Under which regime would you have more "freedom?"

Under which regime would you have more "freedom?"

  • An absolute monarchy around 1500

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • An American-style Democratic-Republic in 2019

    Votes: 21 80.8%
  • A constitutional monarchy around 1500

    Votes: 4 15.4%

  • Total voters
    26
Mar 2016
1,222
Australia
People saying "who are you to decide something" in response to someone telling them what they say is false are virtue signalling. Taking the issue away from someone's lack of substance and trying to make the person who cares about truth seem bad. This is why the truth has largely become irrelevant in our society.
The problem is, what you consider to be "the truth" might not be what a lot of other people consider it to be. Your word is not the final and authoritative word on something, despite what you might think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menshevik
Jun 2017
2,996
Connecticut
The problem is, what you consider to be "the truth" might not be what a lot of other people consider it to be. Your word is not the final and authoritative word on something, despite what you might think.
And this is the issue. Opinion culture makes anyone trying to enforce objective truth out to be the bad guy. You aren't defending what you are saying or saying I'm wrong, you and Menshevik(and many others this is a common trope) seek to make me out to be bad for even thinking there's a correct answer to things in the first place. "Who are you to decide" is missing the whole point, there need to be common standards and that shouldn't be seen as one person imposing their will on others. People believing a fact to not be true doesn't mean it's not a fact and the idea that people believing a fact to be false is enough to make something a debate is a huge danger and weakness of our system. This is the whole issue. There is a pretty healthy gap between giving one person all the power and giving everyone all the power.
 
Mar 2016
1,222
Australia
And this is the issue. Opinion culture makes anyone trying to enforce objective truth out to be the bad guy. You aren't defending what you are saying or saying I'm wrong, you and Menshevik(and many others this is a common trope) seek to make me out to be bad for even thinking there's a correct answer to things in the first place. "Who are you to decide" is missing the whole point, there need to be common standards and that shouldn't be seen as one person imposing their will on others. People believing a fact to not be true doesn't mean it's not a fact and the idea that people believing a fact to be false is enough to make something a debate is a huge danger and weakness of our system. This is the whole issue. There is a pretty healthy gap between giving one person all the power and giving everyone all the power.
All you're doing is insisting that you speak the truth and all of us are wrong for saying that your opinions aren't facts. Do you not see the arrogance and close-mindedness of your language?
 

Isoroku295

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
8,519
In the Past
You say the past nations had little oversight compared to today, but that can also be the problem. While the King may not have dealt with you, there are still local officials who can still cause you problems. At least today a bad cop can get put all over the media. At least today you are more likely to have support from outside the social domain of the local lord of the manor. All things considered, people back then had to tread the line just as much as they do today. But today we have far more protection and power to fight back in the courts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menshevik
Jun 2017
2,996
Connecticut
All you're doing is insisting that you speak the truth and all of us are wrong for saying that your opinions aren't facts. Do you not see the arrogance and close-mindedness of your language?
No no I'm not doing that, you're making a strawman. I cited no such opinions(if you consider climate change being real an opinion you're proving the point, again you and others turning it into an attack on character). If someone considers flat earth the truth(example)...that's considered an opinion under this logic as long as someone is arguing it. Under this logic nothing is a fact, it's an attack on knowledge as a concept. It's why I despise 21st century free speech, it isn't free speech it's a license to say things that are objectively untrue and believing that discourse is an end to itself rather than a means to finding answers to questions. It's just propaganda. But hey "freedom" involves the freedom to make terrible choices supposedly(more propaganda).
 

Menshevik

Ad Honorem
Dec 2012
9,419
here
The problem is, what you consider to be "the truth" might not be what a lot of other people consider it to be. Your word is not the final and authoritative word on something, despite what you might think.
Agreed.

And I'm curious as to how such people think nations, countries, etc, should be governed. If democracy as we know it is too flawed, too radical with it's "free speech," then what should it be replaced with? Technocracy?
 
Jun 2017
2,996
Connecticut
So you dislike that people are allowed to say things you disagree with.

Okay then.... Maybe democratic countries with free speech aren't your thing, I guess?
Again you keep ignoring the merits and are making it about your feelings.

No, it's chemo to the cancer of authoritarianism. But let me guess because I believe in facts I'm an authoritarian?
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegreathoo

HackneyedScribe

Ad Honorem
Feb 2011
6,584
If people pit their opinion laden posts as equal in quality to evidence laden posts, then this is an example of abusing the license to say whatever they want. Just because people can say whatever they want doesn't mean the quality of what they say is equal to well-researched evidence. Free speech cuts both ways, if you say BS people can use their free speech to call it out for what it is. Telling people they shouldn't say something is a world of difference from forcing them into silence.

However, where is the evidence presented so far? It's not opinion vs fact if nobody made a factual statement.
 
Jul 2017
292
Srpska
Constitutional monarchy provides most liberties. It is the most limited form of government. Ancients knew it long ago, they wrote about evils of democracy. Hobbes affirmed it as well.