[ExI] right to try bill
anders at aleph.se
Fri Sep 30 16:34:27 UTC 2016
On 2016-09-30 16:51, spike wrote:
> If one sees the federal government as a law man, then that government
> wants its citizens armed, for they are then allies in defeating
> lawlessness. If a federal government wants to be a parent-like
> structure, then it wants the citizenry disarmed, for being a
> parent-structure requires more centralized power, a lot more money and
> strict obedience from its subjects, since it is a much bigger task.
> In that context, what is the British government?
The British government doesn't want one thing. It is simultaneously
representing the citizens as an overworked social worker, trying to
teach them to behave like an exasperated teacher, helping them express
themselves freely and obey like children, and treating them as customers.
Note that guns are not the issue here: gun rights are not relevant for
the question of how people relate to their government here. The
relationship is very much about what social relationship it is, but
violent power is not a major part of it.
This email is written from inside Windsor Castle. I am literally at the
nuclear core of British sovereignty (OK, I am in the Lower Ward, so the
monarchon radiation is not too dangerous here). The evensong from St
George's chapel and grandeur of the facade is a more potent weapon for
keeping the citizenry in line than any amount of guns. This is soft power.
Dr Anders Sandberg
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat