> If not, then those people might actually be correct.

This doesn't seem reasonable to me. The amount of misery and injustice that would accompany any sort of dissolution of civil society would be enormous and with no path towards something better.

To the extent that some people who think the current system is broken beyond repair make an effort to explain what they would do different it basically amounts to "everything will be better if we just give all the power to my preferred group of people", which sounds a lot like fascism to me.

The expanding scope/power of national government (all branches) is a huge part of our problem. Accelerating that trend but with the "right people" in place is not an attractive solution from my point of view. It doesn't matter to me if the "right people" have a (D) or (R) after their name, expansive national government is a bad idea.

It isn't the expansion but the loss of control. Large government is fine as long as it serves the people. Large government doesn't also have to mean millions of rules.

Civil society also doesn't have to be tied directly to government. America's biggest problems is that we are shedding norms faster than we acquiring them.

I had a conversation with a business ethics professor, and every one of her students for the most part want to work at Amazon and they have favorable opinions about Amazon's means and methods. Corn pone and all that. The lust for money has too large of an effect on our society.