Personally, I’m concerned about our government’s track record of mismanagement and infighting that is detached from the needs of the people. Without that implicit trust, giving them more power is a general concern. Speaking geopolitically, the US military is the most powerful force in history including present day and our economy is the largest globally, which makes us coveted by those who seek to wield power for their own benefit, more so than your average Europe country. If the US were to fall to tyranny, that’d put everyone else at risk. Again, less of that risk with your average European country.
If I lived somewhere like Sweden where there is heavy taxation with equally heavy social benefits, I’d probably be fine with the arrangement and wouldn’t fight it. Sounds nice.
I’m not trying to equate welfare with tyranny, of course. The use of bread and circuses has been associated with the downfall of empires to sway public opinion with a short term good at a long term cost. If you start disrupting our major economic systems like that, we’re more likely to dissolve and those with power would use that weakening to their advantage.
> I’m not trying to equate welfare with tyranny, of course.
But that's exactly what your first paragraph did, at least in the case of the US.
Why do you think welfare "works" for Sweden and would not work for the US? Is Sweden tyrannical?
Expanding government power isn’t inherently tyrannical. But tyrants expand government power for their own benefit.
There’s nothing inherently tyrannical about bread or circuses (unless you’re gluten intolerant or fear clowns). Are you familiar with the use of bread and circuses in the Roman Empire?
“The evil was not in bread and circuses, per se, but in the willingness of the people to sell their rights as free men for full bellies and the excitement of the games which would serve to distract them from the other human hungers which bread and circuses can never appease.”
Besides that, I think I already addressed your point if reread with good will.
It's worth noting that during the middle republic and early imperial years (say the 200-200s) Rome was possibly the most unequal (but still successful) society history has known. The senatorial class owned pretty much everything - and they gave it away on a daily basis in return for power - vote for Brutus and get bread to feed your family. It's hard as a free Roman to get a job working for Caser when old Julius has slaves for everything he can possibly need. The jobs available were basically legionnaire or subsistence farmer (the big farms were worked by ... slaves). If people today think immigrants are coming to take their jobs, just imagine how slavery looks
If I lived somewhere like Sweden where there is heavy taxation with equally heavy social benefits, I’d probably be fine with the arrangement and wouldn’t fight it. Sounds nice.
I’m not trying to equate welfare with tyranny, of course. The use of bread and circuses has been associated with the downfall of empires to sway public opinion with a short term good at a long term cost. If you start disrupting our major economic systems like that, we’re more likely to dissolve and those with power would use that weakening to their advantage.