3 ms·
It's a false dichotomy. There are 4 options: 1. Don't give up liberty, give up security. 2. Give up liberty, give up security. 3. Give up liberty, don't give
by foxyv 8mo ago
It's a false dichotomy. There are 4 options:
1. Don't give up liberty, give up security.
2. Give up liberty, give up security.
3. Give up liberty, don't give up security.
4. Don't give up liberty, don't give up security.
Number 4 is completely possible. It's just that people in power don't like it because it means they have less power. They want to pretend that only options 1 and 3 are available and ignore that they are actually offering option 2.
- gcanyon 8mo agoYour argument is with GP who proposed that the security might be false. But I will say I don't think you should say "options," but rather "possibilities." "Options" implies that all four are actually available. I don't think you get to assume that 4 is possible without offering evidence.
- foxyv 8mo agoIt depends on context for sure. Without a specific case study you can't really say. However, in general, they are not exclusive. This has been demonstrated fairly often. In fact, it is often the case that maximizing liberty leads to more security. https://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/europeanamericanrelationship/content/articles/events/2010foufp/participant-papers/Is_there_really_a_dichotomy_between_security_and_liberty.pdf https://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/europeanamericanrelationsh... https://www.securityanddemocracy.org/post/beyond-the-false-choice-a-new-framework-for-democracy-and-security https://www.securityanddemocracy.org/post/beyond-the-false-c...