FreedomPatriot @[email protected]

@Zergling_man @freepatriot do a 13/51 statistical analysis on power of the king of various historical absolute monarchies v/s exercise of that power.
you will find that the closer you get to giving the king absolute dominium, the less likely he is to fuck shit up, the more careful he will be.
think of it this way:
suppose i sell you my house. it is yours now. to live in, to sell off, and for your kids to inherit. yours also to burn to a smoldering pile of rubble should you choose. nevertheless, you will naturally take good care of it. it is, after all, your house. this is absolute monarchy. the whole nation belongs to the king, he has the sole right to govern, to carve up and give away, etc. he has every incentive to maximize the value he will be leaving behind for his heir and to fiercely protect his legitimacy in the people's hearts
but on the contrary, suppose i am going on vacation to sikkim, and i give you stewardship over my house. it is yours to protect, to maintain, to expend yourself for keeping, but not yours in any respect to sell, lend, or destroy. naturally, you will not keep it as well, regardless of how much i am paying you. it is, after all, not your house. this is republicanism. the president, prime minister, senator, lord-protector... these are men who have not a true claim to the whole of the nation. their only incentive, if they have one, is to simply loot the country and drain from.it every last ounce of wealth and lifeblood, to enrich themselves atvthe expense of the nation that gave them duty without power. nor too are these men necessarily evil or perverse-born, they are rational and act rationally. you forbid them from seeing the nation as theirs to wield and steer, and you expect them to take it forward? for what cause?

I've generally found developing countries to be very libertarian in the sense that you can live your life, how you want, nobody cares about your safety.

You can take whatever kind of risk you want. Want to build some ugly utilitarian building go for it. But there often is more corruption and the specific protections that we used to have against government intrusion don't exist.

@HatkeshiatorTND @freepatriot Then let them eat cake.
The problem is that you can't effectively govern anyone you don't know, which means any government should only cover approximately 100 people. Anything past that should federate or fuck off.

@freepatriot can != does.
>cracking down in journalists
based, #beheadalljournalists
>political opposition
you mean communists? based, #beheadallcommunists

@HatkeshiatorTND @freepatriot >based, #beheadalljournalists

The Czech Republic has something akin to the 2A.

London really is a shithole these days.

@HatkeshiatorTND @freepatriot >can != does
until it does.

Calling El Salvador libertarian has to be some kind of sick joke. They're run by a dictator who can throw anyone he doesn't like in jail at a moment's notice and is perfectly happy to do so. They'e cracked down on journalists and political opposition.

Their government is just a right wing version of Nicaragua's Ortega.

@freepatriot on the contrary, america itself has fought tooth and nail to destroy the bill of rights.

I’ve always found it suspicious and somewhat depressing that in 250 years the people of no other country had looked at the Bill of Rights said, “We should have that too” and fought for it.

Corruption can be a double-edged sword. It can work against you but it also often means officials turning a blind eye to all the ridiculous regulations, though sometimes for a "fee".

Thinking that politics does not affect normal people in their normal lives is a GREAT DECEPTION.