No, that entirely depends on if you subscribe to the Hobbesian outlook that argues the natural state of the world is one of war and brutality. The James Locke school argues that nature isn’t constantly at war, but it does lack a neutral arbiter which is the role of government and the social contract: people get better protection for life, liberty, and property in exchange for giving some of their freedom to obeying the government. Aristotle argued the state exists to enable the good life. Its role is to cultivate virtue, shape character, and ensure that citizens live well and morally. Jean-Jacques Rousseau agreed on the social contract but argued that the community has a collective responsibility to look after the well-being and moral equality of members. In the 19th and 20th centuries, thinkers like T.H. Green expanded this to argue that a just society cannot use the veil of ignorance and must actively improve the lives of the least fortunate. This is where public education and social safety nets come from.

So it looks like this: Ancient Greece: state has to care for people English Enlightenment: govern French enlightenment: govern but you need to care for your people German enlightenment: govern based on ideas

Given the Americans rebelled against the English and aligned with the French, it’s a wonder modern Americans have adopted this brutalistic attitude. Btw the French Enlightenment is what led to the Romantic period.

TLDR: role of government depends on whose philosophy you adopt. But in terms of the greatest figures and looking at the healthiest countries, I’d say it is to look after its people.