It's a social contract. You opted in. It was completely voluntary. 
Discussion
Yeah when you were born in a given jurisdiction, for the privileges of federal + state + county + municipal regulations, laws, codes and taxes you “opted” in. If you don’t like it next time try not being born.
Should’ve just been born somewhere else idiot
Freedom maxxer
nostr:npub1xnc64f432zx7pw4n7zrvf02mh4a4p7zej3gude52e92leqmw8ntqd43qnl relevant to your post about slavery contracts
sedm.org
get to work, faggots.
at scale, politics are just another entertainment program or a sport business like the NFL/WWE/UFC/etc.
yes you can call it a sport and pretend its a an essential part of life, but its really a show business.
the actors (politicians or athletes) are all in on it. they make a good living, and are incentivized to create rivalries because that's good for business.
the sponsors (companies, banks, lobbyists, etc.) want return on their investment, no matter what.
spectators/fans (common people) all pick their favorite side and cheer on it like their life depends on it: blue/red, right/left, dem/rep, etc.
they make it part of their identity: "My name is John and I'm a lifelong republican."
meanwhile, the actors invite each other to dinner after the show is over and go to vacation together every other week...
Calling it a sport is disrespectful to the consensual nature of sports. Sports don’t tax you to run their businesses or force you to engage with them.
But I get your point.
imo there is a clear distinction between a sport and the sport business.
sports we play for the sake of playing are what you are referring to. sports for the love of the game!
sports played competitively to make a living DO tax you to run their business and force you to engage with them.
novak djokovic wasn’t allowed to play in the Australian Open because he refused to take the jab 4 years ago.
do you think NFL QBs are freedom maximalists or do you think they must adhere to whatever the team owners and by proxy NFL execs require to adhere to? 😂
They have to follow the rules of the contract they signed but they’re not forced to sign that contract
Sorry man, I didn’t mean to spark up a debate. My intention was to add more perspective to your conversation using an analogy (imperfect yes, but still accurate). It seems like you’re looking to discredit the analogy.
And by the way, in sports the consensus rules are the rules of the game (field size, ball size, penalties, scoring system)…
The contract you sign when you join a league or a team within a league is more policy rules than consensus. example: what to say and not to say at a press conference…
Don’t apologize. We’ve both been respectful it’s all good haha
You’re completely right about everything. I’m just trying to emphasize the one difference is that you’re not forced to play in the NFL for example. You can play in the XFL. Or you can play a different sport. The government forces you to play whatever bs games and follow their retarded rules. You get me?
I'm with you when it comes to professional sports teams forcing public engagement, especially when they take government funding to build new stadiums.
By accepting taxpayer money, they’re effectively taxing the population without consent, which amounts to coercing us into supporting them (forced engagement).
However, I think I see the last point differently. It sounds like you're saying that anyone who works for someone else is unfree because they have to follow their employer’s rules. But doesn’t that overlook the employee’s choice in the matter? If someone voluntarily chooses to work for an employer and accepts the terms, isn’t that an exercise of freedom?
No one is forcing the quarterback to play in the league or for the team they signed with.
Novak Djokovic wasn’t forced to compete in the tournament, he simply said no, exercising his freedom to choose.
i hear you!
think the whole point of the sports analogy is that: the leaders of the “show” do whatever suits them at the end, doesnt really matter who you and I cheer for - at the end of the day the time we spent trying to convince each other which side is the better side, the owners enjoy the profits of the show (politics & nations at war, sports & rivalries)
All good points. I will add that the players have power in the dynamic though. It’s not just the owners with power. This is why the league continues to change. For example, the NFL has made a large effort to reduce the number of head injuries in the sport. This is better for the players and the league in general. The incentives align. So although it isn’t perfect, the league typically tends to improve for everyone involved.