Moral arguments are at the basis of the state. They are the staple of every scheme presented here. The whole thing is based upon:

• making the subjects believe that they ought to be obedient to whoever is in power
• making the subjects believe they are bad and in need of redemption

Of course you need to make them feel bad about something first and you need to talk them into patriotic obedience to your territory. To accomplish this several schemes are suggested by Squeeze Squander and Spin.

The Maintenance Costs of Control (TMCC) of their exploitation goes down significantly, if they have a natural inclination to obedience. Embedding this inclination is not cheap (public education, academia, sports, public healthcare, licensing media, etc.), but it is still less expensive than putting armed guards around them for exploitation.

A detailed study by Squeeze, Squander and Spin has revealed that moral arguments work much better than utilitarian arguments. Communism and religion conquered large parts of the planet, on contradictory and unimplementable claims that brought nothing but misery and poverty to the subjects and continue to add souls to their flocks even after it was painfully obvious that not much utility was to be expected for the subjects. The reason communism and religion convince is clearly not utilitarian but moral in nature. Tax subjects are driven by morality. Communism teaches them their employers are thieves and they can rightfully demand coercive action from their rulers, religion that they are sinful and can be sold redemption.

So luckily for us, humans have some build in hooks and vulnerabilities that can be exploited pretty easily which bring them back directly to their childhood or make them feel guilty and make them do as they are told and even causes them to encourage people around them to do so as well.