3 ms·

I get the point you're trying to make, it's just that you have picked the perfect counter-example to make it against. Both with animal protection (no human will

I get the point you're trying to make, it's just that you have picked the perfect counter-example to make it against. Both with animal protection (no human will profit) and with Switzerland (we as citizens can force a popular vote against any law our elected government is about to pass, or even propose new laws).

wallace_f 9y ago
You're right that Switzerland is just about the least concerning place in the world in terms of government tyranny. However, there are problems with only starting to be critical when the government starts confiscating your phone at the airport, reading your email, etc. At this point you've even set precedent that they should be allowed to do those things, just so long as it can be justified as good, or even "the will of the people." So in this case we have ourselves to blame for this being in this mess. And this kind of government js actually quite a shift from the type of democracy that Enlightenment figures helped developed for us, which gave us so much in the world. Governments are responsible for most of the evil in the 20th century. Culling that probably starts with thinking about what a legitimate government should be permitted to do in the first place.
- lawl 9y ago
  I completely agree with you in general, even in Switzerland we're not safe[0]. You just picked a really shitty example, and in europe we're in general a bit more pro government than in the US. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_files_scandal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_files_scandal
  - wallace_f 9y ago
    Err, the "shittiness" of the example was deliberate. Of course I could point out violations that everyone would agree with, such as the TSA confiscating your electronics. That threat is personally threatening to people, so all of a sudden they're civil libertarians. Consider another example: what benefit is there in the government spending so much time and money giving due process, health care and other rights to murderers, child predators or terrorists, while free, good people go without healthcare? It's not because the criminals deserve it. If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example." The point is this: to consider what constitutes legitimate government.
    - lawl 9y ago
      > while free, good people go without healthcare? Doesn't happen in Switzerland. > If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example." Nope, I wouldn't. In fact I got heavily downvoted on HN before because I advocated for freedom of speech even for terrorists.

wallace_f 9y ago

You're right that Switzerland is just about the least concerning place in the world in terms of government tyranny. However, there are problems with only starting to be critical when the government starts confiscating your phone at the airport, reading your email, etc. At this point you've even set precedent that they should be allowed to do those things, just so long as it can be justified as good, or even "the will of the people." So in this case we have ourselves to blame for this being in this mess. And this kind of government js actually quite a shift from the type of democracy that Enlightenment figures helped developed for us, which gave us so much in the world. Governments are responsible for most of the evil in the 20th century. Culling that probably starts with thinking about what a legitimate government should be permitted to do in the first place.

lawl 9y ago
I completely agree with you in general, even in Switzerland we're not safe[0]. You just picked a really shitty example, and in europe we're in general a bit more pro government than in the US. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_files_scandal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_files_scandal
- wallace_f 9y ago
  Err, the "shittiness" of the example was deliberate. Of course I could point out violations that everyone would agree with, such as the TSA confiscating your electronics. That threat is personally threatening to people, so all of a sudden they're civil libertarians. Consider another example: what benefit is there in the government spending so much time and money giving due process, health care and other rights to murderers, child predators or terrorists, while free, good people go without healthcare? It's not because the criminals deserve it. If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example." The point is this: to consider what constitutes legitimate government.
  - lawl 9y ago
    > while free, good people go without healthcare? Doesn't happen in Switzerland. > If I advocated human rights for these people when we didn't have them, you would say the same thing you are now: "I agree with human rights, but you just picked a really shitty example." Nope, I wouldn't. In fact I got heavily downvoted on HN before because I advocated for freedom of speech even for terrorists.