[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...