Topic: Why do USAmericans think they are so "free"?
Anonymous A started this discussion 9 years ago #64,719
They live in a police state with major propaganda. Why do they think they are so free?
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 9 years ago, 36 seconds later[^] [v] #803,760
The US government openly admits to illegally spying on its citizens, and refuses to stop. The US government can put any citizen in jail, without a charge or a lawyer, indefinitely, for some secret "suspicion" of terrorism. The US has more of its populace in prison than any other country in the world, including North Korea (!). US police are out of control, killing unarmed citizens on a daily basis and riding around in military tanks. If all of this were happening in Africa or the Middle East, USAmericans would call that place "a third world craphole military state." Why can't USAmericans see it in their own country? What is "free" about the US?
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 20 seconds later, 56 seconds after the original post[^] [v] #803,761
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 21 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #803,768
Green !BEERiVqJJw joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 5 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #803,814
Freer than the people of China.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 5 months ago, 8 years later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,133
@803,760 (A)
> If all of this were happening in Africa or the Middle East, USAmericans would call that place "a third world craphole military state."
Agree.
> If all of this were happening in Africa or the Middle East, USAmericans would call that place "a third world craphole military state."
Agree.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 5 months ago, 2 hours later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,151
Same as any country that's a turd on the world stage: as a peasant just live your life and stay out of the way. I don't fault the Chinese or Russian people for their governments either.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 5 months ago, 8 hours later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,270
niggers tongue my anus
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 5 months ago, 2 hours later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,284
You need a strong state to enact those freedoms.
If the government shrunk then the power vacuum would benefit the angry mob, foreign power, and organized crime.
If the government shrunk then the power vacuum would benefit the angry mob, foreign power, and organized crime.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 5 months ago, 12 minutes later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,285
@previous (G)
The people’s democratic dictatorship can only be maintained when the people’s party maintains a monopoly on power and the private sector cannot challenge the government.
- totally not China
The people’s democratic dictatorship can only be maintained when the people’s party maintains a monopoly on power and the private sector cannot challenge the government.
- totally not China
Anonymous G replied with this 5 months ago, 18 hours later, 8 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,410,380
@previous (H)
The underlying logic isn't the problem.
The problem is that an authoritarian state can be benelovent or not.
The underlying logic isn't the problem.
The problem is that an authoritarian state can be benelovent or not.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 4 months later, 9 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,437,505
Mr. Black Boi joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 9 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,437,514
Mr. Black Boi joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 9 years after the original post[^] [v] #1,437,525
@1,410,380 (G)
> The underlying logic isn't the problem.
>
> The problem is that an authoritarian state can be benelovent or not.
I’m generally in favor of democracy over autocracy, because if you look into the history of the United States, even when most people can vote, leaders have term limits, and there are checks and balances, you can still get horrible human rights abuses. So if you can get horrible human rights abuses when there’s lots of accountability, if there’s no accountability, I’m not even interested in that.
> The underlying logic isn't the problem.
>
> The problem is that an authoritarian state can be benelovent or not.
I’m generally in favor of democracy over autocracy, because if you look into the history of the United States, even when most people can vote, leaders have term limits, and there are checks and balances, you can still get horrible human rights abuses. So if you can get horrible human rights abuses when there’s lots of accountability, if there’s no accountability, I’m not even interested in that.