> This would then imply that all collective social arrangements of people must be called "government" and that any definition of "government" that does not include every possible social arrangement of people is flawed
Wow.
As made clear subsequently, "government" covers the process(es) a society uses for collective decision making and enforcement of those decisions.
It does not cover the nature of marriage, the presence or absence of multi-generational households, the size of cities, methods of transportation or the religious demographics.
It is still a narrowly defined term, but just not narrowed down to the 30 year old look-ma-i-discovered-the-internet version of "it's about the monopoly on violence".
Your derision aside (which is not really a winning method if you want to convey your point or gain understanding with others )
Why do you believe my definition which is a very old definition dating back long before computers let alone the internet is " look-ma-i-discovered-the-internet version"
Or maybe that is suppose to be a weak attack on either my chronological age (which you believe to be 30, far from accurate) or that I am naive in my views even though I have been refining my political options for decades in various venues.
So who about you formulate a better agreement than your current dismissive weak ones where by simply because you only discovered this view on the internet you assume that is the only place it was present, and therefore should be dismissed out of hand. Seems like a lot of projection going on here.
The definition of government that you offered comes from a very distinct strain of philosophy, which doesn't go back that far, historically had few believers, and gained far more prominence with the rise of Usenet than it had ever had before in the history of humanity.
I'm also not interested in convincing you of anything. My only goal is to point out fallacies, so that simplistic depictions of "what is" don't go unchallenged. It's fine with me if you continue to believe what you already believe.
Wow.
As made clear subsequently, "government" covers the process(es) a society uses for collective decision making and enforcement of those decisions.
It does not cover the nature of marriage, the presence or absence of multi-generational households, the size of cities, methods of transportation or the religious demographics.
It is still a narrowly defined term, but just not narrowed down to the 30 year old look-ma-i-discovered-the-internet version of "it's about the monopoly on violence".