3 ms·
That's hardly an argument -- it's barely rising above just calling the state names. The exact role of the state in protecting it's citizens requires nuanced de
by shardling 14y ago
That's hardly an argument -- it's barely rising above just calling the state names.
The exact role of the state in protecting it's citizens requires nuanced debate. Saying "it's not the state's job" doesn't cut it.
- jessaustin 14y agoLet's be fair. the_watcher posts a comment of fifteen words. It's too much to expect "nuanced debate" in a single sentence. I take it you were unconvinced by that sentence; do you believe your three sentences are much more persuasive? Can you imagine a viewpoint that approves most state-provided security services, yet still rejects the actions of the Attorneys General in this case? Perhaps you're upset by the language? "Paternalist", to my eye, is a descriptive term that closely matches the circumstances under discussion. If you find that adjective has unfortunate connotations, by all means suggest another that has approximately the same definition.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]