you should

I mean

it isn't his job to educate himself

I don't understand how this got into a discussion of positive and negative freedoms

silly to define such things

if you make a claim, you support it, if it needs definition, one should define it. it's not the task of your opponent to do this.

it is entirely subjective

It doesn't mean bad or good.

value is objective

Okay, come on buddy. Let us talk.

shouldn't have negative or positive on it then

Starting with negative freedoms; it is the freedoms which libertarians/anarchists generally want when they aren't on the left.

It is a freedom to do what you want to do if you have the ability.

I already know this

For example, wanna fuck a dog?

Got the ability to hold it down and not get caught?

Go at it chum.

economic freedom isn't negative freedom

Whilst positive freedoms are different in their nature; they are a freedom to purpose.

Most all of freedom to thought fall under this.

It is.

The market is a perfect example of negative freedoms at kwor.

*work

Why do you disagree with self determination and individualism?

you cannot control every aspect of somebody

sure, some people may find postive freedom in the market. But this is the overwhelming majority that don't.

Did I say that?

I already know your views

you want authoritarianism in most areas of life

you don't want economic freedom

nor freedom of political expression

Not really.

I mean, the expression of ideals are important.

Except that it is a one state

I adhear to a belief in a single party democracy.

one party state

LIke how they had in the USSR and Thrid Reich

there were mass meetings, especially so in the USSR, and the people would hold scurtinty to the party members

every working man who wished to attend was allowed to, and any question could be asked.

They still hold no power

no influence on them