3 ms·

The argument of the net gain is flawed. A hallmark of modern, free societies is that it's exactly not one for all, but the right and freedom of the individuum.

• danbruc 9y ago
  This is not true at all. All modern societies limit personal freedom in countless ways for the better of the entire society. And those limits are not flaws of the current systems, i.e. you will not get a better societies by abolishing them. There are still some instances where we should abolish limits on personal freedom for the better but this is certainly not the general case.
  • madez 9y ago
    This part of the thread is becoming ridiculous. In all societies at all times there is some system to act against the interest of some people under some conditions. That is trivial. What differentiates modern free societies, then? Modern free societies are characterized by a system of law that not only the weak must obey, but also the powerful. Everbodies basic rights are protected, even against the government. Sure, we pay taxes, and cooperate by compromise in countless ways. However, that's not what we are talking about here, at all! There is simply no way a government can lawfully kill a citizen to help some others, at least not in the EU, whatever the net gain may. That is just one obvious example of how the argument of the net gain is simply overruled by modern principles of basic human rights.
    • danbruc 9y ago
      But it is not known which laws they are allowed to break and which not, you just mentioned killing people for the first time, neither I nor the article did this. What about breaking into houses to plant bugs? I would actually be surprised if they were not allowed to do this. And I picked the example of beating someone up not totally at random, people went to court against the MI5 and MI6 because of their involvement with deportation of British citizens to Guantanamo [1] which may or may not turn out to be a worse fate than getting beaten up in a dark alley. And last but not least, the licence to kill [2] seems to be an actual thing. [1] http://humanrights.ucdavis.edu/projects/the-guantanamo-testimonials-project/testimonies/testimony-of-foreign-intelligence-personnel/guantanamo-bay-detainee-sues-british-intelligence-agencies-over-torture/ http://humanrights.ucdavis.edu/projects/the-guantanamo-testi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_to_kill_(concept) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence_to_kill_(concept)
• irrational 9y ago
  That's anarchy. Societies are societies because they put the good of the group above the good of the individual.
  • ericHosick 9y ago
    > Societies are societies because they put the good of the group above the good of the individual. Doesn't necessarily make a society good (aka righteous).
    • irrational 9y ago
      No, but putting the needs of the individual before the needs of the group does create a bad society.
• Retra 9y ago
  The hallmark of unfree societies is the the right and freedom of the individual. (So long as they are part of the chosen group.)
• kahnpro 9y ago
  The individuum? Getting into /r/iamverysmart territory here...