Freedoms lost to the 20th century

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
21

So, ShadowandLight, you are willing to sacrifice your freedom, for whatever you get in trade from the government? That’s great, I wish you well, but leave me out of it, if my barber can’t cut hair he’ll go out of business whether he is licensed or not. And although it doesn’t matter much to you, it matters a great deal to me.
When you give somebody the power to take one freedom, he wants to take two, if he can’t take more, what kind of power is that?

You’ll kiss Jim Bob’s boots for having stashed that crap, after we get this invasion you want. Jim’s friends.
Amerika is already run by the enemies of freedom,… otherwise this thread wouldn’t be here. I’d have nothing to point towards.

curious_one, they started in the latter part of the 1800’s, with Marx and the Russian revolution. Take my quiz, in 1880 the average person would not have been a tyrant, but today the only Free Born are the ones that go back and redo the quiz.
It’s not easy to believe in ‘Freedom for All’ when all your life you’ve been indoctrinated to shun certain behaviors. Heaven help the christians! They have the best brainwashing going. 2000 years of tried and true methods.

22

No I would fight for freedoms worth having. Americans have before and will again. Remember the suffrage, equal rights…

But taking away a ‘freedom’ which is here to keep me safe is a neccessary evil.

Freedom requires sacrifice, on both parties. True freedom is a land without laws, and I personally do not want that. True freedom is when I can walk up, shoot you and keep on going without penalty of law.

And a barber who is not licensed needs to move on…go to school or find gainful employment elsewhere. It’s not hard to get a license, and that is laziness on his part.

As for Jim-Bob…sorry I dont want a loose canon with one hand on his own personal nuke.

23

Now wait a minute who’s forcing you to do something you don’t want to do? Do you consider laws to protect us under this? like seat belt laws, helmet laws for bicycles, insurance laws for driving a car.

if none of these were true we’d have:
more deaths on the highway, slower traffic on the highway, and far far more expensive insurance for those of us who chose to get it.

or let’s take another case, the DUI laws that “force” you not to drive drunk. again who gives a damn about the kid that will get run over, the property you’ll destroy, your just trying to express your “god” given freedoms.

let’s do another driving example, while we’re I’m on that track. lets say that there were no speed limits or traffic signals, people just went whenever they felt like it etc. what would happen? probably similiar to the safety laws, the roads would be a total mess, no traffic would be moving, and pretty much cars would be useless. Your right this free brave new world of yours without laws is sounding damn good.

I see other people have posted about freedoms we didnt’ have in 1899, and I’d like to say that polygamy was definately an oppression. besides that it was outlawed at least 10 years before 1899.

and I completely disagree with your assertation that world peace would be the result of all this lack of law, anarchists (assuming this by your name) are anarchists because you don’t like to follow laws, you feel they are inhibiting you.

btw if you feel drugs are your thing, (your drug store reference) move to denmark. your free to do so.

24

Sorry, ShadowandLight, I missed the email, or deleted it or something.

Freedom requires no other sacrifice than finding your way at the expense of others. If you lived a truly free life, you’d never go back.

You think Jim W. Bob doesn’t have it like that? He could give the order, and the only thing between you and nuclear winter is the probabilities that the Air Force person won’t turn the key.

Welcome scythekain,

I will dispute your claim of chaos in the face of freedom.
West Germany, when I was over there in the 80’s, had 66 million people in a country the size of Oregon, and no speed limits, and although I did get caught up in some long tie ups, it was by no means chaos on a daily, or even weekly, basis. You just fall prey to the scare mongers. They have your welfare in mind, really.

If a drunk has safely driven from point A to point B, where is the harm? And, what gives you the ‘right’ to hassle this person who has harmed no one?
If you spew about possibilities then you need to be locked up, you can’t be trusted with freedom.
If the person harms you, or your’s, do with him what you will. He’d do it to you if the situation was reversed.

My travel papers have been canceled, not to mention when I took the oath to defend the land of the free from all enemies, foreign and domestic, I was in for a pound.

Perhaps you would like to move to Cuba? or Soviet Russia?
All I want is the freedom to be me, and right now, I have to be a criminal. I’d rather not be a criminal, but I don’t make the laws.

25

“Anyone who would give up freedom for safety deserves neither.”
-Benjamin Franklin

“Law is order, good law is good order.”
-Aristotle

Some interesting quotes to ponder, I know I’ve pondered them.

I consider myself an Anarchist, or I would if it weren’t for people like you anarchistangle. Anarchy will not work untill people realize that they cannot drive under the influance of mind altering chemicals, untill people realize that weapons are only tools for opression and untill people realize that for everyone’s freedoms they may have to give up a few things, by choice, because it is irrisponsible or detrimental to humanity.

And I just have to bring up your(anarchistangle) idiot comment about the drunk driver who got from point A to point B without killing a kid, it matters because next time he will. And even if that particular DD never hits anyone, there are others who will, those are the ones that DUI laws are targeted at, and the law has no way of knowing which drunk drivers will eventually hit somebody and which ones won’t.

The war on drugs is a war on personal freedoms. All research on successful drug policy shows that treatment should be increased, law enforcement decreased and manditory minimum sentatnces should be abolished.

I’ll end this post with a fact that anarchistangle might not be aware of, in the words of Goddess herself, “You are all absolutely Free.”

26

Its called checks and balances between the government and the people. I believe in the right to bare arms to maintain this balance, but not to allow anybody to have the ability to take out half of the population in my city.

I had an economics teacher who found it a horrible trespass on our liberties to make driver’s licenses mandatory. I very much respected this teacher and agreed with him on most issues, but I like the idea of a driver’s license. I like to think it keeps trully incapable off the streets, but this seems less and less true these days.

And as for the drunk person analogy, they get in trouble because they did it once and they will do it again. No one was harmed this time but he may not be so lucky next drive. If a person opens fire in a public area and no one is hit, should he be let off?

27

Hey, Pope, glad to see you back.

I think Ben’s quote is “Those who sacrifce liberty for security, will eventually have neither.”
So, he agreed with me that losing the right to drink and drive, safely, will result in not having drunk free roads, and the loss of freedom for responsible drunks.

Anarchy will work when people like you stop using violence to control people like me, I’m sorry that you appear to be the bad guy, but anybody who uses violence to make others comply is a bad guy, even when it’s good for them. You ready for the government approved diet? They reverse their opinions about every 20 years, you prepared to be wrong that long?

I’ll be glad when the goddess is proved right by my ability to ride my bike without hoops that extort my money, and hurdles that slow me down.

ShadowandLight, you go on believing in your checks and balances and I’ll keep on believing rich people always, mostly, act in their own best interests. If W. thought it would put him in the history books, or that “God” told him to do it, he’d bake the whole mideast in the microwaves and send in robots to drill the oil, where are your checks and balances then? Maybe he’ll only invade, and stay to conquer, some inconsequential countries.

I’d have to say that the fella should pay for the damaged property, but if managed to harm no person I’d have to let him go on his way. My buddies would probably follow him, on the off chance he would do something they could stop, and kill him, if that is what the victim requested.

28

Somebody’s glad to see me? Well, there’s a first (and a last) time for everything.

Thank you anarchist angle for correcting my Benny Frank quote.

You say that anarchy will only work when people stop using violence to control “people like me”, but you go on to say that the drunk driver (I assume this is what you were talking about) who kills someone should be tracked down and murdered at the request of the victim’s family.

And also you accused me (i think) of trying to control people like you with violence. Just as a matter of ego, I’ll have you know that I am a pacifist, so I personally wouldn’t use violence, but I’m also a hypocrit, so i’ll hire the police to do it.

And there is no proving the Goddess right, she’s always right, at least thats what I say to stay on her good side (hope she doesn’t read this), but the fact is we are all absolutely free, meaning those who would want to are free to give you orders, and you are free to ignore them. If you really want something there’s nothing real to stop you from getting it. Laws aren’t real, policemen aren’t real; prisons, blue suits and guns are, however, quite real so those are the only things you have to find your way around.

Why not just buy a nice little piece of land out in the middle of nowhere in Canada or Mexico if you’d rather avoid the USA. A piece of land far away from any city or road where you and your compadres can start a little anarchist commune, have you heard of the Temporary Autonomous Zone?

29

Yes, the family should bear the expense of whatever retribution they take. I should not be forced into the situation by proxy.

There is no difference between you doing it and you hiring it done, it’s still done in your name. This is the hypocrisy that the general population blind themselves to, I’m glad you recognize it, though I’m saddened that you accept doing wrong as ok.

I know first hand about prisons and blue suits being very real, I’ve been on both sides. Trust me, laws are how cowardly bullies get to bully people, and there are no shortage of stupid volunteers to bully when they get to run in packs, drive shiny cars with flashy lights and walk on water, until they get caught with their hand in the till.

I haven’t drank much since my first marriage, she was a drunk, and I was drunk, and it just wasn’t pretty. I defend safely driving drunk because it allows the responsible freedom, and the ones that crash face the stiffest sentence possible, execution at the hand of the victims or their proxy. A simple will would suffice, for me.

As for moving, why can’t I stay here, and be left to my freedom? Do I have to move to the frontier to have freedom? Why can’t I have it in town? I would at least like to see all the laws voted on each year, then I could move to the town with the best laws for what interests me.

So, as a pacifist, you see the correctness of what I’ve said?

30

I see the so called correctness of some of what you’re saying, I prefer gentle persuasion to force.

But as a pacifist I cannot condone murder to repay manslaughter. In the words of Gandhi, “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.” (I probably misquoted that one too.)

I’m not so sure you’re grasping the larger point I’m trying to make about what “freedom” actually entails. You can do whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want. You can toke up, drive drunk, help your freind move hir furniture, kill someone(s), put handcuffs on people who toke up, drive drunk and help their friends move their furniture, etc… Ya grok?

Believing in that freedom that all humans have, which I do (for now), meens you are working against your own freedom when you try to force someone to stop doing something, even if that something is living. Killing someone who killed someone is still killing someone, you are taking away all the freedoms they had in life, that is tyranny.

Sure, you can break all the laws you want in a city, but there are more cops in cities. I was just saying that you wouldn’t have to worry about the rozzes out in the middle of nowhere, make things simpler, I’m sure you’ve read Thoreau and Emerson they lived out in nature.

And like I said, don’t worry about laws, they aren’t real, worry about guns and walls but not laws. And don’t worry so much about what other people do, don’t do, force others to do or don’t do… just worry about what you do or don’t do…there’s peace in it.

31

I’m really a pacifist myself.
People who take revenge on another, are doing evil, too. I’m just advocating the freedom to get your own, and not just let the ruling elite do it for you.

The posistion I take is that in order for the world to improve, each individual must be free to choose to do evil, and having that freedom, choose to do good. When this happens Earth will once again be a paradise.

Personally, I take that ‘forgive others like you would want to be forgiven’ seriously, but I recognize the right to stop those that go to the well one too many times.

32

Before I begin you should all know that I am an American myself, so don’t tell me that I don’t know because I don’t live here.

I can see the fear and ignorance in all of the post in this thread. You are all weak and fearful. You shame your forefathers and your species.

A person’s life means nothing until they give it meaning. If you want freedom then do something about it. Freedom can never be given by any government because the people, like sheep, are always afraid of being hurt. Freedom can only be taken by force. The only people who deserve freedom are those who are willing to kill and die for it. Morality does not even enter into the discussion. If you are so weak that you require the government to protect your interest then why not just kill yourself and do humanity a favor! :smiley:

33

Thank you for pointing that out, jade11, we are weak, and undeserving of life. We should all join in the pillaging of the world,…not.

Let me know how that attitude works out for you.

34

I completely agree.

jade11, fear and ignorance? I will die for freedom, I will not kill for it. Who is the more fearful, the human who takes another life to protect their own or the one who gives their life to serve the whole of humanity?

35

Ok alot of rights were gained in the 20th century, but alot were lost. In the 19th century if a person had a problem with another person they duked it out. Now a person has to go though a lot of crap for even touching the other. I recently got into a fight on my bus now I would have like to stopped the bus got off and beat the living crap out of his punkass. But because of school rules I had to let him hit me and have someone else pull him away from me the he got a bulling charge put on his record and I almost got ISS for just being there but I got away with a warning. Now what kind of crap is that!
The voting issue yeah women couldnt vote along with blacks and that changed as with time. Now however illiterate people are voting on things they dont even understand. I think there should be some sort of test in order to vote you want well you got to earn it. Really immigrants know more about our government than we do, thats sad. Hardly a soul knows abou a little thing in the constitution that allows the people to completly refurnish the government. By popuplar vote the people of the United States could elect new officails in every office every 2 years. Every party member would be thrown out and new ones placed in their stead. The people could have a real choice in the matter not just an A or B catagory. Technically i could run for presidentcy at age 35 and not be with any party. but Because of new rules and regulations I have to do a butload of crap to even get on the ballot
Freedom has been lost by surpising amounts. Dont believe me try taking a small pocket knife onto an airplane. Before you could take any thing on a plane as long as it fit and didnt weigh a ton and wouldnt explode. Airplane pilots were trained to comply with terrorist. Example my dad worked for US Customs and was flying with a hand gun that he checked with security. A Cuban had a bomb and wanted to go home so he hijacked the plane my dad asked the flight attendant if she wanted him to take the terrorist out. She told no and that they would just have to be late and nobuddy cared.
Freedom is not a fair trade for security. A little bit of freedom has been gained in the 20th century but a whole lot more has been lost in the 20th and 21st century and no one is doing a thing about it.

36

The world is upside down, the people running it ARE the worst ones possible. Those who seek power cannot be trusted with it.

Ballot access rules are all about the two party system. It’s much easier to control things when there are only two groups for dissidents to infiltrate.

“Those who sacrifice liberty for security will eventually have neither.”
Ben Franklin

Here’s my quote.

Thanks for your time, crazy person.

37

Thank you and that qoute by Ben Franklin was what I was looking for.

38

You are welcome, glad I could help.