On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 4:19 PM Karl <gmkarl@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2021, 7:12 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
That's nonsense. It was all just drugs, and there's absolutely no reason to apologize for it.
I agree IF you are in support of unrestricted sale of hard narcotics, then that's fine. It just happens to be that in the US (and virtually everywhere else in the world), most people aren't, and the legal structure reflects that.
We have YET ANOTHER US govt turd alias 'david barnett' posting the
most idiotic trolling nonsense one can imagine : "But but, the US govt is good and drugs are baad!" - Please.
David's able to speak so rationally, how do we protect him?
Thank you, I appreciate that! The idea that everyone who speaks up in defense of the US government is automatically a government plant comes from a pretty sad worldview. In the real world, our representative democracy was built by people who largely agree with it (tautologically so) -- which means we largely agree with it's fundamental structure, it's general workings, and it's overall results. I know it's not very fashionable to be patriotic these days (Trump was about the worst thing I can imagine for "Brand USA"), but I think part of democracy is recognizing that it's *ok* to dislike the outcome of a good process, while still agreeing the process itself is good. For someone to say they are ok with Silk Road and what appear to be genuine attempts to hire killers, proven instances of the sale of hard narcotics, and the widespread platform for money laundering and tax evasion -- is kind of to say they are a pretty extreme outlier. It's not our government's job to reflect the attitude of every outlier -- and anyone who wishes it did, almost surely would not support all the other equally extreme but very different attitudes our government also correctly ignores. -david