[AnimalMuppet]

If by your standards the US is "not a free nation", "oppressive", and "totalitarian", then I'd like to see what nations you describe as "free", "not oppressive", and "not totalitarian". Even more, I'd like you to define how you draw the line between them.

And if every nation is defined by you as totalitarian, then I think the problem is your definition.

The US is not perfect. It is less free than I would like. But there's a huge difference between the US and totalitarianism. If you've ever lived under a totalitarian regime, you'd know the difference, and you'd know which side of the line the US is on.

[the_ancient]

You believe a nation that locks millions of non-violent persons in a cage for possessing unapproved plant material, a nation that has soo many laws and regulations that many studies believe that every citizen commits between 1 and 3 crimes every single day. A nation that spy's on every citizen, a nation that has declared a zone 100 mile from every boarder to be a "constitution free zone". A nation where the police forces can execute the homeless, and blow up bombs in the face of infants with no criminal charges being filed against the officers.. A nation that can simply take any property they want from you at any time with no requirement they prove you committed a crime....

You believe a nation like that can be called "free"

At it core the concept of Statism is oppressive. No nation state can be truly free, democracy at its core is the majority oppressing the minority, and many times in reality the minority oppressing the majority.

[AnimalMuppet]

> No nation state can be truly free

You define that no nation state can be truly free, therefore the US is not truly free. Perfectly logical, but there is more going on in terms of freedom than is dreamt of in your philosophy. There is a huge difference between the US and totalitarianism. You define it to not exist. The problem is your definition.

(Note well: This does not mean that the US is perfect, is as free as it should be, or is the best that there currently is.)

[the_ancient]

You are either free or you are not.

There is not "more free" or "less free"

Freedom is a binary state

Edit

to be more clear what you are talking about is more accurately stated is "more oppressed" and "less oppressed".

Oppression can have varying degrees, freedom can not.

[coldtea]

>Freedom is a binary state

No, it's a continium. Should you be free to have other people as slaves, hurt your children, kill people, burn a forest etc?

If not, then you already drew some limits to freedom.

Yet, I'd venture that a person who "lacks the freedom" to own slaves is still perfectly free.

Never in the history of manking was the concept of freedom understood as this "total binary freedom" you mention. Even tribesmen and such had and respected limits while still considering themselves free folk.

[AnimalMuppet]

Enjoy considering yourself a slave, then. But from where I sit, you're mostly a slave to a view of the world that is completely lacking in perspective. I keep trying to get you to look outside it. You keep refusing to do so.

[the_ancient]

What perspective am I lacking. Please Enlighten me.

[AnimalMuppet]

I tried, in my previous two posts on this thread.

At this point, I think we're in an infinite loop. AnimalMuppet out...