The original subtitle of this blog read "A look at the absurdity of our elected and unelected leaders."
But then I realized this phrase contains two inexcusable errors. First, I fell into the very common collectivist trap with my usage of the word our. I didn't elect these tyrants and judging by the typical voter turnout, neither did the majority of the people. So how can they be our leaders?
Now let's address the term leader. According to dictionary.com, a leader is "a person or thing that leads." Lead is defined "to go before or with to show the way." This term is more aptly definitive of one who attracts respect and followers by using persuasion which in turn commands voluntary acquiescence.
Contrarily, the term government is defined as "the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the members, citizens, or inhabitants of communities, societies, and states." Using this definition, one need not possess any real leadership skills, only a demented desire to control others using force and coercion. In other words, a "mobster".
Therefore, effectively immediately, the new subtitle of this blog will be a personal quote: "The problem with giving the state arbitrary power is they wield their power arbitrarily."