bobsal u1553115 wrote:
What? I don't get to have my opinion? I don't grant you that freedom.
It's not my opinion. I have for a long time studied the concept of a republic, i.e. the absence of a monarch (totalitarian central authority); and why the principle of liberty as a basis for self-governance inspired people to fight for independence from monarchical rule.
I'm at liberty to discuss and hold opinions as I wish. I choose not to recognize your hypothetical "king" and "nation". They mean nothing to me. I accept the consequences of my liberty. Feel free to start a thread about your king and and theoretical land.
Ok, but you are proving my point about people not being able to manage their own freedom in a way that makes liberty a sufficient basis for self-governance. You're basically showing how the failure to achieve mutual respect leads to separatism.
This is how I discovered that liberalism is connected with authoritarianism. If people assert that they have the freedom to do whatever they want, and they don't take care to maintain mutual respect, they just end up fighting for territorial dominance and/or to separate off into mutually exclusive territories.
It's why I quoted Learned Hand saying that nothing leads faster to the overthrow of liberty than the belief that it means 'unbridled freedom,' i.e. liberalism.