So I don't want you to take this personally;
You are completely and utterly incorrect, and your argument is illogical.
There are many other options open to people to deal with organisations, ideas, communities, etc. that they disagree with. You have asserted that the "take it or leave it" model is the only strategy available, and you have provided precisely no evidence to back this up.
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:27, archived)
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:29, archived)
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:32, archived)
but it's certainly a strong contender for most dominant, and is actively pushed as a solution that increases freedom (especially by the economic right).
To the extent that "freedom of choice equates to freedom" becomes almost axiomatic. There are other options, and they shouldn't be overlooked.
Which bit is illogical? I can see the disagreement with premises clearly enough.
( www.b3ta.com/talk/4454608 )
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:34, archived)
The first thing I said was "in a free market society", which covers the feeble witterings of my previous post.
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:40, archived)
And while you may not have meant that that was an absolute, you stated it as such.
I'd agree with you that the right have been successful in recent years at narrowing the concept of freedom alarmingly, but combating this requires rigorous logical and theoretical precision.
Despite the terminology used in the previous statement, I am not, and have never been, a Marxist.
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:41, archived)
Maybe not even an assumption, more a benefit. I'm not being very rigorous.
I'm also taking bets for who will first reply with "hehehe homo".
(, Tue 16 Jun 2009, 14:46, archived)