3 ms·
Then perhaps the article should choose a more illustrative example. My point is that I disagree with the basic premise. Laws which help tyrannies oppress and m
by mikeash 8y ago
Then perhaps the article should choose a more illustrative example.
My point is that I disagree with the basic premise. Laws which help tyrannies oppress and murder people are not necessarily the same laws that turn good governments into tyrannies. I see no reason the two should be connected.
- pdonis 8y ago> Laws which help tyrannies oppress and murder people are not necessarily the same laws that turn good governments into tyrannies. Can you give any counterexamples? Also, bear in mind that the criterion in the article is not "does the law help tyrannies oppress and murder people?" but "does the law make it difficult or impossible to protect the innocent against the government?"
- mikeash 8y agoThe test as quoted makes no sense. It’s always going to be difficult or impossible to protect the innocent against a government run amok. There is no scenario where a bunch of maniacs have taken over and you’re trying so save some innocent people and it’s easy to do. Thus I have interpreted it as “does the law make it more difficult to protect the innocent against the government if the government has gone crazy?” That seems like the more charitable interpretation, as it actually makes a little bit of sense until you bite into it.