|
The above quote is vague because it implies 'personal liberty and security' are generalized absolutes, when in fact every person's liberty and security are slightly different. What's more, when two people or two groups have conflicting interests, liberty and security for one person or group may come at the expense of the other person or group. See: the Middle East.
For predators to function, they must have a sufficient degree of liberty and security, after all. A lion in a cage is no longer an effective predator. From the lion's point of view, the people who put him in the cage are the predators.
The question for every society is to decide which group of predators will dominate.
One can make a good argument that it's better to be ruled by predators who themselves choose to follow very strict rules, and who restrict themselves to stylized forms of predation. For example, by driving competitors out of business rather than hiring hit squads to gun them down.
Does Barney Fife wear size 3800 stretch pants?
How smart is wasting time on Usenet?
|
