YOUR government might be a bigger threat than anything YOU might find online, but this statement is just not generally true whatsoever. Given how broad this argument is, if anything, it’s an argument for improving government, not getting rid of it. Every freedom has two sides, the more positive freedoms you get, the less negative freedoms you get, and vice versa. There is no possibility of “infinite freedom”, it’s always zero sum, and so always a balance on a per topic basis, which hyperreductive arguments like this (“state level infringements of freedom”) totally ignore.

▲

Andrew_nenakhov 2 days ago | parent [-]

Right now the government in question is Australian, and I personally wouldn't trust the government which would force citizens to compulsory wear of masks outdoors and alone in cars.

▲

bspammer 2 days ago | parent [-]

No one in my government has ever done as much harm to me as the people who share your opinion about taking reasonable measures to stop the spread of a deadly disease.

The slippery slope claims by the anti-mask people have entirely failed to materialise, yet millions died needlessly. Far more people (including myself) were permanently damaged by getting covid before the vaccine.

▲

Andrew_nenakhov 2 days ago | parent [-]

Ok now you're defending measures like forcing people to wear masks on a secluded beach and somehow you still call such measures reasonable. Yuck.

	▲	ellrob88 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Decisions made under the context of a global pandemic, which needed to be consistent, easy to understand, and easily enforceable. I'm comfortable with the way that was handled in these circumstances. A mask is hardly an inconvenience. Anyway, to get back on topic, which country do you think is the best example of the level of government you think is optimal?