Consensual government is an oxymoron. It doesn't matter which system is in power, I cannot not consent to paying taxes. If I don't pay taxes willingly, they will be taken by force, or I will be arrested - and if I resist, shot. Unless you're referring to consensual in relation to the word consensus; which is a blatant abuse of language, no different than social, and socialist. Your definition implies that government is a fundamental core and part of reality, which is blatantly untrue. A government only exists to the extent that we let it exist: either because we live in fear of it, or because we perceive that we are benefiting from it (welfare). ----------------- Again, the only that really matters is distribution of wealth. A government can't do anything without wealth, and people will not willingly give away their wealth to them if they don't have to (read with a gun pointed at their heads). The only thing that matters is to what extent they take things from you. The more a government takes it from its population, prisoners or slaves, the more leftist is. At the extreme end, the government owns everything. The less it takes from the population, the more right wing it must be. Because the less resources it has, the less courts it can run, and the less army/police it can finance to enforce its laws. ------------------ Consensual governance is an oxymoron because one cannot not consent to having their shit stolen and taken away.