If we disagree on something very important and consequential to us, like you think my house belongs to you, I would request the government to remove you against your will.
You want others think like you, you have to persuade them in a non violent way.
Post by CriticalRoots
That would be "dispute resolution", which could be handled in a variety of ways. As is the case with basically every service provided by government. History shows that the "legitimate" monopoly on force (gov) often winds up behaving like organized crime.
What the chain says
- Block
- 662 131
- Time
- 2020-11-20T16:42:45Z
- Signer
- 1GgyBPgTRm568SQZVtd1fo1KVqJ3VLL7iv
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1GgyBPgTRm568SQZVtd1fo1KVqJ3VLL7iv VerifiedReplies (5)
Imbecilic answer
One of the best signs one has caused cognitive dissonance in another mind is when a response resorts to some kind of attempted name calling or insult
I asked a practical answer and you gave me theoretical bullshit that doesn't answer my question. What ACTS would necessary for YOU to solve the situation presented? Practical please.
You can't just avoid all answers and then hope to get away by pretending not to understand mine.
We have been there before. Remember?
Your turn:
Who should have the privilege to violate other people's rights and why?
Answer or run.
When something seems obvious it's either because you understand it well, or because you never actually thought it through.
No offense, but you seem like you never thought it through.
No shame in that...
But before you insult those who have, maybe learn.