Doug Casey: Why Do We Need Government?
Submitted by Doug Casey via CaseyResearch.com,
Rousseau was perhaps the first to popularize the fiction now taught in civics classes about how government was created. It holds that men sat down together and rationally thought out the concept of government as a solution to problems that confronted them. The government of the United States was, however, the first to be formed in any way remotely like Rousseau's ideal. Even then, it had far from universal support from the three million colonials whom it claimed to represent. The U.S. government, after all, grew out of an illegal conspiracy to overthrow and replace the existing government.
There's no question that the result was, by an order of magnitude, the best blueprint for a government that had yet been conceived. Most of America's Founding Fathers believed the main purpose of government was to protect its subjects from the initiation of violence from any source; government itself prominently included. That made the U.S. government almost unique in history. And it was that concept – not natural resources, the ethnic composition of American immigrants, or luck – that turned America into the paragon it became.
The origin of government itself, however, was nothing like Rousseau's fable or the origin of the United States Constitution. The most realistic scenario for the origin of government is a roving group of bandits deciding that life would be easier if they settled down in a particular locale, and simply taxing the residents for a fixed percentage (rather like "protection money") instead of periodically sweeping through and carrying off all they could get away with. It's no accident that the ruling classes everywhere have martial backgrounds. Royalty are really nothing more than successful marauders who have buried the origins of their wealth in romance.
Romanticizing government, making it seem like Camelot, populated by brave knights and benevolent kings, painting it as noble and ennobling, helps people to accept its jurisdiction. But, like most things, government is shaped by its origins. Author Rick Maybury may have said it best in Whatever Happened to Justice?,
"A castle was not so much a plush palace as the headquarters for a concentration camp. These camps, called feudal kingdoms, were established by conquering barbarians who'd enslaved the local people. When you see one, ask to see not just the stately halls and bedrooms, but the dungeons and torture chambers.
"A castle was a hangout for silk-clad gangsters who were stealing from helpless workers. The king was the 'lord' who had control of the blackjack; he claimed a special 'divine right' to use force on the innocent.
"Fantasies about handsome princes and beautiful princesses are dangerous; they whitewash the truth. They give children the impression political power is wonderful stuff."
IS THE STATE NECESSARY?
The violent and corrupt nature of government is widely acknowledged by almost everyone. That's been true since time immemorial, as have political satire and grousing about politicians. Yet almost everyone turns a blind eye; most not only put up with it, but actively support the charade. That's because, although many may believe government to be an evil, they believe it is a necessary evil (the larger question of whether anything that is evil is necessary, or whether anything that is necessary can be evil, is worth discussing, but this isn’t the forum).
What (arguably) makes government necessary is the need for protection from other, even more dangerous, governments. I believe a case can be made that modern technology obviates this function.
One of the most perversely misleading myths about government is that it promotes order within its own bailiwick, keeps groups from constantly warring with each other, and somehow creates togetherness and harmony. In fact, that's the exact opposite of the truth. There's no cosmic imperative for different people to rise up against one another... unless they're organized into political groups. The Middle East, now the world's most fertile breeding ground for hatred, provides an excellent example.
Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived together peaceably in Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa for centuries until the situation became politicized after World War I. Until then, an individual's background and beliefs were just personal attributes, not a casus belli. Government was at its most benign, an ineffectual nuisance that concerned itself mostly with extorting taxes. People were busy with that most harmless of activities: making money.
But politics do not deal with people as individuals. It scoops them up into parties and nations. And some group inevitably winds up using the power of the state (however "innocently" or "justly" at first) to impose its values and wishes on others with predictably destructive results. What would otherwise be an interesting kaleidoscope of humanity then sorts itself out according to the lowest common denominator peculiar to the time and place.
Sometimes that means along religious lines, as with the Muslims and Hindus in India or the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland; or ethnic lines, like the Kurds and Iraqis in the Middle East or Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka; sometimes it's mostly racial, as whites and East Indians found throughout Africa in the 1970s or Asians in California in the 1870s. Sometimes it's purely a matter of politics, as Argentines, Guatemalans, Salvadorans, and other Latins discovered more recently. Sometimes it amounts to no more than personal beliefs, as the McCarthy era in the 1950s and the Salem trials in the 1690s proved.
Throughout history government has served as a vehicle for the organization of hatred and oppression, benefitting no one except those who are ambitious and ruthless enough to gain control of it. That's not to say government hasn't, then and now, performed useful functions. But the useful things it does could and would be done far better by the market.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -



We don't need no Tiranny nor Government. Let the people free and ruie with justice.
Put the Mom's in charge.
You wouldn't want mine.
The Founders were a big step in the right direction but were still short of the mark. The way of true Liberty is not only to thrive in Inalienable Rights but to have the RESPONSIBILITY of these Inalienable Rights instead of hiring the responsibility out to a third-party (voting for a psycho). DC is essentially a sample of the population... a smaller country from the banks and corporations to control.
The only way to be truly free is if we were self-governed and actually represented ourselves. Lockheed Martin, JPMorgan, Goldman, Monsanto doesn't directly call your ass up on your cell! It will soon need to because Liberty has always been on the right side of history.
For the same reason we need traffic lights.
The streets would be a clogged, un-functioning bloodbath without them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj6Oc4TlblE
'But the useful things it does could and would be done far better by the market.'
Yeah, until someone comes in and kicks over the tables, then you need an army to sort it out.
And a government to maintain it. What was the point of this article again?
C'mon Doug, you can do better than this...
The problem with this idealistic thinking is very simple. Something like 2-5% of the population are socio/psychopaths. Very simply, they are the reason that, mostly, for most of the inhabitants of earth, life is more like hell than it is happiness.
Maybe it is a fault in our gene pool, maybe it's nurture. Most likely genes, with some nurture.
We are about to find out a lot more about this here in the good ol' USSA.
95-98% of the population are sheeps. Sociopaths wont obey your feel-good rules.
The author's conflation of McCarthy and the Salem witch trials proves the old adage about a blind pig and truffles.
People desire leadership. They get government instead.
The Market for Liberty book covers all you will ever need to know about how a laissez-faire society would prosper without government. The best book on liberty/freedom that I have ever read. Clear, consise, logical.
So Doug Casey has never heard of Muslim slavers that led to European castles and the crusades, which definitely pre-date WW1.
Internally the ottoman empire was tolerant.
Except for the blood toll and additional christian tax. Blood toll is taking kids from parents to train and make them sipahis. Better money if they survived than being a serf, but regardless.
Good gawd man! You can't engage in the explanation of historical fact to people completely indoctrinated by the states institutions of "higher learning"!!!
You run the risk of being called...a simpleton, an infidel in fact, just another bigoted white christian male trying to hold the brown man down!
Sigh ;-)
Psychopaths put themselves in the roles associated with government. They use fear to convince people to bring about tyranny.
The only way to prevent this happening is to limit the destructive power available to the psychopath tyrants & to always ensure that sufficient physical force is available to counter-balance a tyrant's threat. This is why the American founders wanted a small, divided government with checks & balances. It is why there's a 2nd Amendment.
Thomas Jefferson proposed that funds be set aside to teach Americans how to be free citizens in a democratic republic. Unfortunately, his proposal was voted down. This was the greatest mistake made, IMO. Today's Americans have forgotten (that is, never been taught) what Freedom is.
Paraphrasing Martin O'Malley; " the gun laws I instituted never infringed on a deer hunter".
Uh, Dickhead... The Second Amendment is not about deer hunting.
"We need government as a jobs program for the 5% of psychopaths born into society"
NoPension
Simple, make gov't service voluntary. Those Psychos who covet power and fame already have wealth. There's your trifecta.
on the contrary---use the draft for gov't "service" --no pay --two year conscrption---lawmakers chosen by lottery is the only way if you feel you must have someone to tell you what to do and how to act.
Your Quote: "lawmakers chosen by lottery is the only way if you feel you must have someone to tell you what to do and how to act."
That is one of the best and most sensible solutions I have heard.
So what's the name of the government agent that brushes your teeth? What about the one whom reroofs your house?
There isn't one you say? You brush your own teeth and make arrangments for the maintanence of your own home? What makes you think garbarge collection, utilities, or roads are any different? Which party do you think has more incentive to come protect your family from violence when you pick up the phone...the police who get paid from plundering your regardless of your consent, or the agency that survives on its reputation to satisfy a customer?
Your imagination is captive, or rather, stunted.
You have no idea of what the function of government should be. Neither does Doug Casey. You conflate government with rulers, they are not the same.
That could easily be turned into a roundabout. Problem solved.
Nice vid.
The only reason we have government is for the safety and protection of it's citizens. Maybe treasury, and creating acommon currency without private bank manipulation. That's it.
I challenge anyone, anywhere to define the role of government beyond that.
Government should be in charge of national defense, agencies that protect us- FDA, FAA, NTSB, patent ofc, etc. Maybe even the FBI and CIA. In charge of the treasury and the administration of that.
What government should not be doing and what does not fall within that job description..
Student loans, cash for clunkers, pork projects and farm subsidies, home lending- Freddie, Fannie- bail outs of any type, debt servicing, compelling citizens to buy products, getting rid of worthless money sucking agencies like the Dept of Energy or the Dept of Education.
I tried to read the Omnibus Bill. What an atrociuos piece of shit that is. Try reading that- after 100 pages you will understand just how fucked up government really is.
agencies that protect us????? you're a fool!
To westerner that video looks scary, but I did not see any accidents happening. In fact, I'd say that video is a perfect example of what real freedom looks like- somewhat chaotic, compared to strict order, but actually more efficient.
It's unalienable. Un-a-lien-able. Not lienable.
1776 - Common Sense Thomas Paine
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise."
"Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived together peaceably in Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa for centuries until the situation became politicized..."
NO. NOT until IsraHell moved in the neighborhood. Jews and History: Lies Galore >> http://wp.me/p4OZ4v-3BS
Spain too prior to Ferdinand and Isabella.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs3y-jpY4eI&spfreload=10
Excellent documentary on exactly that point. The Moors 'invaded' because they were invited to replace the current corrupt government and clergy, and then Al Andalus became a very great civilization, combined the best of the two cultures, crops and technology of agriculture and ... from Arabia with Spanish-Visigoth energy and love of learning. They all voluntarily converted to Muslim because it was the better deal, same as gov.
Compare to the Spanish Re-Conquest and Inquisition.
The NSA has removed this comment due to its support of the 4th Amendment.
That comment is bullshit, they have been killing each other since weapons were invented.
Protection is a big thing, anybody who things we can lay down our defenses and be safe, clearly have never left their momma's side...
Sorry, but watching the Demo debate and the candidates buying votes with free shit. All ice cream candidates so in a foul mood as watching our country turn into a shithole like most of Europe.
Ever wonder why the French built this: http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M017b21d155cfbbec912e114195c8692eo0&w=300&h=227&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0
I suspect it had a great deal to do with the neighbors.
There were pockets where they did live peacefully together but many other areas where they did not. Your statement is disingenuous.
Good fucking answer. It's the Moms who are responsible for conjuring up a meal 3 times a day for the tribe. She lies awake at night thinking of ways to get food into the stomch of everyone she loves. And when it is deemed impossible, moms go mad. When mom is not happy, no one is.
This might work well in a tribe of 13K years ago, but not a modern tribe of 100M people.
Basically, yopu're saying that everyone should vote for Hillary. Yeah. That's going to end well.
Women are responsible for at least half of the world's wars. Do you think Helen was just sitting back in Troy, being beautiful? That bitch was a conniving, manipulative little snipe. If you were ever able to look into the secret affairs, the words of wives and mistresses to their mates in the bedchamber, there you will find the genesis of many, many wars.
In charge of the kitchen, maybe.
Women are the number ONE source of Collectivism.
-Women, but not necessarily moms, voted obummer in twice.
-Hitler knew that getting the women to go along with the fascist program was the key to him getting enough political strength to take control of Germany.
- Women value 'security' over freedom. Psychopath control freak politicians know that.
- Emotional political appeals are more effective against women than men (in general) so that opens up greater opportunity for manipulation.
https://www.google.com/search?q=obama%27s+base+voters+women+young&tbm=is...
2008
Men 41%
Women 47%
2012
Men 34%
Women 41%
18 - 29 year old
52% 2008
43% 2012
In 2012 - 98% black women under 30 80% young black men
Black America can be held responsible for this fiasco.
Thank 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism'! Moar free shit.
Anarchy is not in and of itself BAD...it is simply a system WITHOUT a ruler. A community who decides issues with no one more equal than anyone else is an example. After our current system self-destructs, we'd be lucky to institute Anarchy...however, the evil among us would figure out a way to take power for themselves...again
The evil won't need to work hard to get the job. Most people will be looking for someone, anyone to give power to. People's brainwashing to submit to anything presenting itself as authority is so strong, they will imprint on anything even looking like authority as hatched ducklings imprint on anything looking vaguely like a mother duck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw7mO3fknS4
And this guy didn't even claim to be "government." If he had I'll bet he could have gotten them to give up money, their freedoms, etc.
Is anyone on ZH going to watch the Dem debate?
The you can see them fight who is going to raise middle class taxes the most to pay for moar FSA, bigger gubmint and support more of Obama's imported refugees.
It can be fun, verdad?
I quit smoking pot so I don't think I'd last.
Anarchy is not in and of itself BAD..
The Market for Liberty book covers all you will ever need to know about how a laissez-faire society would prosper without government. The best book on liberty/freedom that I have ever read. Clear, consise, logical.
All government eventually devolves to tyranny. And a lack of government is merely a vacuum to attract psychopaths.
In a world of infinite resources a man could grab as much as he wanted or could control. But even that would not be enough as it would hardly slack the thirst to control others.
We have probably come as close to a world of infinite resources as we are going to get short of leaving the planet. As such we seem to have become more or less a three class society. There are those who view themselves some sort of ordained gods having ownership, in their minds, over the rest of us. There are those who have descended into debauchery ( and many of the ordained gods fall into this group as well... they just dress better). And there is the group trying to make sense of it all, raise families, and basically make the other two groups possible.
Sadly, I think man left to his own devices this is as good as it gets. I think, if we have the ability to look back some day this will have the appearance of a golden age.
I think what follows will be really grim...
You make a long serious of claims and present conclusions as evidence, near-zero actual evidence or argument, so far as I can see.
A great waste of my time.
If governments are evil and corrupt, it is because humans are evil and corrupt.
Rousseau was a fool; he thought man was perfectable.
Edmund Burke on the other hand understood the human condition. He knew that man, left to his own devices, would devolve to evil and corruption.
Nature abhors a vacuum; human nature, doubly so.
As much as we all love to hate government, it is indeed a necessary evil. Some work better than others.
We indeed willl look back at the American Experiment as a Golden Age of enlightenment.
As corrupt and disfunctional as our current government is; whatever replaces it is likely to be far less respecting of 'human rights' and far more brutal...