Should the state ,as you have defined it here, act for the people or act upon the people?
Should the state ,as you have defined it here, act for the people or act upon the people?
Is that a trick question?
Obviously I think it preferable for the state to serve the people rather than rule the people, though only so much can be done to ensure that, frankly. Armed institutions objectively have more power than those without arms. In as far as must have a state for the time being though, it should definitely be closely regulated by civilian institutions. In the short run, I suggest, for example, the creation of more community organizations tasked with, if you will, policing the police.
Last edited by IMPress Polly; 03-01-2015 at 11:04 AM.