The New York Times calls the word "Freedom" an "anti-government slogan"

[struth]

As long as Americans are being convinced by their wealthy masters that they have 'freedom' and America is the most free democracy in the world, they don't question that they've lost all the freedoms the other democracies actually have.

The list is a long one and can start with their rotten health care system. Or their lack of freedom to be safe and have their children safe from gun violence.

Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life | News

For the fifth year in a row, Canada is ranked the #1 country in the world in 2020 for Quality of Life, according to a global ranking from US News.

dailyhive.com

Here's the list from that link that the truly free countries take for granted as their rights.

• A good job market
• Affordability
• Economic stability
• Family friendly
• Income equality
• Politically stable
• Safety
• Well-developed public health system
• Well-developed public education system

That's what freedom really is all about, not just a word used to uphold working class Americans' illusions.

I agree with most of your list...I disagree that freedom somehow is connected to income equality, or a well developed public education or health system. Freedom means the ability to choose what healthcare you want, or where your child gets educated, not having the choice, and limiting it to the Govt provided sources is not free. Also, income equality isn't anything related to freedom at all....freedom and equal outcomes are not the same at all. Freedom is having the ability to make as much wealth as you can. Freedom is the opportunity, not the results

Good point on health care and the ability to choose your health care being freedom.

And the point is that Americans don't have the ability to choose, they're forced to accept the US system of health care for big profit of insurance companies.

We Canadians actually do have the freedom to choose our government run universal HC system or private insurance in it's place. Obviously very few choose the private insurance.

So in fact, you walked right into the fact that Americans lack freedom on HC choice.

On income inequality? What can indicate a lack of freedom more than the inability to live a high quality of life.

Freedom is having the ability to make as much wealth as you can.

Yes, of course all we who subscribe to capitalism would agree. And America grants that ability to the wealthy class to make unlimited billions upon billions.

But what about the masses in America? Do they have the ability to make a decent living. Has government even brought them a decent minimum wage?

hahah of course Americans do...nobody (well Obamacare once did), is forced to buy any insurance. You can pay out of pocket for healthcare if you want. I do think the freedom to choose is limited though, given that Govt has created laws and regulations not allowing people to pick healthcare insurance across state lines.

I am sorry...freedom doesn't mean a high quality of life. It means the opportunity to get a high quality of life. Freedom doesn't guarantee anything....freedom is the ability to go out and get that. You sound very spoiled really if you think being free means you are guaranteed some sort of high quality of life.

Freedom grants the ability to all to gain wealth. It's not limited to one class of the other, that is what happens in leftist regimes...like Cuba for example. No country on earth, in earth's history has granted the opportunities for more people to gain wealth then the United States.

I am not quite sure what a min wage has to do with anything...why on earth would someone be talking about about min wage? Freedom is the ability to make the most max wage you can earn.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes. In Cuba, "freedom" is anti-government.

How is this so confusing for Trumpsters?

 

[BlindBoo]

These people are evil and must be destroyed for the good of humanity.

LOL. Except that's not what the first line of the tweet says. "Shouting "Freedom" and other anti-government slogans". But nice try at transference.
Oh my, you alt-righters are simpletons. I truly wonder sometime if you people should be allowed to vote.

Freedom AND other anti-governments slogans. Meaning the word freedom is included in anti-government slogans. My you’re quite stupid.

"...And other anti-Government slogans..", meaning a single government, not all governments. Specifically the Authoritarian anti freedom government it Cuba.

 

[marvin martian]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

So it doesn't matter which government the people were shouting at to you? Because to me, shouting "Freedom" to an "anti-freedom" government is an anti-government shout!

So you agree the government of Cuba is anti-freedom?

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

So it doesn't matter which government the people were shouting at to you? Because to me, shouting "Freedom" to an "anti-freedom" government is an anti-government shout!

So you agree the government of Cuba is anti-freedom?

Would you like me to confirm that water is wet too?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Why is there not one thread about the CPAC and Trump's speech. Are Trump Republicans embarrassed of Trump? Based upon their threads, they are avoiding him completely.

There is a thread concerning the straw poll, but that's it. Nothing about what was said.

 

[Unkotare]

That makes perfect sense for a democrat. They see government as the opposite of freedom. That's why they always want more government.

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Well, that depends.

We can REALLY protect the lives of citizens by putting them all in their own little jail cell.

Is that what you mean?

 

[BlindBoo]

That makes perfect sense for a democrat. They see government as the opposite of freedom. That's why they always want more government.

No that's Neo-GOP speak. The government of Cuba is the opposite of freedom. Ancient Republicans and Democrat once agreed too.

 

[Unkotare]

...

We can REALLY protect the lives of citizens by putting them all in their own little jail cell.

...

That's one of the failed arguments that apologists for fdr often try to trot out.

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Well, that depends.

We can REALLY protect the lives of citizens by putting them all in their own little jail cell.

Is that what you mean?

That also depends on where you live. How dense the population is. Texas did alright, they allowed the cities to have stricter measures than rural areas But really all the measures were temporary and as I understood it they were always meant to be temporary. As long as it is temporary it's not despotism.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

-DOI

 

[dblack]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

So protecting us from invaders would qualify, yes?

 

[dblack]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

So protecting us from invaders would qualify, yes?

Of course. What are you getting at?

 

[easyt65]

I heard AOC wants to include 'Freedom' in the definition of 'Infrastructure'.....

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

So protecting us from invaders would qualify, yes?

Of course. What are you getting at?

I think it's obvious.

 

[dblack]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

So protecting us from invaders would qualify, yes?

Of course. What are you getting at?

I think it's obvious.

Obvious to you maybe. But if you don't want to share, no worries.

 

[BlindBoo]

Some people think of socialism as synonymous with government. As freedom, most especially free trade, is in direct opposition to socialism, it's easy to see how they'd make the mistake of thinking that freedom is anti-government. But the very purpose of government is to protect our liberty, so from that perspective I see government as anti-socialism. If it's to fulfill its core purpose, it must be.

If by that you mean that any government action that is not narrowly tailored to protecting our liberty, such government action is improper, then I agree.

How about government action design to protect the lives of it citizens?

Protecting lives is part of protecting liberty. But it's protecting lives from the acts of others - not from the realities of life. ie government isn't there to feed, clothe and house us.

So protecting us from invaders would qualify, yes?

Of course. What are you getting at?

I think it's obvious.

Obvious to you maybe. But if you don't want to share, no worries.

Which has priority? Life or Liberty. I think life comes first. That is to protect the citizenry from a threat the Government may have to temporarily curb or suspend some liberties until the fight is over.