4 ms·

Do you have any idea where humanity would be if we followed your advise? "Accept the status quo, or piss off to Mars"? Seriously? Do you know how USA itself wa

by Radim 13y ago

Do you have any idea where humanity would be if we followed your advise? "Accept the status quo, or piss off to Mars"? Seriously? Do you know how USA itself was formed? You sound like a somewhat uninspiring, jaded person, but that's your problem. I just don't like people spreading FUD. There's a lot that can be done, here on Earth, to improve liberty and individual freedom. Which is, by the way, not mutually exclusive with supporting space exploration (false dilemma).

nbouscal 13y ago
You need to read what I'm actually saying instead of assuming that I fit your archetype for ‘opponent in a dialog’. You still completely misunderstand my stance despite my having belabored the point extensively. Your claim was as follows: > The issue is, what happens if you decide you don't want to do business with that entity anymore? > In case of state, the punishment is prison and, resisting that, death. My claim is that if you stay on that government's land, you are not in fact choosing not to do business with that entity. Period, nothing more. Nowhere did I claim that you have to accept the status quo. Nowhere did I claim that nothing can be done to improve liberty or individual freedom. Those are positions that you attributed to me because you aren't arguing against me, you're arguing against a straw man instead of taking the time to understand what I'm telling you. Space exploration isn't necessary to improve liberty or individual freedom, it's necessary for a return to individual sovereignty without many people dying. You're welcome to improve liberty or individual freedom all you want, either from inside the country or outside of it. What you can't do is live inside of the country but somehow consider yourself above that country's laws because you have an eternal inalienable right to sovereignty. No government recognizes that right, because if they did governments could not function. You can have life, you can have liberty, you can have pursuit of happiness. Sovereignty is not on that list.

by Radim 13y ago

nbouscal 13y ago

You need to read what I'm actually saying instead of assuming that I fit your archetype for ‘opponent in a dialog’. You still completely misunderstand my stance despite my having belabored the point extensively. Your claim was as follows: > The issue is, what happens if you decide you don't want to do business with that entity anymore? > In case of state, the punishment is prison and, resisting that, death. My claim is that if you stay on that government's land, you are not in fact choosing not to do business with that entity. Period, nothing more. Nowhere did I claim that you have to accept the status quo. Nowhere did I claim that nothing can be done to improve liberty or individual freedom. Those are positions that you attributed to me because you aren't arguing against me, you're arguing against a straw man instead of taking the time to understand what I'm telling you. Space exploration isn't necessary to improve liberty or individual freedom, it's necessary for a return to individual sovereignty without many people dying. You're welcome to improve liberty or individual freedom all you want, either from inside the country or outside of it. What you can't do is live inside of the country but somehow consider yourself above that country's laws because you have an eternal inalienable right to sovereignty. No government recognizes that right, because if they did governments could not function. You can have life, you can have liberty, you can have pursuit of happiness. Sovereignty is not on that list.