imported post
iamfreeru2 wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
iamfreeru2 wrote:
I guess you guys just don't get it. Citizen = slave and slaves have no protection other than what the master wants to give them.
That is NOT the etymology nor the meaning of the word citizen, except of course perhaps to Socliasts and Communists.
Citizen is an antonym to both alien and to subject. A subject is closer to slave; but a citizen is not a slave by a long shot.
Like I said you don't get it. Maybe one day you will. I hope it is not too late. Have a nice day.
Miriam Webster:
1
:an inhabitant of a city or town;
especially :one entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman
2 a
:a member of a state b
:a native or naturalized person
who owes allegiance to a government and is entitled to protection from it
3
:a civilian
as distinguished from a specialized servant of the state
Basically, by equating a citizen with a slave, "iamfreeru2" is challenging the notion of social contract. 99% of the people on this planet belong to a society, however formal. Societies, by their very nature, require rules, codified or informal, by which people must act in order for the society to continue to function. Thisset of rules for interpersonal relations is known as a social contract. A member of a society must agree to the contract; in exchange, that person is allowed to participate in the society, to their long-term net benefit. Breaking the rules invalidates the contract; in more primitive times, the penalty was expulsion from the society. In more modern times, a punishment is ascribed to a violation of the rules and once the punishment is taken, the individual is allowed to continue participating in society. Only the most heinous crimes result in expulsion, either by exile or execution.
"iamfreeru2" says that by agreeing to the social contract of the United States or of any society, a person becomes a slave. A slave, by definition, is property and totally incapable of accepting or rejecting the contract; they are forced into it, usually at the lowest level. "iamfreeru2" might be able to argue quite eloquently from a metaphorical standpoint that U.S. society does not offer a choice, and that U.S. citizens get the raw end of the deal; he is quite wrong. Any person can choose to totally reject the contract. However, "totally rejecting the contract" requires leaving the country and renouncing citizenship. Even if a person decides to cut off all human contact and go live in the woods, he still has the protection of the U.S. government, and its military and police force, and for that reason is expected to abide by U.S. law, such as it still applies to someone living in the middle of nowhere; he cannot trespass on another's land, cannot kill another person, cannot rape anyone he happens to meet, cannot take something that is not his, etc. In order to be totally exempt from social contract, a person must go live in an area ungoverned by any sovereign nation and devoid of human existence. Good luck; this planet has 6 billion people on it, in every corner capable of sustaining human life, including places the average American would think impossible to survive.
In addition,"iamfreeru2" does not seem to be considering the other available social contracts he could choose from. Even in the civilized world, many of the liberties and protections we take for granted do not exist. For example, take Japan. Very well-organized, powerful nation. NO rights of the accused. If the police think you did something, you did it, and they will beat, interrogate, isolate, and even starve you for as long as it takes for you to admit it. Coercion is not banned; you quite simply could die if you do not confess to whatever they think you did. Spain, very similar. France, no 8th Amendment; if you commit a crime they throw you in a 1.5m square concrete cell with no bed, no chair, no desk, and no running water; you get a bucket for sanitation. Some prisons do not even allow clothes, as clothes allow prisoners to conceal contraband. Britain, we all know what a mess that is; it's an aristocracy, pure and simple. Rich men get in office, there's about a snowflake's chance in hell of voting them out because THEY decide when to hold elections and so have to be unpopular for a very long time to get voted out, and what they say goes.
I am a citizen of the United States. I am entitled to the rights and protections guaranteed me by the Constitution, in addition to the privileges that a free society that generates wealthaffords in terms of standard of living,and in return I am obligated to follow the laws laid down by society. I've seen the way it could be, and I'm happy to be here and not in any other country, problems and all. "iamfreeru2" does not seem to notice the hypocrisy of using an Internet forum to criticise the way the nation that built the damn thing works. If he trulyis not a member of any society, then he is a leech, plain and simple; he is using the fruits of society's labor while thumbing his nose at the rules that make those fruits possible.