Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
Time and again it is the "power" of a populace seeking liberty from tyranny that over comes the power of even the strongest and most effective of governments.
Not true. Cambodia in the 70's, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Saddam's Iraq, A'stan under the Taliban, Saudi-Arabia, Syria, North Korea etc etc etc.

This "power from the people" is not a reality in the real world, unless they do a lot of killing to get it, and unless they are prepared to keep killing, they can loose it.

As to the trite catch-phrase of "monopoly on armed violence," I gladly toss it to the same bone pile where so many half-right phrases commonly associated with the efforts of intervening powers to suppress such popular uprisings duly belong.
Then you don't understand it. It means "Man on the ground with a gun." It's not presented as a "system of Government". It is a means by which control - for both good and bad - is gained and maintained for the Government to function.
It is the lack of such monopoly that leads to (ultimately) the stability of good governance. It is the presence of such monopoly that leads to the stability born of oppression.
All sounds good, till you look at Somalia, the Congo, Sierra Leone, parts of Colombia, Thailand etc etc etc. It's the competition for the monopoly that creates the problem and it is frankly ridiculous to suggest the US citizens owning guns gives them the capacity to defend themselves against their government. Never seems to work and never has.