Oh shit.
Well, shit.
I just realized: there's a perfect adjective to describe defective or deviant government. It's black government, by analogy to a black market.
And yes, black government implies a black market. Indeed it implies, what, three or four black markets? First for the perfectly legitimate white trade that the black government bans for embarrassing it, second a black market for the black goods that the black government needs to run, plus...
Anarchy = white government.
Cooperative government.
Or is it white government = anarchy?
Note that without a black government, there is nobody who can ban government firms. Black government implies government, because government. White government implies government, because there is demand for government, which will be met by supply if nobody gets in the way.
Black government is defined by an illegitimate crime: it governs coercively and involuntarily. Like a black market, a black government is inherently riddled with crime.
Even if you temporarily seize a black government system and dictate it "benevolently," inevitably it will fall to corruption, because involuntary government has no need to provide a service. You can't cancel if the losses exceed the profits.
Black government is inherently irresponsible.
Necessarily, black government legalizes crimes and outlaws profitable and responsible white trades.
Every government that shows up in the history books has been a black government. If there has ever been a white government before, the records and accounts of it have been lost.
The first white government, if it escapes the larval stage, will absolutely bulldoze its black competitors. Black governments know this best. They instinctively realize they cannot possibly stand up to a fully-realized white government, and manically search for any infant forms to destroy before they get "out of control" as it's put.
Exit is critical because white governments inherently age into black governments. It is imperative that they die as quickly as possible once they reach that stage; likewise, since aging is not an intrinsic property of super-mortal organisms like a government, the prospect of imminent demise causes the white government to age much more slowly. In theory zero aging is possible; however it is unnecessary and likely impractical.
Responsibility is critical. A white government that meddles with other white governments is not a white government.
The above two caveats aside, white government is defined by whatever the customers want it to be defined by.
I believe there is little to no demand for white government. It is in fact rhetorically possible to legalize a white government. China can have special economic zones, as can Honduras. Why not your country?
By pointing out that clearly the existing black government is fine and has nothing to fear from competitors; by insisting that clearly existing black government is scientific and wouldn't object to a scientific A/B test or control group or whatever, you could corner the Pope into allowing your special white-government economic zone.
The problem is the residents themselves would fight you. Naturally the black government will try to backhandedly sabotage the project, and the local residents would aid and abet them in every way. They will believe every slur thrown, they will report every tiny infraction, they will try to subvert the white government by demanding black services, and it's endless.
Further, the Amish already use white government; it only doesn't quite count because they have no security forces. I don't even have to argue that a $20 is lying on the sidewalk; I can point to the guy who already picked it up. By contrast, everyone who didn't pick it up - this is a non-scarce, non-excludable $20 - must have no demand for it.
You might be tempted to argue (as younger-me did, exactly as I was told to) they're just too stupid to think of picking it up. Go look at Unz and watch what happens when I specifically point out there's a $20 there and they can just pick up.
No comments:
Post a Comment