Strong doesn't mean large. I just mean has the ability to act decisively on behalf of its constituents. But yes. They will always corrupt. Positions of power rarely attract good people. My position is that governments cannot be kept out since they have strategic advantages, so how do we work with them while they still hold to some ideals? How do we help them maintain those ideals for as long as possible? And how do we throw off the yoke when they become despotic?
Discussion
I don't really believe that there is a long-term method of forming a harmonizing relationship with the state. Every time we have, it has been short-lived and always ends up imploding on itself. Bitcoin may play a role in ridding ourselves of the state... or at least assist in the formation of a completely new one. Also, why should we help them? I see no reason to do so. They lie to us regarding their ideals from the very beginning.
Strong states = means of control backed by threats of violence, if not an outright monopoly on violence. A strong state is what an individual should be, not a weak minded collective of humans that aren't capable of behaving themselves without threat of jail or bodily harm
You're wrong about everything, by the way. A government HAS to be sizable. That's not an option. Many of the recurring issues that we face are largely due to the people's unrelenting laziness and reluctance to take action against our leaders when corruption begins to become widespread. Which is what we're witnessing now, on a global scale. The first step that needs to be taken is a call for the riddance of WMDs. Everything you have suggested is impossible, as long as those exist. Although I doubt that will ever happen in our lifetime.
You don't use WMDs to strike a handful of people & if you did you'd just create a whole lot more new enemies.
WMDs are used against .govs.
Have you never read about the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
That was an attack on an enemy .gov by attacking their tax cattle...
Lol. There were still plenty of civilians.
That's what the civilians are, tax cattle the source for the .gov parasites, they can't exist without them. 🤣
It is an attack on an enemy .govs "supply chain" "resources" etc. 😂
It's not attacking your own peasants & getting yourself offed for it...
They have to eat, they have to sleep, they have to shit, they have to travel at some point, not everyone is as worthless as that 20 year old or as limited in thought. 🤣
How do you think the central banks & military industrial complex cowed the puppets that didn't respond to bribes... 😂
Okay. Well, you enjoy yourself, mate. I feel like you took some things out of context or perhaps missed the point i was trying to make. Perhaps, you missed my previous comment? Idk. 🤷♂️
Meh, it's all irrelevant because the system will collapse before anyone gets antsy enough anyway. 🤣
I was just pointing out that they couldn't win if most humans still acted like humans... which they don't...
I have a busy day, mate. Gonna type this up quick and we'll chat later if you wish.
When did I say strike? And I figured we were referring to larger populations. Hence my reference regarding government influence never ceasing to spread. The more it spreads the larger both governing and civilian bodies become.
I meant WMDs strictly as a means to threaten. I'm aware you'd make more enemies but trust me, nuclear powers have threatened foreign nations with nuclear force far more often than anyone believes. And it's worked. Obviously they won't advertise such a thing across the bloody media outlets. Also, I meant having WMDs, in general, should be prohibited if they wish to be in a position of power. That's what I meant by leverage. They can threaten anyone. Doesn't mean it will be their own people. Probably won't be. But, they might threaten others. And we don't want that either.