I know they worked differently in the past. The abilities are different, just as Facebook is different from the telephone. The force piece is more of a Canadia

I know they worked differently in the past. The abilities are different, just as Facebook is different from the telephone. The force piece is more of a Canadian perspective. Freedom of expression, association, and movement are not so much under attack as they are available only to those "who hold acceptable views." The volume of support needed to see change is high and clearing the volume goal involves going unnoticed by the people with more monitoring power than ever before. It also involves risking your ability to feed and house yourself. Those risks are shared with your entire group, who also have to accept those risks. Then you must factor in who is capable of such risks. Those people are generally well off enough that the basic human necessities threat is removed. They are also overwhelming likely to be benefiting from the current state of affairs (which you see a a LOT of on HN.) Force creates a new risk for any forceful partipants, but we are closing in closer and closer on the risks of force being less than the risk involved in doing nothing. That is when force can, and will, be used imho. I also don't think it's something you can predict unless you can actively relate to the poor.