That's the one I'm talking about. But are there any versions that are not enforced by the state at the cost of some liberty?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That's the one I'm talking about. But are there any versions that are not enforced by the state at the cost of some liberty?
Potentialy it would be and yes, cost some liberty for corporations.
I dont think thats illegitimate, if you open a postal service, we also prohibit you from reading the letters you deliver.
Now, the version which actualy was written into law is just ridiculous and essentialy gurantees them local monopolies.
Over here, the government is allowed to step in but didnt yet have to as far as i know, though in the time leading up to the current form some providers were toying around with discriminating between different types of traffic and even scanning your traffic. Essentialy opening your letters.
That's what happens when you give up liberty for "security"... The government takes your security away themselves"to protect you". Also, there is no such thing as corporate liberty. Only human behavior can be restricted... liberty is liberty. And loss of 'corporate liberty' is loss of liberty nonetheless. Finally, the reason that private postal providers don't open letters isn't because of government forbiddance--it's because of customer forbiddance! The real regulatory force in the world.