"It's a bit like how Libertarians will argue that the government is intrinsically incompetent and corrupt, but can be trusted with nuclear weapons which might literally destroy civilization as we know it."

Good point, and analogy.

"It's a bit like how Libertarians will argue that the government is intrinsically incompetent and corrupt, but can be trusted with nuclear weapons which might literally destroy civilization as we know it."

Just to quote you from a few posts ago re: Obama:

"I have the same reaction I often have these days when dealing with an ambitious holder of political power: This person talks a good line and is professionally pleasant - but never ever forget they'd sell me out in a minute if they saw it as advantageous to them. I don't "believe" (and I don't want to)."

Seems you share that same distrust of the system, perhaps at a different level. Your analogy just doesn't hold -- at the same time libertarians (lower-case "L") are arguing on the inherent corruption in the system (something you seem to agree with), they demand transparency of said system. Libertarians are minarchists, not anarchists, thus seek to _improve_ the system. Sure, one approach in this effort is to ensure the government is afraid of its people, not the other way around -- but this doesn't necessitate arming everyone with nukes.