I just had a thought today regarding Where people got the notion that it was okay for the government to tell people how to live. You know, like Don't Drink, Don't Smoke, Don't Gamble, Wear your Seatbelt, etc.
It is a left over from Monarchy. Under monarchy, the people are subjects, not citizens. As far as the king is concerned, He OWNS you! That being the philosophy of government, the King wants his property kept in reasonably good condition in case he has need of it, (such as a war or something) and therefore he prohibits whatever conduct as he sees fit because such conduct is regarded as detrimental to the well being of the crown.
Of course he can't go TOO far, or the population will be unhappy, which causes other sorts of problems that are detrimental to the well being of the crown.
So anyway, now that the notion that the Government has a right to tell you how to live had become ingrained because of centuries of experience with Monarchy, it simply never occurs to most people to question the idea. I personally believe that human beings are genetically inclined to monarchy and subconsciously/instinctively regard it as the most natural form of government, with the result being that people will often blindly adhere to ideas which are anathema to a free Republic.
So there it is. That's my theory of why people blindly accept the notion that Authority ought to tell people how to live. It is a relic of Monarchy applied to Democracy.
Theoretical basis for nannystatism.
This theory relies too heavily on projecting "benevolence" on the part of Government. My experience is that people who gravitate towards positions of power are doing so more for their self satisfaction at wielding it, than at any real concern for the "People."hanelyp wrote:A variant of your theory, Government as Parent and Subjects as Children. In this case the parent can't bear the child growing up and becoming independent, so they keep them suckling at the teat far beyond when they should be weaned.
