This characterization of rights seems somewhat melodramatic. A government is capable of providing its citizens with rights without forcing individuals at gunpoint to provide them. The way this happens is that the government creates an organization that is dedicated to the provision of these rights, and then individuals can voluntarily join it. The government can set the wage, or produce summery marketing material, or issue medals to encourage participation in civic practices.
Where does the government get the money? It still checks out to forced labor, once or N times removed. Not that I'm saying it's never acceptable - it's a trade-off, but we should call it as what it is, if used - a gift from others, a privilege. Not a human right. And, we should be strongly biased against it by default, not trivialize it.
