What is the role of a government?

To rely on a method of governing solely based on science and logic may seem radical to some. Emotions and values play such an important role in our enjoyment of life that to strike them from decision making is like stifling life itself. In Star Trek, Spock fought his anguish after his mother died so as not to "emotionally compromise" himself and his ability to command his ship. Absurd. Should he not have the privilege to grieve for a loved one?

Ideally, logic and science should only be used in law-making and limited at the level of the government. Private interests should never be restricted so long as they do not cause a significant detriment to others. Such is the case in the U.S. now although it's far from perfect. Law dictates many regulations, but they rarely fully coincide with an individual's personal morals. Thus, people decide for themselves what they deem to be a proper code of conduct. Still, it is important that citizens hold their government to higher and more consistent standards than any individual.

But what does this mean for individual sovereignty? It is a serious question that fundamentally defines the purpose of a government itself. How much influence on individual affairs should a government impose?

This issue is one of several that separate republicans from democrats, capitalists from socialists. To protect individual interests, government should have a minimal role in people's everyday lives. A person should ultimately be able to choose for himself what type of life he wishes to lead, whether it be religious, athiestic, scholarly, athletic, healthy, gluttonous, wealthy or impoverished. Republics would argue that the United States provides enough venues for anyone to achieve either of these lifestyles. But do they? Reducing government influence also reduces government accountability. This burden of accountability then falls to individuals, which leaves much room for discrimination, as individuals may be biased by their own personal ideologies. Certainly, we have seen this phenomenon happen countless times in the United States and all over the world.

Protecting individual interests is only one part of a government's role. But what is fundamental about humans is that we do not live individually. No, it is probably safe to say we are inherently social animals. Nevertheless, as is shown by our fundamental needs or rights, we are inherently selfish as well. Perhaps these traits were necessary for our survival according to evolution. Nevertheless, a government should take into account both of these factors of human behavior and find the best way to balance them. Some may say, then, that a government's role is ultimately to equally govern the selfishness of its constituents.

The fact of the matter is everyone will not have access to the same resources, and the government should not let this hinder individuals from fulfilling their inherent needs.