Which of the following people is more free:
1. A drug addict.
2. A man who is not addicted to drugs simply due to the fact that he lives in a country where drugs are banned, or society condemns their use.
Most modern people will have any cognitive dissonance, any kind of mistake in matrix. The modern definition of freedom means that you can do anything you want, without the government or society prohibiting it, and according to this definition, "freer" is simply a drug addict.
But it's stupid. The another man has a much better life. It can make more decisions and make them consciously; it makes better choices in life. A drug addict has his hands tied to his addiction, and he must follow it, not common sense.
Even the most liberal liberals admit that man number 2 is in a better position, but they will inactive come up with a communicative that justifies their view that drugs, pornography, and another specified things should be allowed.
This is simply a translated ~paraphrased by me passage of Luke Smith's article entitled the same as the title of my entry. The full text can be read here: ]]>https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/modern-freedom-means-being-a-slave-to-imp...]]> .
Why did I put this in here?
This is about this fresh Prohibition in Warsaw.
Rainbow Rafael is hard to praise for anything erstwhile it comes to managing a city he is president (a purposeful typo), and in which he seldom happens.
Still, I think Prohibition is simply a good idea.
It hurts me how many people on our side think not.
Who buys alcohol in the mediate of the night? I don't think a man like that would do that.
Besides, alcohol is not very good.
In ancient times, pito wine, due to the fact that it was possible to store it in barrels longer than water, but really, we live in a time erstwhile each store can buy bottled water, to (unless) all home is supplied with a water supply, or you can put a filter on, and have.
For taste? It is an explanation, but it is surely not an explanation for the fact that this alcohol is omnipotent, and drinking beer is even in many circles considered a male work (to a tusk with specified a male duty).
In turn, cigarettes.
While in the case of alcohol it can inactive be said that it is for taste, cigarettes have no explanation. There's no excuse. They are simply poison, both for the smoker and for his surroundings.
I erstwhile saw individual smoke so much that now he's got a gap in his throat, and he can't talk, but he's just in the wind.
Cigarette smoke is disgusting and suffocating to me (and to many others), and it annoys me that individual is constantly walking around town to spray it on me.
And that's what minors smoke.
That's the scene: going to school. A teacher walks in front of him, and a student, most likely a minor, and this student smokes an e-paper, and all the clouds of smoke fly to the teacher in the back. Just before entering, the student hides a cigaret in his pocket, the teacher pretends not to see it.
When you walk through a passage in a supercarket, these "electronic cigarettes" positions are adequate that erstwhile in 5 minutes I came across 3 specified ones.
Ba! I've even seen an adult buy specified an e-paper to individual whose adulthood was not so apparent (if at all).
The point of this post is that erstwhile the lefting does anything, it usually hits us the another way around.
Please, let's not be what the platform has been for 8 years of PiSu's rule: a group of frustrations forever shouting that everything the opponent does is wrong.
Our opponent is bad at quite a few things, but good deeds on the another side are besides worth noticing.
