Sedona’s Illusion of Privilege in a Nation Rejecting Governance

By Bear Howard

Bear Howard Chronicles

Sedona, AZ —   In the wake of the 2024 election, Sedona residents—much like many Americans—have convinced themselves that they are too special to be burdened by the realities of governance. Their disdain for local leadership reflects a broader national trend: a growing belief, fueled by the current administration and politically motivated news outlets, that government itself is an unnecessary intrusion rather than the backbone of a functioning society. Across the country, there is a push to dismantle government processes, not because they are failing, but because a privileged citizenry no longer wants to engage with them. Yet, when the government does exert its power, it often does so selectively, punishing those who refuse to fall in line—whether at the local or international level.

Both Sedona residents and national leaders decry government interference while relying on the very systems they criticize. At the federal level, the new administration pushes deregulation under the guise of “freedom,” ignoring that a sophisticated society cannot function without structure. In Sedona, residents complain about zoning laws but would be the first to protest if their views were obstructed by unchecked development. The hypocrisy is national in scale: Americans want roads, law enforcement, and environmental protections but often reject the mechanisms that sustain them.

This entitlement-driven rejection of governance extends from city council meetings in Sedona to the highest levels of Washington. Residents rail against taxes but expect services even though most of the tax revenue is actually paid by tourists paying sales and bed taxes. They demand local control but refuse to engage in the civic processes that allow it. Nationally, this is echoed by an administration that cuts funding to public infrastructure while promising a better future—one that somehow materializes without government involvement. Both Sedona and the country at large indulge in the fantasy that benefits can exist without responsibility.

Much like Sedona prides itself on being a unique oasis, America clings to an outdated idea of exceptionalism while resisting the work required to maintain it. The national administration, like Sedona’s government critics, operates under the illusion that dismantling government will somehow lead to prosperity. In reality, it invites chaos. The same residents who protest city leadership’s attempts to manage tourism are no different from national voices demanding the elimination of federal agencies while expecting stability to magically persist.

Mistrust as a Status Symbol

In Sedona, rejecting local governance has become a form of self-importance—residents believe they don’t need government because they are different, special, and separate from the problems of the world. Nationally, this sentiment has been magnified into a political movement. The administration validates the idea that Americans shouldn’t have to “put up” with the government at all, framing necessary civic structure as oppression rather than function. The result? A country—and a town—disillusioned with reality, where rejecting governance is more about ego than principle.

The Hypocrisy of Government Overreach: Tariffs and Punishment

While the administration champions smaller government when it suits its supporters, it has no problem using federal power as a weapon against those who refuse to fall in line. Nowhere is this clearer than in its aggressive use of tariffs—economic punishments imposed not for strategic reasons, but as tools of coercion. Businesses, consumers, and even entire industries suffer under these arbitrary trade wars, as the government imposes economic hardship on those it wants to force into submission. This is governance not as public service, but as a dictator’s tool—a method of bending opponents to its will.

This same dynamic plays out in Sedona. Residents resent local government for imposing regulations but fail to see that, without oversight, power merely shifts to those with the most money and influence. The federal government’s tariff policies mirror this imbalance, demonstrating that the absence of fair, functional governance does not lead to freedom—it leads to selective control by those who hold the reins.

Without Government, Chaos Wins

The irony is that those who despise government the most are the ones who would suffer the most without it. Sedona residents claim to hate regulations, but without zoning laws, developers would erase the town’s natural beauty. Without environmental protections, Oak Creek would be polluted beyond recognition. On a national level, the administration’s push to dismantle federal oversight threatens to erode everything from infrastructure to social stability. Americans—like Sedona residents—fail to see that their privileged stance against the government is not strength but self-destruction.

Conclusion:

Sedona’s rejection of governance is a microcosm of a larger national delusion: the belief that privilege exempts people from the realities of a functional society. The 2024 election has ushered in an administration eager to validate this mindset, dismantling government not because it is broken, but because a spoiled electorate believes it should not have to engage with it.

At the same time, when the government does act, it does so with targeted aggression, punishing those who resist its demands while pretending to champion freedom. Until both Sedona and the nation recognize that structure, responsibility, and governance are not the enemy, they will continue on a path of self-inflicted decline.