3 ms·
It's also the individual's ultimate responsibility to feed themselves and find shelter and healthcare. But lots of societies believe that, acting through govern
by afandian 8y ago
It's also the individual's ultimate responsibility to feed themselves and find shelter and healthcare. But lots of societies believe that, acting through government, they should provides a safety net.
(I know in some parts of the world that's a controversial statement.)
Why shouldn't society work for the benefit of the more vulnerable? Whether it's those unable to provide their own healthcare or able to verify their own facts (for example, in situations where Facebook is literally the only access to corroborating information)?
- metalchianti 8y agoI think the issue at hand is different because it's a question of censorship. You'd be infringing on the liberties of others and a central authority would be deciding what's ok and what's not. You could make the argument for whether or not Facebook should be that authority but the analogy of government providing a safety net does not hold up.
- afandian 8y agoDifferent governments work in different ways. The political process isn't perfect everywhere (or anywhere) but they can be diverse. Facebook _is_ censoring and editorializing, full stop. Should societies not even attempt to fight back?
- UncleMeat 8y agoAnd you are infringing on the liberties of others when collecting taxes to distribute as food stamps. "Never infringe on liberties" is not a workable plan. The question is when those infringements are worth it.