The Real Function(s) of Government

There are many, competing views on what government is suppose to do. From the minimum of contract enforcement and private property protection to social welfare and heavy regulation. Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Communists, etc... Everyone has some idea as to what they believe a government should do.

In my opinion, most of those views are unnecessarily complicated. Government is not suppose to protect property, it is not suppose to provide social welfare. But it can to both of those things. In my opinion there is inherit job for government. There is no supreme authority that specifically defines the functions of government (that I am aware of anyway). There is no specific function of government.

Government has a very specific function that solely relates to why people came together to form that government in the first place. This of course does not apply to governments formed by a small group or a single individual claiming to have legitimacy where none ever existed (ex. Absolute monarchs claiming to have divine rights). A government like that is not really a government at all, just a farce. (Though technically that government could gain legitimacy if that the lack of legitimacy is not challenged).

The kind of government I want to talk about it one with true legitimacy however, one that is of the people, but the people (at least at in its' inception). A government were individual came together because they knew that they had common interests and they wanted to go about achieving those common interests. This concept lies the true function of government. Problem Solving. Groups of people come together to reach common goals and then trying to reach those goals, whatever they may be.

Thoughts Provoked by a News Article

I recently read an article on MSN News about the legal troubles of a woman who is called “Jihad Jane” (Colleen LaRose). The article describes her failed terrorist attack and how, after, she cooperated with the authorities. A link is posted below if you want more specifics on that. What I want to focus on in the post is the part of the article that describes how her history of abuse may have lead her to the path of jihad. I do not have any other specific articles or studies to corroborate what the author of that article seemed to allude to, but it is fair to find that a traumatic life, with unresolved pain, can leave one more malleable. (In the “Jihad Jane” story it is obvious that past trauma is unresolved because she described herself as lost at the same time she followed the orders of her “brothers” that she “loved”).

The real thing I would like to focus on is this question: How can you believe you cause is just, if you attract or purposely recruit broken individuals? Broken individuals will do anything to be loved. Your cause or argument holds no real sway, has no real relevance if the person would listen to almost anything you say if you worded it the right way. You can not call you cause just if most of the people who believe it are broken.

Okay. To clarify, so this argument does not necessarily negate the possibility that ones cause is just even if followed by the broken, however, if the cause is only followed by the broken then there is no proof that it is just.

Your argument holds no real value if it can't be applied to people who are thinking rationally. An arguments real relevance can only be seen if it is accepted by those who are ration. Winning over one rational thinker does not make one's argument valid or just. Though, winning over many rational thinkers does not make one's argument valid of just either.

The concept, I am struggling to get at here is that an argument should carter to rational human beings. An argument that carters to rational human beings can be just and valid (though not necessarily so). An argument that carters to irrational human beings (arguments that either attract or hunt for irrational human beings) can not be considered valid.

I guess overall, rational arguments are the only ones that can be valid or just.

References:

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/jihad-jane-despite-cooperation-us-seeks-decades-in-prison