I agree with your remarks about the healthy and productive process of confronting and melting publicly "right" and "wrong" ideas, as Stuart Mill explains.

And being totally against censorship, I find this matter quite complex, though.

Because we can see many times that hate speech doesnt come originally from "people" or communities, but from armed organizations, governments or ideological lobbies... in these cases the hate speech doesnt help the situation, but FUELS the conflict in order to better achieve the objectives, whether of an arms lobby from Washington or an Islamic Revolution from Tehran.

Anyway, if there is a solution, it should be more speech and more freedom !!

Lo nunca visto en países libres, CENSURA preventiva y generalizada basada en los criterios subjetivos de un comisario político que no ha sido elegido democráticamente.

The radical dichotomy between the concepts of government and people is naïve and too simple. Governments have been CREATED not by aliens, but by real persons, by people.

I agree that this creation is some kind of monster used by the powerful to exploit other people, but authority is not an irrational superstition. Authority is a great REALITY based and justified on the historic legitimation given year by year, month by month by people in a complex PROCESS of thousands of years.

The theory of fundamental rights of Liberalism (relations between citizen and State) was modified and distorted after 2nd WW at some UN Declarations and other international forums.

The so called "2nd and 3rd generation of human rights" introduced in those years and until today the DISTORTION of applying the idea of human rights to relationships among citizens.

So now I have the fundamental "right" to have other people pay for my house or my health care and to have other people to agree with my personal opinions about morals, social principles, sex, etc (of course if they fit into the canon of collectivism and Deconstruction)... otherwise they would NOT respect my rights.

Thank you very much for this super orange pill, a lot of useful information !!

2 minutes ?? I am afraid that is too simple an explanation...

The fact that the educational system, morals of powerful, religions, etc indoctrinate people to obey is not a sound reason to affirm that people obey ultimately because of that.

Too many books and theories have been written about the ORIGIN of the State and none of them is definitive, but what is certain is that this origin is a process of thousands of years in hundreds of different civilizations, not a false illusion of the people.

Discrimination is one of those confusing concepts that drives us all crazy.

It is something negative when it is an illegal act of the government or a public power, since it is an attack against the principle of equality before the law.

Yet, when we speak of discrimination between private people we tend to miss the simple fact that we all do it, all the time.

We all discriminate when we choose our friends or our partner, when we apply for an specific post, when we hire a worker, when we decide to have a tuna sandwich, when we cheer on our favourite team, when we buy a book, when we marry or when we decide to spend a week in Brazil and not in Canada.

And we do it according to criteria of beauty, race, culture, kindness, money, intelligence, etc and other very "selfish" reasons.

We all do it every day and it is our right (without prejudice to the fact that by doing so we could be maybe a stupid or a bad person in some cases).

So, discriminating CV with picture or discriminating interview for a job ?? ...yeah !! isn't that the main function of a CV or an interview ? .... to discriminate !!

Felicidades por la entrevista, nos trae un buen chorro de realidad y de autocrítica, ambos requisitos imprescindibles para avanzar.

Mi impresión en este tema es q la dimensión del cambio personal y social q propone #bitcoin es tan gigantesca q principalmente son los mejor informados (grandes inversores) y/o entusiastas (generaciones jóvenes) los q hacen el esfuerzo para entenderlo. De ahí la brecha entre precio y adopción.

La gran masa de población sólo entrará si Amazon o su banco se lo dan masticado o cuando haya un cambio generacional.

Great speech about integrity and against hypocrisy... here in English !!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AX4MKIDvXLM

I mostly agree with the central idea of your post about AML.

Yet, I think that "equality" could be a much clearer word in that context than "social justice", which is a very common but quite confusing concept, as one might think considering its religious origin (from a Jesuit priest).

Confusing also because (if we dont turn to religious beliefs) justice is always a "social" idea, so its a redundancy.

And finally because out of a legal system nobody can give a minimally precise and not circular definition of what "Justice" is (apart from stating his personal opinion about what considers just or unjust)... this problem dates back to Roman Law times.

As Hume explained, the problem with "what is right" (morals) is that it comes not from reasoning but from emotions. So, there is NOT such a thing as a single "what is right" except for very few and extreme cases (vb to kill a baby .... but not vb to kill and eat human flesh as its done nowadays in some parts of Papua New Guinea).

Most of cases of "what is right" are gray areas determined in every historic moment and in every part of the World by the emotions of majority.

And today majority of people chose every day order, obedience, police and repression, since they get security in exchange. This could change in the future, though.