Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. (Maybe the first time I've said that seriously!)
Although I wish that we lived in a world in which freedom-based arguments would win the day, that is not the world in which we live. We need all sides of the argument in order to win over the most people possible (all IMO). Remember how "muh free-dumb" was the trendy insult for a while? I couldn't believe it! People literally mocking freedom, after decades of "I AM FREE TO BE THE REAL ME AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME!!!"
For some people, data-driven arguments will win the day. Arguments like "if we've got to be locked down to save the hospitals, why the heck are we not using this time to expand hospital capacity?!??!?!"
The people you describe -- those who have displayed their inability to live up to the ideals of liberty as many in that same cohort simultaneously and publicly expressed their disdain for it -- have done us all a big favor. We can now safely jettison any silly ideas that the people of the "exceptional nation" will defend liberty. Gee, thanks, Dad, for "fighting for freedom" the way you did. "The people" really appreciate it.
I long ago lost any notion that in order for freedom to succeed the majority needs convincing of its value. Untrue. That horde merely goes where it's led; they'll go any which way because they anchor to nothing. Oh...maybe they do...to such things as their own immediate survival or the feeling of being in the "club" or the immediate gratification they get from indulging their sanctimony toward those who would value freedom over mere survival. Damn, that's annoying. Public chastisement for you, cretin!
To suggest that the ordering of the large-scale suspension of human freedom "just for a few minutes" while "we get things in order" during the "emergency" could 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 lead to a happy ending is to reveal, IMO, a dangerous naiveté.
During a speech in the British House of Commons in 1783, William Pitt (the Younger) said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” I made a point about this in my newsletter, "Obedience".
I credit -- to a point -- those who pursue attempts to convince/persuade "the horde". I learned the hard way 'tis better to leave the horde to itself. Better to seek, find, and support those who need no convincing about the value of liberty first.
"Liberty is the great engine of value in the world. It is what allows people to pursue their discoveries of value. Take away people's liberty and they cannot be productive. They cannot create their lives or make their contributions. Only with liberty can people make progress in the discovery and pursuit of valued ends. That makes liberty the necessary foundation for valuing peoples choices, which establishes the priority of liberty as a fundamental principle." - Alec Rawls
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. (Maybe the first time I've said that seriously!)
Although I wish that we lived in a world in which freedom-based arguments would win the day, that is not the world in which we live. We need all sides of the argument in order to win over the most people possible (all IMO). Remember how "muh free-dumb" was the trendy insult for a while? I couldn't believe it! People literally mocking freedom, after decades of "I AM FREE TO BE THE REAL ME AND YOU CAN'T STOP ME!!!"
For some people, data-driven arguments will win the day. Arguments like "if we've got to be locked down to save the hospitals, why the heck are we not using this time to expand hospital capacity?!??!?!"
The people you describe -- those who have displayed their inability to live up to the ideals of liberty as many in that same cohort simultaneously and publicly expressed their disdain for it -- have done us all a big favor. We can now safely jettison any silly ideas that the people of the "exceptional nation" will defend liberty. Gee, thanks, Dad, for "fighting for freedom" the way you did. "The people" really appreciate it.
I long ago lost any notion that in order for freedom to succeed the majority needs convincing of its value. Untrue. That horde merely goes where it's led; they'll go any which way because they anchor to nothing. Oh...maybe they do...to such things as their own immediate survival or the feeling of being in the "club" or the immediate gratification they get from indulging their sanctimony toward those who would value freedom over mere survival. Damn, that's annoying. Public chastisement for you, cretin!
To suggest that the ordering of the large-scale suspension of human freedom "just for a few minutes" while "we get things in order" during the "emergency" could 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 lead to a happy ending is to reveal, IMO, a dangerous naiveté.
During a speech in the British House of Commons in 1783, William Pitt (the Younger) said, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” I made a point about this in my newsletter, "Obedience".
I credit -- to a point -- those who pursue attempts to convince/persuade "the horde". I learned the hard way 'tis better to leave the horde to itself. Better to seek, find, and support those who need no convincing about the value of liberty first.
"Liberty is the great engine of value in the world. It is what allows people to pursue their discoveries of value. Take away people's liberty and they cannot be productive. They cannot create their lives or make their contributions. Only with liberty can people make progress in the discovery and pursuit of valued ends. That makes liberty the necessary foundation for valuing peoples choices, which establishes the priority of liberty as a fundamental principle." - Alec Rawls