3 ms·
You are putting "individualism" where none was mentioned. > "fine none of us then as long as I can insulate myself from the worse effects of it". No. More lik
by rglullis 4y ago
You are putting "individualism" where none was mentioned.
> "fine none of us then as long as I can insulate myself from the worse effects of it".
No. More like "there is no way that any central entity will be able to solve the conflicts of everyone without turning into authoritarianism and tyranny, so let's stop pretending that we can do that and create a plethora of different communities where people are closer to those with decision-making power."
I can (and want) to help my neighbor and those close to me as equals, but I have no interest in being a mere subject serving as an instrument to whoever is in power above.
- giraffe_lady 4y agoSo... based on the fear of a particular outcome, you want a situation where individuals and small groups must solve the problem for themselves or accept the consequences? The language may be uncharitable but I remain comfortable calling that cowardice and user-blaming, yes. I stand where I stand on this.
- rglullis 4y agoThe only cowardice I see is in those thinking they can not fight by themselves and for others, and want to have a soothing voice telling them how to feel.