Ayn Rand's Anthem-- Relation to big question

Ayn Rand's famous anti-Soviet novel, Anthem, discusses my big question pretty thoroughly. From the start of the novel, a future world is portrayed bleakly and in a negative light. Inhabitants of this new society resemble those who have existed in B.C years; the apparent lack of progression can be attributed to the culture's tight government. This government rules all equally and its main function is to preserve the ignorance in its inhabitants. Among these oppressed individuals is Equality 7-2521, the novel's protagonist who eventually defies the harsh regime. He seeks solitude in a local hole (once a modern coal mine) and reflects on his life during these intervals of seclusion. Government has done its job by keeping the peace; he is the only "cursed" individual that he is aware of-- the only one who seems not to fit in. It also imposes harsh sanctions on those who are discovered nonconformists-- something Equality will later experience as his new concepts are rejected by the world's "greatest" minds. Government's influence over its subjects is severe-- a limiting force that succeeds in keeping order in practically everyone. Equality, upset with the poor reception of his new discovery, breaks free from the governmental force which binds him to society, escaping into the wilderness. He finds rest in a pre-war home (presumably one left from this day) and proceeds to gain the knowledge books in this house contain. In the final chapter, he vows to avenge the destruction of our advanced age, planning to insinuate another revolution--this time against the former victors of "The Great Rebirth." Rand's government has done its job in conforming the masses, however in Equality 7-2521, it provokes an opposite response. From this, I conclude that too much governmental influence does not keep peace. Rather, it provokes it. Many notorious revolutions and military conflicts have arisen from this concept. When government becomes too large, it is unsustainable-- people will respond accordingly. In this sense, Anthem supports both the pro and con sides to my big question. Government is necessary to some extent to prevent wide scale chaos, however when it becomes too large, it actually may provoke resistance.

First Impressions

The universal question that I will be focusing on in this blog: "Is government necessary for the existence of peace?"
I am interested in this question because it addresses societal order and what happens when nothing is left to organize society-- topics which intrigue me. It is pertinent to many novels and has been debated between anarchists and large-government supporters forever. Both sides have well founded and compelling arguments; the challenge will be to prove who's right. On a personal note, I would like to relate this question to my own experiences. When I was a young child, I attended a day care which prohibited bringing toys from home. I always adhered to this rule until the day when our supervisor left. I broke the rule by bringing a personal possession to class the next day while under the impression that our supervisor had left permanently. The substitute teacher was unhappy with my actions. In the absence of a ruling body, or government, I had succeeded in breaking the peace. I defied the norm, creating a non peaceful situation. This example may seem inapplicable as it addresses an event which unfolded when I was probably 5 years old; through other textual examples, I will seek to expose the truth (or lack thereof) in the necessity of some form of government (whether it be tangible or not) for the existence of peace.