Umm, the strong will out even with govt. In fact, govt will enforce the will of the strong.
Consider how eminent domain works in the US. One of the seminal cases in the US involved GM wanting to build a plant where a bunch of poor people lived. The local govt took the land under eminent domain and basically gave it to GM. (It's the "poletown" case if you're looking for cites.)
Yes, you get to vote, but as they say, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting over what to have for dinner.
Those aren't the only possibilities. (And relatively incorrupt is optimistic. It isn't consistently corrupt.)
Consider the sudan (no functioning govt) with zimbabwe (malevolent govt). It's not obvious that the sudan is worse.
Also, remember that the effective genocides have had govt backing.