Coersion is not consent, though. If I offer you the options of servitude or death, you are technically free to choose death, but if you then choose servitude, no reasonable person would say that you had a meaningful choice in your enslavement.

What is a 'meaningful choice' then? Is there some bias here?

There's also no objective measure to determine how free we really are in any given scenario. A person who appear free may not be or vice versa. This is why I meant the idea of an essence of freedom - at any moment you can refuse the status quo so long as you are conscious of this. Even a vegetable (paralysed person) can change their own mental content.

You've been reading too much Sartre mate.

Haha, how did you know.

Arguing that no matter how unfree you may be, you're still free to change your own mental content. Who else but Sartre?

It seems like the only way to defend individualism, and engaging in a material idea of freedom is a slippery slope to undermining all of this.

Thanks for the input.

You're welcome, mate.

Even so, not everyone and not at all times, are people aware of their reactions and free choosing of them. In the same way that a physical prison materially inhibits a person, so could there be, conceivable and mental prison blocking one's ability to self-reflect or be consciousness. Awareness is a temporal gift. All kinds of freedom can be taken away, and to suggest that a person possesses a freedom essence at all times is magical thinking. Furthermore, this temporal nature of freedom also challenged what it meant to be human. If a person is unaware and unfree, are they still human? All of this is inconsistent with material sensibilities. Freedom is neither here nor there. A sensation, at best, a subjective reflection of objective processes.

Somehow this is very unsettling.

Combatting long held assumptions, and questioning ideology you didn't even realised you believed is always unsettling.

@ego_sum_jeffum why not both?
https://cherryparkofzombies.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/stalin.jpg

>gif
>doesn't even move

Shut your face

or what

Punch a gay fascist in the face

I'm not a fascist tho @Valtiel

And so, politically speaking, not everyone is free and not at all times. The concept of freedom is bourgeois idealism. It is based on privileged material conditions at the expense of others, and the ideological push towards freedom in society also only serves the few with the material position to use it. Freedom is just an excuse to exploit others, and has no real objective reality. Since freedom is a destructive force, people ought to remove it from their minds as a bourgeois trick used to repress others.

Freedom was a mistake.

Youre a mistake

*"Freedom is a bourgeois prejudice. We repudiate all morality which proceeds from supernatural ideas or ideas which are outside the class conception. In our opinion, morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of the class war. Everything is moral which is necessary for the annihilation of the old exploiting order and for the uniting the proletariat. Our morality consists solely in close discipline and conscious warfare against the exploiters."* **Vladimir Ilylich Lenin**

@Wilhelm Zaisser#5032 nice fake quote

@Deleted User do you have a more specific source for that Lenin quote?

@Hositrugun Apparently was in a letter to Emma Goldman.

Good riddance to Lenin tbh

Goy bye

And Marx

And Stalin

Maybe it's from her book *My Disillusionment in Russia*.

No, I can't find it.

Maybe the quote is too good to be true. I can't find it in Lenin's Collected Works either.

Never post a quote without verifying it.

Yep. I fucked up.

@Deleted User
>communigger
>gullible
Imagine my shock

How the fuck has this millionaire cunt not been banned, yet?

Firefly only bans people for autistic reasons

But I can admit my mistakes and try to correct it from happening again in the future. All is not lost.