It's no suprise since people are educated in government schools in their most crucial period of life. They are educated by state-licensed radio, television and newspapers. By state-approved books on the bookshelves of a state-approved shops.
Who will exactly stand out and educate children of the nature of state if this way or another they lose some license or are being paid from tax money in the first place? Several generations already are out of touch with reality that the state is just a bunch of people with a monopoly of violence (justified in the eyes of similarly uneducated parents by piles of paperwork called "law" and "democracy").
State is a constant war against people covered with lies. The only productive way to get out of this situation is to 1) acknowledge that violence is never justified, risky and counter-productive 2) state violence is not justified, employs double standards all the time, and exists on religious beliefs in higher concepts like "country" or "society" that seemingly take precedence over individuals. And of course, you have to trust and follow authority, just like in good old dark ages.
EDIT: before downvoting, consider replying what is factually wrong in my comment.
Sorry but what is factually right with your comment ?
Not everyone in educated in government schools. Your implication that merely being state licensed influences the content is ridiculous (witness Fox News). The state does not have a monopoly on violence. The terms country and society have nothing to do with religion and patriotism is a concept that occurs in countries without a strong religious presence.
Not disagreeing with the meat of your post, but could you say a little bit more about the state not having a monopoly on violence?
From what I understand this term is used to explain that the government is the only one who is legally allowed to use violence against other individuals, and is the only one who can grant you that power. And as far as I can tell that IS the case. Thoughts?
I think it's not an exaggeration that most of the people are exposed to state propaganda (or excuses for the state) since the very beginning. Most of people are educated in government schools where no teacher would seriously talk about being paid from taxes that are taken by force instead of voluntarily.
Do you think people pay taxes voluntarily? When you suddenly dislike NSA or war in Iraq, or war on drugs, or rape in prison, or torture in Guantanamo, or capital punishment or bank bail outs, can you protest by not giving a part of your money to the state? No you cannot, because there is always a gun pointed at you. And you know it very well. Similarly you cannot vote for no master or no taxes. You only get to vote when other people prescribed and for a narrow set of people who will decide how to spend money taken from you. And then you are being brainwashed to think that "anybody who does not vote is not a patriot and should shut up". Somehow if me and my friends get together and vote something against you we don't get magical power of Justice, but if some other bunch of people do the same, then they get that power. Think about it. People are killed because of these beliefs.
Religion in my view is not some particular kind of worship like christianity. Religion is a belief in higher matters that are more important than any human being. In case of government, it is a belief that the "government" is a special entity that actually exists and is important and has not only power, but must have such power to punish and reward individuals. While in reality no such thing exists. Government is simply a conceptual label that is used to excuse very real human beings when they point weapons at other human beings.
What's a reasonable alternative? Anarchy? The "state" -- most rational people would say "government" -- you discuss is a collection of municipal, state and federal government, with differing goals and political orientations, and how should spectrum be allocated other than by a government agency? Where is it done differently? So I can't publish a book without the government's approval of it? Which government? Which agency approves books? As another poster said, what is correct in your post? You have to justify such ridiculous claims that are contradictory to reality.
You know, it's not me who must provide a proof that "state is bad". It's other people who should prove how a construction called constitution + law + police + voting justifies violence of the police, soldiers and prison guards.
It is pretty obvious that any "law" or "regulation" is a description of punishment by taking your body or your property by force. Normally you are supposed to bring them yourself when politely asked, but you do that only because otherwise you'll be forced to under a gunpoint.
Also I don't need to describe to you how a happy society will live without centralized violence. It's up to every individual where and how to live. What I'm doing here on HN is simply pointing out the nature of the state and how it creates all the problems people are pissed off about. When people stop apologizing for state violence and simply understand that it is never justified, then we can talk seriously on alternatives. Thankfully, libertarians and anarchists have written tons of books already. But if you believe in state, you will never take a serious look at peaceful solutions.
Who will exactly stand out and educate children of the nature of state if this way or another they lose some license or are being paid from tax money in the first place? Several generations already are out of touch with reality that the state is just a bunch of people with a monopoly of violence (justified in the eyes of similarly uneducated parents by piles of paperwork called "law" and "democracy").
State is a constant war against people covered with lies. The only productive way to get out of this situation is to 1) acknowledge that violence is never justified, risky and counter-productive 2) state violence is not justified, employs double standards all the time, and exists on religious beliefs in higher concepts like "country" or "society" that seemingly take precedence over individuals. And of course, you have to trust and follow authority, just like in good old dark ages.
EDIT: before downvoting, consider replying what is factually wrong in my comment.