I get this a lot when talking about how without an all encompassing government nothing would stop people from become greedy and evil ( moreso than they apparently are). However taking into account how governments are comprised of people you begin to wonder whether its just a genetic thing or somehow the people that make it into Congress are just supposedly good and kind unlike everyone else. And more often then not these people are elected by people who are supposedly evil so that basically the whole democratic system void and without purpose? And if the people who get into the government are supposedly good why haven't the part of the population that isn't part of the political class already overthrown them or even voted for them in the first place? And if we're all supposedly bad why is it that we're still here and that social cooperation works fine in most cases without government interferances?
Wait, was there a question in this or was this a statement?
However taking into account how governments are comprised of people you begin to wonder whether its just a genetic thing or somehow the people that make it into Congress are just supposedly good and kind unlike everyone else
How does this work? I've seen the opposite, people in government are the worst-of-the-worst. I don't get things like the president worship, and the idea that they're good people. They're megalomaniacs. I would never want to be president. Why would you want to, or what makes you think you could lead an entire country of 300 million people? Don't you have your own life to live?
People who want to work in government and pass laws have a complex. They see the world as some kind of sandbox and they want everything to be all lined up and pretty, according to their own personal definition regardless of what anyone else thinks.
Every time I see this my response is to google "United States Constitution Text" and Ctrl+F for democracy. You will see zero results. "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government." Huge difference. A republic is limited in scope, you're creating a government with boundaries and limitations. As opposed to a democracy where the majority gets whatever they want because they're the majority, a republic is a nation of laws where individuals have inalienable rights that they can enjoy.
Edit: In-fact, the United States was very undemocratic when it was founded.
Who could vote? White, property-owning males, only.
Congress:
The Senate? Senators appointed by the states.
House of Reps - yeah.
Executive/President? Nope, electoral college.
Judicial/Judges? Nope.
And again, Congress was intentionally designed to work against the will of the people. You combated the popularly elected House representatives against the State appointed Senators. You had a 100% fresh House every two years, whereas you couldn't throw the Senate out - only 1/3 would change every two years, leaving an "old guard". The government was designed to prevent popular radical change, because the government was never meant to institute a will of the majority, but rather safeguard the rights of individuals.
And if we're all supposedly bad why is it that we're still here and that social cooperation works fine in most cases without government interferances?
Bad is a vague term. Most people are selfish, they act in their own best interest. In cases where there isn't a self interest, the lack thereof usually leads to inaction. Just because people are selfish doesn't mean their actions are bad; I selfishly want to buy things for myself for my own enjoyment, that leads me to work a full-time job and have a positive benefit on society (so that I can get money) - there are mutually beneficial situations where both parties are acting selfishly. Alternatively, there are different kinds of people who get endorphins from being altruistic (call it good, selfless acts) but their misguided actions can often lead to bad things.
