The critique of statist dependency vs. the critique of government-in-general

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Foundation_(Washington)

The Freedom Foundation was founded in 1991 by Lynn Harsh and former Republican legislator and gubernatorial candidate Bob Williams. The organization, a member of the State Policy Network, has a stated mission “to advance individual liberty, free enterprise, and limited, accountable government.” According to the organization, the governing principles of the organization are to “eliminate the desire for dependence on government that has permeated [American] culture.”

I agree that dependence on the modern, remote, bureaucratic, Leviathan-scale nation-state government is not a good thing. But I think there’s an important distinction between that perspective and the general anti-governmental dogma of the libertarians and the anarchists.

Human groups are going to have administrative agencies. What’s key is the scale. In a bioregion or a town or an ecovillage the administrative agency can be small enough and local enough as to be immediately accessible and accountable to the community. And conducive to a participatory form of democracy. If you prefer not to call such a “government,” well, OK, but I would say a government of that type is not problematic.

As a Green, I’m a decentralist. So I’m not a big fan of the too-centralized and too-remote governments of the extant nation-states.

Unlike a Libertarian, I’m not anti-government in general.