[jpzisme]

Given the choice between having to constantly fight the masses and having to sometimes fight a state that was designed to safeguard freedoms but sometimes infringes upon them, I'll take the latter.

A quick look at how the natural world works is a good enough deterrent: https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/

[wu-ikkyu]

This seems like a false dichotomy. Finding the right balance between individual autonomy and working together for mutual benefit might be a better way to frame it.

>A quick look at how the natural world works is a good enough deterrent: https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/

What does this prove? No being can survive without destroying another being. Moreover, no plant or animal has threatened the entire Earth moreso than nuclear armed States

[jerf]

"Moreover, no plant or animal has threatened the entire Earth moreso than nuclear armed States"

Cyanobacteria have accomplished far more than we have on that front: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxygenation_Event

[durgiston]

counterpoint: nuclear-armed USSR, and since then nuclear armed former Soviet Republics with poor nuclear security, definitely including Russia in this. second-counterpoint: global warming is also bad, actually damaging the earth instead of potentially damaging it.