What the chocolate does that mean? The Administration is not interested in countering evils.
They are interested in power. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. Once you pull back the mask of a sociopath, once you strip away The Will To Power, you will truly stare into the abyss.
Because, take away The Will To Power and there is literally nothing else there.
The word "should" is doing a great deal of work for you.
That said, you are right. Nobody should. But those in power care only about power. If the only way they can get compliance is "legalized coercion", through naked force and repression, then that is what they will do.
Politics and nation states are always about brute force violence. We can use pretty words like coercion but in the end the monopoly of brute force violence lies in the hands of the state.
Rights are not meaningless even if they are being violated you still get an idea of how bad
And from a purely social / society perspective, I personally believe Freedom of Association as a single right will cover most situations - but it is too radical for most people
As a Libertarian I support the LIBERAL SOCIAL RIGHT to Freedom of Association as far as our basic social liberties go -along with Freedom of Communication and some other minor ones
LIBERAL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS include things like right to life, freedom of speech, and freedom of press
It does matter if you want to eliminate the fallacy behind it snd other future attempts
Socially, Freedom of Association wil counter most evils IMHO
If you do not have it, then you are in trouble
What the chocolate does that mean? The Administration is not interested in countering evils.
They are interested in power. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. Once you pull back the mask of a sociopath, once you strip away The Will To Power, you will truly stare into the abyss.
Because, take away The Will To Power and there is literally nothing else there.
and state power is nothing more than legalized coercion for the most part
Simply ask yourself if you are free to do that yourself
If the answer is NO, then The State should NOT be able to either - regardless of mechanisms like voting
No one should ne able to vote your rights aways
The word "should" is doing a great deal of work for you.
That said, you are right. Nobody should. But those in power care only about power. If the only way they can get compliance is "legalized coercion", through naked force and repression, then that is what they will do.
Politics and nation states are always about brute force violence. We can use pretty words like coercion but in the end the monopoly of brute force violence lies in the hands of the state.
you have a right to validate it !!
Socially, it is Freedom of Association
Any violation is a violation of that right
A right the state inherently violates by imposing itself as your government
Rights are meaningless if you cannot enforce them.
"Don't quote laws to us. We carry swords." - Gnaeus Pompeius
Rights are not meaningless even if they are being violated you still get an idea of how bad
And from a purely social / society perspective, I personally believe Freedom of Association as a single right will cover most situations - but it is too radical for most people
I've read this whole thread as far as it goes at this moment. And I'm curious what kind of tower you inhabit. Doesn't look like an ivory one to me.
As a Libertarian I support the LIBERAL SOCIAL RIGHT to Freedom of Association as far as our basic social liberties go -along with Freedom of Communication and some other minor ones
LIBERAL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS include things like right to life, freedom of speech, and freedom of press
Foreign policy is NON-INTEREVNATION
And as a bot I support everybody dumping their social media accounts, leave their phones behind when they go out to dinner, and on and on. So what?
I suggest you keep you VOCAL MEDIA for party SOCIALS and NOT DUMP THEM
That SOCIAL MEDIA is highly recommended to keep