The State Paradox

"Where did Substance D come from? Why can't we stop it? The bigger this war gets, the more freedoms we lose, the more Substance D ends up on our streets!" - Alex Jones, A Scanner Darkly

Govern/mental = control/of the mind. See? 'Government' means 'mind control'.

Government provides us with many things we (apparently) could not do otherwise. But who would build roads? Who would arrest the criminals? Who would defend our country? Who would keep big business in check?

I don't know. There has not been a functioning human society without government since agrarian medieval Ireland.

However, for all those quick to denounce the idea that government is not necessary, it is important to remember that the state apparatus must surely cause as many or more problems than it solves.

The market incentivises production. Only government incentivises destruction. Without government there can be no large scale war, because no-one in their right mind would pay for it out of their own pocket...they need someone else, everyone else, to be forced to pay. Hence government.

Imagine you are in control of a nation's police force. Now you get, say, ten million pounds per year to fund your operations, taken by force from everyone else. Let's say you are a nice and principled person, and you set to work stamping out all the organised crime, the drug runners, the mobs, the thieving bastards. What happens now?

"Crime at all time lows."
"Public question need for large police force."
"Government calls for cut to police funding."

And now you're down to 5 million pounds. See, there's not much of an incentive to wipe out the criminals, is there? In fact there is a disincentive.

Now, let's supppose you took a more selfish approach. See, the people clearly will only be willing to pay through the nose for your 'services', if there is something they are afraid of, and thus need protection from. So, you allow some drug runners and mobs to operate, in return for a cut from them of course. And to thank them for their co-operation, you deploy the full weight of the Law against their competitors.

The public are aware and afraid of the crime, but you as police chief hold up your hands, say "we're doing all we can but we need more funding", and you can even point to the arrests of the opposing mobs as evidence you are serious about removing the problem. What happens then?

(During a drug raid, this kid needed a pee. He could have had cocaine in there or anything.)

"Police declares all out war on drug cartel"
"Public offer full support to police effort"
"Police demand funding for their operations"
"Government to push through police funding initiative"

And now you're sitting on 40 million pounds a year, with no shitting intention of doing anything about the problem, except a few token arrests.

Now you may say this is a conspiracy theory, yet nothing I have just described involves the need for conspiracy. Just people acting, in an unfree market, in their own self interest. If this is a conspiracy then so is every large and small business in existence.

I believe it is like this in any government agency, just the police/drug war example is the best and most blatant. The crime business and the police business have a mutual dependency on one another. Government disincentivises productive activity, and incentivises destruction of property, of life. Like the inverted pentagram symbolically does to the moral order, government inverts the natural economic order.

This realisation will free you from the mind control, ie the 'government'. I'm not saying anarchy is the way. Certainly not now, not when the West is being sunk into chaos, which is frankly what most people associate anarchy with, when truly there is a difference between no government/chaos and self government, which one day will be the norm if and when this species acheives a little sanity. Or, self control of the mind if you prefer.