Transaction

j"19HxigV4QyBv3tHpQVcUEQyq1pzZVdoAutMØ On Wednesday, October 21, 2020, 01:06:03 PM PDT, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote: me: >>> I'll be waiting for any actual 'cypherpunk' or libertarian to shred donalds 'philosophy' to pieces. I think I'm going to wait a looong time. donald: >> We do not in fact have equality before the law, because actual equality >> before the law leads to intolerable consequences, because individuals, >> groups, and communities are not in fact equal, and require different laws jim bell: >> The news item from that time said that Bloomberg had proposed that young racial minorities shouldn't be allowed to own guns > So you're saying that james donald is as 'libertarian' as bloomberg?(meaning of course he's not libertarian at all), both going against the fundamental principle of equality before the law? No, I'm not. I was simply pointing out how some people resist the idea of having different laws for different people, even when other people claim there appears to be a need for it. . I had been aware of Bloomberg's amazing comment since just a few days after it occurred (about Feb 6, 2015) and I frequently cite it (and leftists' equally-clueless reactions to it) to expose their hypocrisies. It is quite useful. > By the way, the correct understanding of "equality before the law" is that no person has authority over any other person. I DON'T think that's the same thing. >And the very existence of any kind of state violates the principle of equality before the law. Well, I generally agree 'states' should not exist, but without 'states' that greatly changes the concept of 'laws', and 'equality'. Jim Bell text/plainbinary(bef9f53b1465873fd81e86c88f1de351995ea0fb