Is this the real reason why the Far Right distrusts the Government?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ant-keep-its-benefits-their-own-ethnic-group/

Could it be as simple as ethnic/racial animosity?

Based on my observations of the discussions that take place around here, it may explain a lot. Then again, I find the whole topic of government mistrust to be fueled by fear and propelled by the convenience of it being a handy trope to toss around.

Now while I realize this article points out the problem more globally, it would be great if we could just keep it to the United States on this thread.

 

It would take a simple mind to accept this premise. Distrust of government comes from government breaking the trust. I don’t know what your definition of far right is so it’s hard to respond further.

 

It seems you just felt compelled to respond to fill space.

If you personally mistrust our government (USA Uncle Sam) because they have broken your trust, then explain. Can't get more simple than that.

 

No, it isn't.

I know it's hard to understand why people might not trust government, but history might be an avenue of education that you might wish to peruse.

 

You mean like the fact that civilization has been around for 5,000 years? In case you haven't figured it out, governments go hand in hand with civilization.

I don't know what kind of history you were taught, but civilization has delivered its promises.

I know. That sucks if you're into that neo anarchy stuff that floats around the interwebs.

 

I wonder when some people will comprehend the difference between legal and illegal?

Btw more nonsense from the compost

 

How about bullet points?
- fiscal irresponsibility in the form of spending/unbalanced budget
- claiming to provide education and delivering ignorance and conformity
- creating dependence in individuals through subsidizing bad behavior
- creating dependence in business in everything from agriculture to passenger trains
- appropriation of wealth from citizens through the fed/manipulated inflation
- two tiered justice systems
- moving to globalism at citizen’s expense
- abdication of responsibility for national security
- promotion/perpetuation of racial strife
- general bureaucratic incompetence
- shameless use of propaganda
- infringements on natural rights

There’s my short list.

 

Seems to me a mistrust of those who seek power is just plain wise.

 

Lucifer points to history as a reason to trust government. I dunno why, butt he does seem rather intent on giving government power over him.

I wish I cold understand him, but... he didn't bother explaining his love of being told what to do.

 

I don’t mistrust government but rather fellow citizens. Government is a tool. I have issues with the way some folks utilize it.

Then again, ‘question authority’ appears to be part of my DNA. Family would likely tell anyone that would listen I’ve been a PITA since birth

 

To me the federal government does two things well. Kill people and explore space. It should stay focused on those two things.

 

Think about the morality of your tool.

You're basically talking about the use of force in order to achieve your goals, which is inherently evil. So do I wonder why places where the use of force/government never seem to be able to achieve their goals? Nope. When I see homeless in LA, NYC, SF, and all of those other government loving cities, all I see is karma. They want to use evil, so evil they get.

 

1. Is this a joke?

2. Do you trust government?

 

Those who seek power will eagerly submit to it if they think doing so is part of the path to wielding it.

 

It's just a sociopathic pipe dream. If you want to be Hitler, do you join or fight him? You might attain some level in the Nazi party, but at the end of the day, you're still a Nazi. We all know what happened to them.

Sociopaths/psychopaths seek power over others because they don't have the ability to empathize, so all they see is power over others.

 

The USSR was ruled by a government.
NAZI Germany was ruled by a government.

Yes, governments can not be trusted.

NEXT!

 

Those who do not mistrust governments will soon find themselves bereft of any freedom worthy of the name. That was the view of the founders almost to man. So I find myself in quite worthy company.

 

Wow, civilization is able to make promises?
Can it sing and do a soft shoe as well?

 

Weakness in human nature is conducive to the love of power and proneness to abuse it. This is compounded by a corresponding weakness in the human nature of self-governing people themselves.

And the correct term is jealously. Not distrust. The Framers used the term frequently.

For instance...

Jefferson expressed this in the Kentucky Resolutions, as adopted in 1798 by the Kentucky legislature.

". . . it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism: free government is founded in jealousy and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited Constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which and no further our confidence may go; . . . In questions of power then let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."


Another example...

Because, it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens, and one of [the] noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle.

James Madison ("Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments"-- Addressed to the General Assembly of Va., 1785)


Another example in Washington's Farewell Address...

''Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.'' (Here Republican means that of a Republic)


There are many, many more examples of the use of the term.

 

Libertarian-ism has always been and always will be a FAILURE because it based upon a FALLACY.

The LIBERTARIAN Articles of Confederation were a complete and utter DISASTER and the nation was on the POINT OF COLLAPSE when they were TRASHED in favor of the current Constitution with a STRONG FEDERAL GOVERNMENT of We the People.

Not trusting the government OF the People, BY the People and FOR the People means that libertarians do NOT trust We the People.

But that is their problem.

We the People do NEED to wrest control over our government FROM the Wall Street Casino Bosses who have BRIBED our representatives. That is what the PROGRESSIVE movement is all about.

We the People will PREVAIL because it is OUR government, not theirs.

 

The greatest atrocities in human history have been guided by the hand of one government or the other.

Less is more. Personal liberty and individualism to the greatest extent possible, government reduced and limited to the greatest extent possible.

 

I think that this has a lot to do with it.

I have always remembered a passage I read in a biography of Thomas Jefferson. It said that most leaders mostly concern themselves in improving the condition of themselves and theirs. Jefferson was different in that he concerned himself with improving the condition of all people.

In the conversations over health care, it often occurs to me that the primary complaint from conservatives is they fear their money is going to provide healthcare, for someone not like themselves.

 

I highly suspect that the situation, is, being that the US is a liberal democracy it prevents the authoritarian tendencies of many conservative leaning individuals.

In fact, if it wasn't for government forces, certain groups of people would be violating everyone's rights. Religious people would be descriminating against everyone not like them. If it wasn't for the government, conservative forces would still be trying to hold down Blacks, women, and homosexuals. So I can see why many conservatives don't like the government, it prevents them from exercising their base instincts

 

And yet it has been other governments that have prevented and stopped the greatest atrocities. Who would have stopped Hitler, if the British and American governments had not launched counter attacks.

 

By big authoritarian communist and fascist governments...