You're looking at it from the wrong angle. First off, there's big profits in prohibition. Second it provides pretext for the police to raid your house and kill your dog. Think of them as 'speed traps' for revenue.
'The devil made me do it' is no excuse for whatever personal choices a person makes to follow orders. Obedience is what needs to be addressed. It is not, because a tyrant needs blind obedience. It frees the people from responsibility, and thus guilt, for their actions. Without it tyranny cannot exist. So the tyrant needs to control who gives what orders. Censorship can only empower tyranny, doesn't matter if it's by the one or by the many. It serves no other purpose.
And Nuremberg was a sham. The only people executed there were those that nobody had any use for. You certainly can't use anything there to rationalize censorship. Followers chose to follow. That is the simple fact.
I wouldn't know how to disagree with some of that. It takes might to protect 'rights', no matter what angle you look at it. What humans need to learn is respect, starting with one's self and letting it grow. We also suffer an extremely high level of frustration over our failure to communicate.
Our only 'rights' are ingloriously defined by the laws of physics. You have the 'right' to fall if pushed off a cliff.
It's a game of 'pick your poison'. I too, prefer compression ignition over the spark. It's just more reliable and natural with more fuel flexibility. Continuous combustion of a steam or stirling engine would be the least polluting though.
Well hell, if you're going to throw a guy in jail for writing a note, what's the point? He may as well come in shooting everybody first. Why scream 'fire' when you can light one?
Not to the bean counters we put in charge. The economy is all that matters. No matter what happens, no matter how disastrous, there's always a profit to be made from it.
They don't have to follow orders. Though you might not win many wars that way, the soldier still has a free will. As for the politicians, you just have to stop voting for them. All choices are personal.
Slashdot Mirror
You're looking at it from the wrong angle. First off, there's big profits in prohibition. Second it provides pretext for the police to raid your house and kill your dog. Think of them as 'speed traps' for revenue.
Copyright is a weapon, being used to attack free speech. You are wrong. DMCA is evil, all of it.
No, it's simple fact. If nobody follows, nothing happens.
"Las Vegas borrowers were good customers."
Well, barring any sense of rationality, yes...
The space shuttle and concorde are extinct birds. You sure won't hear them anymore.
Constellation
'The devil made me do it' is no excuse for whatever personal choices a person makes to follow orders. Obedience is what needs to be addressed. It is not, because a tyrant needs blind obedience. It frees the people from responsibility, and thus guilt, for their actions. Without it tyranny cannot exist. So the tyrant needs to control who gives what orders. Censorship can only empower tyranny, doesn't matter if it's by the one or by the many. It serves no other purpose.
And Nuremberg was a sham. The only people executed there were those that nobody had any use for. You certainly can't use anything there to rationalize censorship. Followers chose to follow. That is the simple fact.
AM at night? Art Bell
...I want to know where my flying car is...
Gate D13, better hurry
They are exactly the same, a 'provocation'. You cannot justify censorship without admitting there is no free will.
They can always Skype :-)
I wouldn't know how to disagree with some of that. It takes might to protect 'rights', no matter what angle you look at it. What humans need to learn is respect, starting with one's self and letting it grow. We also suffer an extremely high level of frustration over our failure to communicate.
Our only 'rights' are ingloriously defined by the laws of physics. You have the 'right' to fall if pushed off a cliff.
It's a game of 'pick your poison'. I too, prefer compression ignition over the spark. It's just more reliable and natural with more fuel flexibility. Continuous combustion of a steam or stirling engine would be the least polluting though.
Well hell, if you're going to throw a guy in jail for writing a note, what's the point? He may as well come in shooting everybody first. Why scream 'fire' when you can light one?
Use of force is not speech. But yes, those might be your choices. It does not justify censorship in any way. Nothing does.
Non-violence is always best, but making the current methods unprofitable also works. It gets around the 'leading the horse to water' problem.
The situation we are discussing involves no immediacy. We cannot allow censorship. A man with a gun to your head is not engaging in speech.
So, we should pay off the bully so he'll stop beating us up just because he 'creates jobs'?
There are relevant questions.
Not to the bean counters we put in charge. The economy is all that matters. No matter what happens, no matter how disastrous, there's always a profit to be made from it.
There you go. You don't have to join, do you? You cannot justify censorship, not now, not ever.
Sorry, you don't have the right to displace another from their position. Now you advocating outright theft.
*I'm sorry, I'll be taking that nice laptop of yours, and while I'm at it, get out, the house is mine too.*
Speech can do nothing. If you don't believe in free will, say it! Otherwise you're talking out yer ass
They don't have to follow orders. Though you might not win many wars that way, the soldier still has a free will. As for the politicians, you just have to stop voting for them. All choices are personal.
The preachers are NOT the problem. The choir is. They are the ones actually pulling the trigger. Address that goddammit!