posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 12:17 AM
Vital freedoms can't be permanently given up for small measures of security, hence the need to agreesively prosecute the terror wars and prevent the
civil society from becoming heavily policed and developing a siege mentality. But, obviously, everyone exchanges freedom for security to
varying degrees. Its a question of how much and what kinds of freedoms in exchange for what kind of security. Pink Floyd had it right, eh, don't
trade a warm summer field for a cold steel rail or hot ashes for trees, etc etc.
We give up freedoms every day tho, the freedom to take what you want and do what you want, in exchange for the security of society itself, and the
freedom to not pay taxes and have to obey the rules of hte system in exchange for governance and social programs and all the like. But if we're
talking about the freedom to say what you want or the freedom to not have government troops living in your house or the freedom to vote in exchange
for, well, anything, then its probably not worth it, certainly not outside of a temporary emergency situation. I mean, if you're walking down the
street and a riot breaks out, you'd welcome the sudden and overpowering loss of freedom that is the police comming in to restore order, because it'd
be no more than a day or a few hours. Its definitly not as simple as 'freedom' for 'security', you're brutalized to death without security and
dominated into nothingness without freedom.