• @j4k3
    link
    English
    -35 months ago

    There is a massive difference between rules and authoritarianism. You don’t know your history very well. Feudalism started when the larger government failed to adequately protect provencal farmers. People simply picked up and moved closer to people that were rich enough to afford a few armed security guards. Eventually, this relocation enriched these lords to the extent that the people in their region lost all of their rights to everything. They didn’t own land, tools, or even their right to relocate.

    The only change that happened was trusting these minor authorities to simply do the right thing. This is how Roman Citizens became medieval serfs. The biggest lesson to learn from their history is to never give up your autonomy. Make all the rules you want. Don’t steal my property and autonomy. It is my right to choose.

    I don’t even own a car, or drive. This is a fundamental cognitive failure of a generation blatantly repeating errors of the past. Those errors are very likely to cause hundreds of years of sociopolitical regression. We will be loathed for centuries to come because of our blind stupidity. Giving up autonomy is burning Rome. It won’t be clearly seen for a long time, but it will be called neo digital feudalism. You will own nothing, because you did not recognize the blood that bought your autonomy or your descendants that will pay it again on the other side of the terrible age you’ve opened them up to endure. It has nothing to do with driving and everything to do with fundamental citizenship and democracy. Those two aspects are directly and irrefutably connected through the legislature. Once precedent is established, the grey areas tilt the table over time. Eventually, you area serf once again. It is absolutely essential to maintain autonomy to have democracy.

    • @calcopiritus
      link
      English
      85 months ago

      Nobody is free to do whatever they want. Never had been.

      There is a balance between freedom and security. Rules restrict your freedom but provide you with security.

      It is childish to expect absolute freedom. When there is a new rule coming up, you have to think to yourself “is it worth it the freedom I’m giving away for the security it provides?”. There are some rules 99+% of people can agree on, like “should people be free to murder other people?” The answer is most of the time “no”.

      For example, in Spain a recent law is introducing a “wankport”. So soon we’ll have to ask for our government for a key to access porn. With a limited 30 accesses per month. Their reasoning is “porn is bad for children!”. Do I think that that is worth it? Absolutely not. It’s completely baseless and it punishes adults to restrict the kid’s behaviour.

      There is an endless list of reasons why cars being too fast is bad though. They emit more noise, the emit more CO2 and other harmful gases, they release more microplastics, and so on. They also increase both the chance of accidents and their lethality. They wear more the roads and a miriad of other reasons.

      What is the freedom you give away for cutting off all of those harms? Arriving 5 seconds later than usual to your workplace. Saving 5 minutes on your multi-hour trip. Is it worth it? Yes.

      • @j4k3
        link
        English
        -65 months ago

        You have a bias that is unfounded and you are willing to sacrifice the future of your children for it. I was almost killed by the 7th car to hit me while commuting full time on a bicycle. If anyone has a reason to hate cars it would be me. Still I have better abstract logic skills than this and can see the bigger picture clearly. You are burning the future for stupid reasons.

        • @calcopiritus
          link
          English
          55 months ago

          You can’t approve of enforcing speed limits! You weren’t almost hit by a car like I was!

      • @j4k3
        link
        English
        05 months ago

        I’m not a Nazi, Soviet, or McCathyist.