You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] Quaestorr 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

On a deep personal level, I believe in absolute freedom. (When I was a kid I used to argue with my dad, who was not at all into this line of thinking and got pissed, about why we should stick to e.g. traffic rules without having explicitly agreed to do them.) But that sent me not to anarchism, but quite the opposite: as there are no innate, primary, 'god-given' incentives for people to act civilized and nice, we need to force each other in line ultimately by the threat of physical force and not just by appealing to their reasonability, punish small purpetrators and eliminate big ones.

Of course that was a long time ago and I have become more moderate, realizing the downside to authoritarianims etc., but I still favor a strong state with characteristics of a so-called police state, although I don't think it should be conducted by one all-potent leader. Democratic elections would be best, if participation would be limited to patriots. Internationalists, fifth-columnists and sectarians should be excluded.

I did have my own flirtations with anarchism, but in hindsight only to extent of sympathizing with its sub-goal of eliminating the present, imperfect system, and talking along with friends.

Maybe if I'd grown up and lived in the U.S. or a land with similar space, I'd be more into this 'freedom' thing, but as my land is rather crowded, I prefer to have everyone's freedom confined to their homes. I personally would favor more police on the streets and even the army policing certain urban areas.