Even the best government is the least evil, it is not and cannot be truly good.
"Argue for your limitations and sure enough they're yours." Richard Bach. The best government is not evil and is instead morally and ethically good.
A terrorist holds 50 people hostage, with them wired to be blown up if the police attempt to rescue them.
The terrorist believes the ends justify the means. The terrorist has initiated force against 50 people. He's a criminal. He has chosen to deny his own ability to persuade by reason and has denied his victims the ability to persuade by reason.
A sniper can take him out and save the 50 people. But we can't do that, because the end of saving 50 innocent people's lives does not justify the means of blowing the terrorist's head off.
Are you insane? (/rhetoric) Of course the sniper takes out the terrorist. It's moral and ethical to use force in self-defense against a person that is initiating force. The means -- using force in self-defense -- justifies the end. The end is saving 50 people.
"No exceptions to the immorality of initiatory force exist. No matter how "noble" the ends, they never justify the means of initiating force, fraud, or coercion against any individual. Any government or activity that depends on or uses initiatory force, threat of force, or coercion is immoral and destructive... While all governments have the power, none ever have the moral right to initiate force or coercion against any individual. The only beneficial and moral laws are those designed to protect the life and property rights of individuals from initiatory force, the threat of force, and fraud. In turn, the only moral use of force is for self-defense: That is for protection of oneself, property, or country from force initiated by other individuals or governments. ...Self-defense by any means, including force, is not only a basic moral right, but a moral duty."
INITIATORY FORCE -- THE PRIME EVIL
Basic disagreement. Until humans are perfectly good, no government composed of humans can be perfectly good.
Any less than 100% good government is by definition evil to varying degrees. Until men (and therefore governments) become good, it is best to limit the ability of men in power to domineer over others. Therefore a more limited government is by definition better than a less limited one.
With the obvious caveat that a government must be strong enough to fulfill its prime obligation, which is indeed to prevent the initiation of force against its citizens by actors either inside or outside its area of control.
There is also, BTW, the unfortunate fact that people differ greatly in their definition of what constitutes “good” in a government. Until all agree on a definition it seems pretty silly to think that we could devise a truly good government. Until then it seems wiser to settle for a limited, lesser evil government.