4 ms·
No. Because tin-pot shitholes -- and the people trying to make them -- have, can, and will always find some new "threat" with which to justify taking away civil
by fapjacks 6y ago
No. Because tin-pot shitholes -- and the people trying to make them -- have, can, and will always find some new "threat" with which to justify taking away civil liberties. Things similar to what you have said here about "nuanced reality" with respect to civil liberties have always been for me a pretty good smell test for underlying authoritarian beliefs. In ANY context, it's possible to point to something as justification for taking away civil liberties in the name of safety and security. Yesterday it was internet death threats and human trafficking, today the pandemic, tomorrow who knows, but I promise there will be one.
- andrepd 6y agoI'm not familiar with the concept of "tin-pot shithole". >have, can, and will always find some new "threat" with which to justify taking away civil liberties. So slippery slope, is what you're arguing? "First they make a completely reasonable and temporary restriction of right of physical assembly, next we'll be off to the gulags." Isn't really an interesting argument, is it?