Everything the government does is backed up with violence

What’s something you believe everyone should know.

The definition of a state from political science is an entity that has a monopoly on legal violence in its jurisdiction. Although many people forget this, it should be the primary way that people view social and economic regulations.

Every rule and regulation that society puts into place ultimately relies on the threat of violence. If you want to do anything from the perspective of a government, you should be aware that non-compliance is ultimately met with either hurting someone, or putting them in a box against their will.

A couple implications of this fact. Free speech includes the right to advocate for violence. If you want to change a policy, ultimately you’re saying the sorts of violence that’s permissible and in which circumstances. Even advocating for putting limits on hate speech ultimately requires someone to enforce these laws, because presumably the people saying hateful things won’t stop voluntarily.

Next, there might be some cases when direct violence is better than indirect violence. Throwing someone in prison for years is probably more harmful to most people than cutting off a few fingers or giving someone a lashing. Being curious about the total costs of crime and punishment seem important to designing a well-functioning system.