Are Americans Too Depraved to be Free?

I am not an economist or a political scientist or a philosopher, but I see part of my mission as a libertarian "layman" to spread libertarian memes whenever I can and to problematize statist memes whenever they come up in conversation. I was talking with some reasonable and pleasant conspecifics from church the other day when I revealed that I was a libertarian extremist. When I opined that there was way too much government, one woman, highly educated and intelligent, remarked at once: "I am grateful that we don't have men with guns running around in our neighborhood killing people. Don't you think having government and rules keeps us safe from this kind of disorder?" I replied that the only legitimate purpose of government would be protect us from violence, but she was so convinced of the depravity of her fellow humans that she would not consider any lessening of government control. I have often encountered this type of argument: people cannot be trusted to be charitable to the poor so the state must provide; people can't be trusted to take care of their elderly family members so the state must provide; people lack self control and must be protected from self destructive or negligent behaviors; and so on.

I have been led to wonder whether my political views are informed by an overly optimistic assessment of the morality of my fellow humans. I have no illusions about our intelligence or gullibility, but I have always assumed on some level that enough folks can be relied upon to do the right thing that we do not need constant surveillance and control. Maybe I have been particularly lucky in the folks I have known, but for the most part, the people I have known are generous in charitable works and giving, reasonably honest in business dealings, and not at all apt to do violence to others. I'm not saying that I have never been robbed or defrauded or assaulted (I have), but these have been exceptional events. 99.9% of the time, I have been able to rely on the kindness of strangers and the basic decency of my neighbors and others I encounter every day.

I cannot see into the hearts of my fellow men, but I have a hard time believing that all this goodness and civility is due to fear of the state, that they are just waiting for the state to weaken before they go on a barbaric rampage. Am I naive for believing this?

I realize that there have been riots and other mob violence in America and that there are, in fact, criminals. Some form of law enforcement might always be necessary. I suspect, however, that the majority of Americans would not engage in violence or theft or trespass even if the state were to wither away altogether. There is probably some percentage of the population that would become criminals if the state did not deter them, but I don't see this as substantial. I have no data to back up this assertion, but this is what a lifetime of interaction with humans has led me to believe. My statist conspecifics don't know what people would do if the hand of oppression were lifted, but they appear to assume the worst.

The state benefits from the widespread assumption that people are barbaric and that the "thin blue line" is all that stands between civilization and barbarism, and I would not be surprised to learn of instances where the state has cultivated such a belief. Indeed, dependency on the state itself might well help to create the kind of person who would descend into barbarism without state support and control. And when the state takes over an area of life, the competing institutions of civil society are apt to atrophy, and individuals will be less likely to accept personal responsibility for the things that have been socialized. Why would I tithe for the poor when the state taxes me for their supposed benefit? Why would I plan for my parents' old age when the state has this in hand and has taxed me mercilessly for this purpose?

I wish that I had some better arguments to hand when I encounter the "people are evil and must be governed" meme. All I seem to have now is "no they are not", and this does not work all that well. I would welcome suggestions from my imaginary readership.