> Pretty ballsy to proclaim western society and economic coercion as not "legitimate oppression". Those are 2 claims, in which neither makes sense to me, proba

> Pretty ballsy to proclaim western society and economic coercion as not "legitimate oppression". Those are 2 claims, in which neither makes sense to me, probably due to a lack of detail. Did they make sense to you when you wrote it? If it's 'legitimate', are you referencing the oppression of the majority as a proxy for western society? Economic coercion - The threat or act by a sender government or governments to disrupt economic exchange with the target state, unless the target acquiesces to an articulated demand. It's possible that 'economic coercion' is now a misnomer, having been used to mean something else specific, initially. I have referenced a definition, for simplicity. Feel free to audit. As it stands, it is not oppression, unless any given demand is supposed to equate to the status of oppression? You can survive without participating in the economics, it just benefits you more to participate, where lifespan and pleasure is concerned. That isn't coercion any more than checking the material you put in your mouth is biological oppression, it's a linear optimization you're free not to make.