By kurtis 24 Dec 2002
Well I read this on slashdot and it got me thinking so now I’m curious what the folk of thraxil think of the concept? The way I see it … you have a long slippery slope between freedom and safety. Absolute safety allows for no freedom … thought police and such. Absolute freedom allows for no safety … true anarchy. Before 911 civil liberties were doing really well but these days it seems that people are willing to give up freedoms in order to be (or feel) safe.
<p>So which is it? I imagine people in manhattan probably have a significantly different point of view on this than crazy anarchist types like myself … but it seems the government is only going to use our national tragedies to further its own grip on our personal freedoms … which is a tragedy in itself. I believe that if the founders of this country (who were the anarchists of their time) knew just how much control our government had over us or could even conceive of how much privacy we have given up … they would be disgusted. </p>
<p>However people <span class="caps">ARE</span> terrified and I do admit terror can inhibit freedom as much as government control can … so I find myself unsure of how to stand on this. My instincts tell me that freedom is more important than safety … that I’d rather be dead than be a slave. Anyone?</p>