6 ms·
Can we kindly stop using hyperbole like “using the force of the state, in other words violence” as an argument against literally any governmental policy ever?
by stouset 5y ago
Can we kindly stop using hyperbole like “using the force of the state, in other words violence” as an argument against literally any governmental policy ever?
In this same fantasy universe jack-booted government thugs are beating up people who don’t wear seat belts or who mislabel the nutritional contents on a package of cheese, except that’s just not what ever actually happens in the real world. These kinds of laws can be appropriate when they make society better for us all.
To that point, anti-maskers have almost certainly killed more Americans at this point than terrorists could ever have hoped to. You might consider that when attempting to understand why people are seemingly so hard-pressed to get laws requiring their countrymen (and women) to do the literal bare minimum to protect the lives of their neighbors.
- aww_dang 5y agoThere's a distinction between a voluntary practice and a compulsory practice. The distinction centers around individuals being compelled by violence. The kind thing to do would be to minimize our use of compulsion as much as pragmatically possible. >Can we kindly stop using hyperbole... anti-maskers have almost certainly killed more Americans
- stouset 5y agoAs much as I wish it was, that last sentence is sadly not hyperbole.
- ctrlp 5y agoExhibit A: Australia Exhibit B: Canada Exhibit C: New Zealand
- Mandatum 5y agoI think we have to be careful because those laws can be wielded by dickheads. See: every abuse of power. That's a fallacy in itself, however I think there's definitely some merit to both sides here.