The Nature of Liberty
"Extremism in defense of Liberty is no vice."
"Moderation in war is imbecilic."
Do the collectivist mentality and the nanny state foster policies favoring a maximal amount of freedom for the individual?
If you believe they do, please explain how and why?
Are determined hostility, unrestrained rudeness, unswerving disputatiousness, relentless rebelliousness and unchecked intractability necessary components of a free society? If so, why?
Where is the value in being determined always to talk, but never to listen? Does such a determination serve the interests of liberty or oppression? In which of those two categories does One-Way Rudeness properly belong?
In what ways could policies consisting of nothing but denigration, vilification and condemnation be constructive?
What is the difference between liberty and license?
Could it in any way be possible to use deception, subterfuge, mendacity –– and even sabotage –– to institute a reign of truth?
|Does she look friendly and welcoming, or formidable and challenging to you?|
[NOTE: Mocking, denouncing, or questioning the motives of the questioner, while derisively dismissing the questions, themselves, as unworthy of response would be considered a tactic –– not an answer.]