Originally Posted by JayStar
I do believe this, I express them daily. I agree that America isn't a free country but that doesn't mean it's citizens don't have rights. You're a fool to believe that the government has taken away these rights. But no country is free.. no country that isn't doomed beyond repair.
A slave who gets chocolate on Saturdays isn't exactly better off than a slave who doesn't.
The vicious cycle of debt slavery that runs this world is a bitch. Unless you can become a part of the elite and are no longer trapped in the cycle, your "rights" are about as worthless as a piece of chocolate to a slave.
What you fail to understand is that money runs the world, your rights mean nothing if money wishes to exterminate and oppress you.
To be truly free means to be fully able to do whatever you want, whenever you want to, however you want to within the realms of physical possibility(quite the constraint).
In any case, I oppose this bill because I quite frankly dislike any attempts from big brother to intrude upon what I deem to be my privacy.
Hoss.
Originally Posted by Hyde
A slave who gets chocolate on Saturdays isn't exactly better off than a slave who doesn't.
The vicious cycle of debt slavery that runs this world is a bitch. Unless you can become a part of the elite and are no longer trapped in the cycle, your "rights" are about as worthless as a piece of chocolate to a slave.
What you fail to understand is that money runs the world, your rights mean nothing if money wishes to exterminate and oppress you.
Although your analogy is meaning full.. it's quite out of place.
Even though rights are regulated they're much better than being a slave with chocolate. I don't fail to understand the power of wealth. Instead, I understand the necessity of government [at times].
Picture a world where everything is fair. No taxes, freedom to anything, freedom to travel anywhere. This world sounds nice, yes. But is it realistic? In today's age you and I both understand the necessity of government. However, I rejoice in the ability to speak against it, a privilege many other people do not share. That is all I'm saying.
Just because I don't have full freedom, doesn't mean I'm a slave.
Originally Posted by JayStar
Although your analogy is meaning full.. it's quite out of place.
Even though rights are regulated they're much better than being a slave with chocolate. I don't fail to understand the power of wealth. Instead, I understand the necessity of government [at times].
Picture a world where everything is fair. No taxes, freedom to anything, freedom to travel anywhere. This world sounds nice, yes. But is it realistic? In today's age you and I both understand the necessity of government. However, I rejoice in the ability to speak against it, a privilege many other people do not share. That is all I'm saying.
Just because I don't have full freedom, doesn't mean I'm a slave.
The analogy is not out of place. You are restricted from doing whatever you want, you work in order to pay off what is an astronomical imaginary figure that shouldn't be approaching those levels. Your freedoms are sprinkles atop a steaming-pile-of-shit-flavored ice cream.
Western society is an advanced version of feudalism. The government owns your land, you pay taxes. You have rights to your land, but, if you want to build something on your land, chances are you'll have to go out and pay for a permit. Your rights are a sparkly distraction from reality. I feel no need to rejoice that the government allows me to do what I should be able to do without any input from the government. If you lived on a fief and your lord allowed you to bitch about the way he ran shit, would it be any better than not being able to do so?
Whether or not my ideals are realistic is of no concern to me. Accepting a cruel world is conforming to the system, and the last thing i'd want to do as a person is that.
Hoss.
I'm a libertarian, I understand the value of individual rights. Actually, I'm practically on your side, I'm only trying to explain things realistically.
I have to ask, what's the alternative? Not to say that full Armageddon is out of the question...
Funny actually, I've thought the same. Democracy is basically a way politicians can sit on our shoulders and say, "Well, at least you had a vote".
Either we get rights and have them regulated or we get none at all. Is that fair? Should we accept it? No, but unless you're plotting on killing every government in the world.. we still have to live with their laws.
I have to ask, what's the alternative? Not to say that full Armageddon is out of the question...
Originally Posted by Hyde
If you lived on a fief and your lord allowed you to bitch about the way he ran shit, would it be any better than not being able to do so?
Funny actually, I've thought the same. Democracy is basically a way politicians can sit on our shoulders and say, "Well, at least you had a vote".
Either we get rights and have them regulated or we get none at all. Is that fair? Should we accept it? No, but unless you're plotting on killing every government in the world.. we still have to live with their laws.
