Quote:
Quote by: Osborn F Enready  I want to reiterate, for clarification purposes here.
In the OP, the term force was used.
Force is not necessarily always physical.
For example....
Tax dollars, are currently used to "add" non-natural liberty to peoples lives, at the expense of the liberty of those actually earning the funding which is being redistributed via government.
By removing that "tax and redistribute" policy, and all of the dependent programs, you would be technically "forcing" people to accept the liberty they should have had all along, but did not, because the system has operated for so long unconstitutionally, people have been allowed to become dependent on it.
That is force, though, not physical force, and not a violation of ANYONES rights. Its actually re-empowering people with their FULL RIGHTS as was intended from the beginning of the nation. |
However, if you aren't a constitutional anarchist does one have the right to choose to live in a society where you are required to contribute? Is liberty the act of choosing your path, or is it the path itself? If its the path why do we even have elections and amendments? What is the purpose of a democracy where there is only one right answer and you don't have a right to hold a contrary opinion of how things should be done?
Personally, if I was in charge I'd buy up large chunks of Wyoming and tell the Libertarians that this area is for them to test their idea of a perfect society with zero government interference. Be free. I don't really care. As a democracy one could say that if you don't like popular opinion then move to Columbia, but I'd be nice. I can make a pretty good guess about what would happen to the people there, but its your right to make choices I see as unwise.
Is it my right to make choices you see as unwise?