3 ms·

It’ll be real fun during the next set of lockdowns when the government disables all non-essential peoples vehicles. A democracy functions under freedom of move

It’ll be real fun during the next set of lockdowns when the government disables all non-essential peoples vehicles. A democracy functions under freedom of movement, speech, self-defense, self-reliance, etc If the people can’t move, are censored, can’t support themselves and must support the government… you’re not free or in a democracy.

secretsatan 4y ago
Where are you people getting this idea that they will shut things down remotely, it’s not mentioned anywhere in this article, the sources, or official pages
mbg721 4y ago
A handy hack for getting around pesky legal protections of human rights is to realize that while the rights themselves are protected, the levers people apply to them in everyday practice are not. So you can just selectively outlaw levers.
hutzlibu 4y ago
"you’re not free or in a democracy. " Depends. People could vote against emergency laws now, but since most people are ok with that mechanism, it is democratic. And I say that as someone who is not ok with those laws. But I can accept that the majority thinks otherwise. And in general, switzerland with their tradition of direct democracy and consensus is certainly more democratic than most other states.
flanked-evergl 4y ago
> A democracy functions under freedom of movement, speech, self-defense, self-reliance, etc Not to nit pick, but while I'm picking nits. What you refer to is liberal democracy. Karl Popper explained this very well in his book Conjectures And Refutations: > The difference between a democracy and a tyranny is that under a democracy the government can be got rid of without bloodshed; under a tyranny it cannot. > Democracy as such cannot confer any benefits upon the citizen and it should not be expected to do so. In fact democracy can do nothing—only the citizens of the democracy can act (including, of course, those citizens who comprise the government). Democracy provides no more than a framework within which the citizens may act in a more or less organized and coherent way. > We are democrats, not because the majority is always right, but because democratic traditions are the least evil ones of which we know. If the majority (or ‘public opinion’) decides in favour of tyranny, a democrat need not therefore suppose that some fatal inconsistency in his views has been revealed. He will realize, rather, that the democratic tradition in his country was not strong enough. If people in Switzerland choose a government that restricts their movement, this is what they should get, and if they don't get that, democracy is broken.
- FpUser 4y ago
  >"If people in Switzerland choose a government that restricts their movement, this is what they should get, and if they don't get that, democracy is broken." People would select my cat as a president if "properly" prepared
- starkd 4y ago
  Look at the founder's discussion about the tyranny of the majority. Something which pure democracy is prone to, if carried to the extreme. It's the reason why we have elected representives and not everything is determined by plebiscite. If you put everything up for a vote, it's easily becomes a situation where most people are happy on individual issues, but no one is happy on average of all the issues.
pineaux 4y ago
I think your presentation is a bit unrealistic. If these things happen, they will probably happen a bit more covert. I agree on your premise: that the government has an incentive to get more and more control over its citizens, but I am more afraid for the trump-type governments using tools like "the protection of free speech" against their political enemies and using the blocking of electric cars to block their political enemies (as it is more usually rich left-leaning people that own electric cars). I was also against the lockdowns that were done by most western governments. But your fear for this kind of oppression is -I think- a bit overblown.
- starkd 4y ago
  I think that's kind of a failure of imagination on your part. Violation of rights crosses the board over all parties. Look at the Twitter files release fro yeterday that demonstrates heavy FBI involvement in twitter direction. https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604871630613753856 https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16048716306137538...
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
They can move, just not in an electric vehicle. This freedom has been challenged during covid years though, with governments still looking into more permanent "pandemic" laws that CAN restrict people's movement. That's not a good development. I mean I get where they're coming from - in the Netherlands, they couldn't stop people coming together for house parties / gatherings so they installed a curfew - but it felt draconic and like they didn't have a plan. Every time they announced new restrictions or lifting them it felt arbitrary. Self-defense is a debatable one. It's not working in the US for example - how many crimes and deaths are prevented because of the 2nd amendment rights? All I hear is victims of gun violence. Anyway. People can move, just not in an EV, if it's empty and can't be charged due to grid restrictions. People aren't censored, they're just not platformed if their opinion is shit - freedom of speech / expression is not a requirement to be platformed. You aren't told to support the government, you can vote for something else. However, you are expected to behave under the laws, and you may disagree with them, etc - just be aware of the consequences. If you feel like you live in a totalitarian state - and I understand that people would if they live in the US - you can always move. That's the other freedom of movement you enjoy, the freedom to leave the country if you don't like it.
- starkd 4y ago
  You too might need a gun if the police around you are unable police crime and crime gets out of control. Don't think it can't happen, because it does. Also, telling people they can "simply move" if they want more rights is sort of like Marie Antoinette's quip about telling them to "eat cake".

secretsatan 4y ago

Where are you people getting this idea that they will shut things down remotely, it’s not mentioned anywhere in this article, the sources, or official pages

mbg721 4y ago

A handy hack for getting around pesky legal protections of human rights is to realize that while the rights themselves are protected, the levers people apply to them in everyday practice are not. So you can just selectively outlaw levers.

hutzlibu 4y ago

"you’re not free or in a democracy. " Depends. People could vote against emergency laws now, but since most people are ok with that mechanism, it is democratic. And I say that as someone who is not ok with those laws. But I can accept that the majority thinks otherwise. And in general, switzerland with their tradition of direct democracy and consensus is certainly more democratic than most other states.

flanked-evergl 4y ago

> A democracy functions under freedom of movement, speech, self-defense, self-reliance, etc Not to nit pick, but while I'm picking nits. What you refer to is liberal democracy. Karl Popper explained this very well in his book Conjectures And Refutations: > The difference between a democracy and a tyranny is that under a democracy the government can be got rid of without bloodshed; under a tyranny it cannot. > Democracy as such cannot confer any benefits upon the citizen and it should not be expected to do so. In fact democracy can do nothing—only the citizens of the democracy can act (including, of course, those citizens who comprise the government). Democracy provides no more than a framework within which the citizens may act in a more or less organized and coherent way. > We are democrats, not because the majority is always right, but because democratic traditions are the least evil ones of which we know. If the majority (or ‘public opinion’) decides in favour of tyranny, a democrat need not therefore suppose that some fatal inconsistency in his views has been revealed. He will realize, rather, that the democratic tradition in his country was not strong enough. If people in Switzerland choose a government that restricts their movement, this is what they should get, and if they don't get that, democracy is broken.

FpUser 4y ago
>"If people in Switzerland choose a government that restricts their movement, this is what they should get, and if they don't get that, democracy is broken." People would select my cat as a president if "properly" prepared
starkd 4y ago
Look at the founder's discussion about the tyranny of the majority. Something which pure democracy is prone to, if carried to the extreme. It's the reason why we have elected representives and not everything is determined by plebiscite. If you put everything up for a vote, it's easily becomes a situation where most people are happy on individual issues, but no one is happy on average of all the issues.

pineaux 4y ago

I think your presentation is a bit unrealistic. If these things happen, they will probably happen a bit more covert. I agree on your premise: that the government has an incentive to get more and more control over its citizens, but I am more afraid for the trump-type governments using tools like "the protection of free speech" against their political enemies and using the blocking of electric cars to block their political enemies (as it is more usually rich left-leaning people that own electric cars). I was also against the lockdowns that were done by most western governments. But your fear for this kind of oppression is -I think- a bit overblown.

starkd 4y ago
I think that's kind of a failure of imagination on your part. Violation of rights crosses the board over all parties. Look at the Twitter files release fro yeterday that demonstrates heavy FBI involvement in twitter direction. https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604871630613753856 https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16048716306137538...

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

They can move, just not in an electric vehicle. This freedom has been challenged during covid years though, with governments still looking into more permanent "pandemic" laws that CAN restrict people's movement. That's not a good development. I mean I get where they're coming from - in the Netherlands, they couldn't stop people coming together for house parties / gatherings so they installed a curfew - but it felt draconic and like they didn't have a plan. Every time they announced new restrictions or lifting them it felt arbitrary. Self-defense is a debatable one. It's not working in the US for example - how many crimes and deaths are prevented because of the 2nd amendment rights? All I hear is victims of gun violence. Anyway. People can move, just not in an EV, if it's empty and can't be charged due to grid restrictions. People aren't censored, they're just not platformed if their opinion is shit - freedom of speech / expression is not a requirement to be platformed. You aren't told to support the government, you can vote for something else. However, you are expected to behave under the laws, and you may disagree with them, etc - just be aware of the consequences. If you feel like you live in a totalitarian state - and I understand that people would if they live in the US - you can always move. That's the other freedom of movement you enjoy, the freedom to leave the country if you don't like it.

starkd 4y ago
You too might need a gun if the police around you are unable police crime and crime gets out of control. Don't think it can't happen, because it does. Also, telling people they can "simply move" if they want more rights is sort of like Marie Antoinette's quip about telling them to "eat cake".