'Government: Who Needs It' by Gregory Salmieri

"Government: Who Needs It"

This talk explores why Rand thinks that government is necessary to protect individual rights, and why this is its only proper function.

SUBSCRIBE TO ARI’S YOUTUBE CHANNEL

ABOUT THE AYN RAND INSTITUTE
ARI offers educational experiences, based on Ayn Rand's books and ideas, to a variety of audiences, including students, educators, policymakers and lifelong learners. ARI also engages in research and advocacy efforts, applying Rand's ideas to current issues and seeking to promote her philosophical principles of reason, rational self-interest and laissez-faire capitalism. We invite you to explore how Ayn Rand viewed the world — and to consider the distinctive insights offered by ARI's experts today.

SUPPORT ARI WITH A DONATION

EXPLORE ARI

FOLLOW ARI ON TWITTER

LIKE ARI ON FACEBOOK

EXPLORE ARI CAMPUS

INFORMATION ABOUT OBJECTIVIST SUMMER CONFERENCES

LEARN ABOUT AYN RAND STUDENT CONFERENCES

[PabloAlvestegui]

Apart from the concept "steeling", this talk was brilliant. I loved it!

[Iamjamessmith]

Very helpful. Much appreciated. Please one minor correction I believe at 20:00 to next minuted: Change concept "steeling" to "stealing". I could be wrong.

[kimobrien.]

With capitalism the government is executive committee of the ruling class whose purpose is to manage the common affairs of the capitalist class. This is a lot of double talk where capitalism can be fixed by defending private property.

[jabibgalt]

1) Where does the right to impose a monopoly of physical force (thus excluding those who are not members of government) come from? Where does the right to govern come from? Where does the moral obligation to be governed come from? Who defends the people from government?


2) Why is it assumed that, selecting a group of people to hold a monopoly on the use of physical force, is the only way to place retaliatory use of physical force under objective control (objectively defined laws)? Couldn't there be other mechanisms (such as those of a free market) to satisfy the demand for objective law and security? Why isn't the idea of having a free market of law even considered?


3) Isn't a "government funded through voluntary taxation", just an evasion to not call it a private law and security institution? Isn't "voluntary government" compatible with anarcho-capitalism? Couldn't objective law and security be offered in the market in the same way, and for the same reasons, that every other demand for goods and services ever needed or demanded by humanity has been satisfied?

Thank you.