4 ms·

What is the US's prevailing philosophy for domestic protection? Is it absolutely 0 risk? Is it 0 risk for certain things and not others? My mind struggles to u

What is the US's prevailing philosophy for domestic protection? Is it absolutely 0 risk? Is it 0 risk for certain things and not others? My mind struggles to understand a cohesive leadership strategy for the next 100 to 500 years. The current state of affairs could easily devolve into anarchy within 100 years - I just don't understand what they are giving us to work towards together? Bills like these say very squarely, 'we don't trust you, the citizen, to be able to defend yourselves. Nor do we believe that your efforts at incorporating new products and cooperating together to defend yourselves will be sufficient.' So... you're saying we are absolutely hopeless in the next 100 years? I seriously don't get that as a leadership strategy. The American spirit is one that overcomes any adversity, not through avoidance, but through head-on action powered by an unshakable resolve. This bill, as well as the original Patriot Act and almost every one since, discards the everyday citizen as the first and primary hope for the future. It is an erosion of the 'American Spirit' from our direct keepers of the flame; it's unbelievably sad. I say all of this 'couched' knowing full well evil people exist and keep a whole community behind for almost 50 years through racism - so it's not a 'let everyone be mean to each other' == freedom either.

thebradbain 4y ago
If the United States lasts in its current form for another 100 years, I will be surprised. 100 years ago, you could argue this country was fundamentally different than it is now — aside from rights (pretty much all of civil rights) and liabilities we now take for granted (the concept of federal income tax was just 10 years old, and not even fully implemented for another couple of decades), we were still two states shy of the 50 we have now. The country will absolutely change in the next 100. No telling which way, though.
eldenwrong 4y ago
Anarchy would be great and the chances of that are extremely small. I think you mean a total surveillance fascist dictatorship
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Anarchy would be great? Anarchy would be Somalia - warlords and armed gangs. I don't want to live there.
  - eldenwrong 4y ago
    Imagine going outside of your house and engaging in voluntary interactions the whole day. A horrible horrible world. Thankfully the government and police make everyone behave due to the threat of violence. What would we do without them!!? Anarchy doesn't mean no rules
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - RobotsDownUnder 4y ago
      >Anarchy doesn't mean no rules That is exactly what it means...
      - eldenwrong 4y ago
        Not really but I understand that the word is used like that by people who haven't spent 30sec looking what it actually is It really means no government or central authority dictating arbitrary rules enforced by violence.

thebradbain 4y ago

If the United States lasts in its current form for another 100 years, I will be surprised. 100 years ago, you could argue this country was fundamentally different than it is now — aside from rights (pretty much all of civil rights) and liabilities we now take for granted (the concept of federal income tax was just 10 years old, and not even fully implemented for another couple of decades), we were still two states shy of the 50 we have now. The country will absolutely change in the next 100. No telling which way, though.

eldenwrong 4y ago

Anarchy would be great and the chances of that are extremely small. I think you mean a total surveillance fascist dictatorship

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Anarchy would be great? Anarchy would be Somalia - warlords and armed gangs. I don't want to live there.
- eldenwrong 4y ago
  Imagine going outside of your house and engaging in voluntary interactions the whole day. A horrible horrible world. Thankfully the government and police make everyone behave due to the threat of violence. What would we do without them!!? Anarchy doesn't mean no rules
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - RobotsDownUnder 4y ago
    >Anarchy doesn't mean no rules That is exactly what it means...
    - eldenwrong 4y ago
      Not really but I understand that the word is used like that by people who haven't spent 30sec looking what it actually is It really means no government or central authority dictating arbitrary rules enforced by violence.