4 ms·
That, whatever it means, cannot mean losses of personal rights.
by mdp2021 3mo ago
That, whatever it means, cannot mean losses of personal rights.
- petterroea 3mo agoIt means you aren't entitled to visit a foreign country. You aren't entitled to them letting you in. Of course in a perfect world we all trust each other and have open borders, but that's a privilege we have to work for. I'm European and enjoy the open borders, but also am well aware that such a situation is not a given. Cannot mean loss of personal rights, sure. Showing up at a border and being required to give up personal rights isn't ok. But many people in this thread are writing as if they actually believe they have a right to go anywhere, and that simply isn't the case. It's the kind of thing you need live in a strong passport country to believe.
- SR2Z 3mo agoI'm sure this has already been pointed out to you, but this was an American citizen returning to America. This guy had rights under the 4th Amendment. No matter what the government claims, they do not have carte blanche to inspect digital files that are physically being carried across the border. I guess technically deleting them may have been a crime, but the government better have a great explanation for why they wanted to see those files if it's gonna charge him.
- lazide 3mo agoMost countries disagree?
- mdp2021 3mo ago("Most", is to be verified.) These times will not be remembered as a pinnacle in the stages of Civilization. On the contrary, immensely barbaric and dark ages.
- lazide 3mo agoSure buddy, and WW1/2 were walks in the park.
- mdp2021 3mo agoAnd why would pointing to what may seem to be indicated as times of violence attack the idea of these current being times of ignorance (and after all that was done to provide remedies against ignorance).
- lazide 3mo agoYour statements appear to be notably myopic.
- mdp2021 3mo agoShow it. If your argument would be that these times would be much better than those of one century ago, prove it. If you believe that these times would be "civilized", and not «immensely barbaric and dark ages», argument it. What I said was, in reply to the note that entering a country could be considered a privilege (could not be considered a right), that nowadays the authoritativeness of countries is very greatly diminished compared to a standard.
- lazide 3mo agoa claim without evidence can be dismissed just as easily. you’re the one making a claim it’s particularly barbaric right now, compared to… pretty much the rest of human history presumably? it’s pretty boring recapping Stalin, Hitler, Ghenghis Khan, Khmer Rouge, the Red Scare/McCarthyism, etc.
- mdp2021 3mo agoOh no, I compared it to decency. And your examples do not falsify my statement. Statement which is, by the way, differently expressed by Henry Kissinger ("Leadership", 2022): the defining traits of current administrations are increasing mediocrity and inadequacy.