So far, I got an answer from Papal Zouave History🇻🇦 @PapalZouaveUS.

I may bring him here as he is open to learning about Nostr before making a decision.

No news from The Chivalry Guild as of yet.

Same. If the gov't didn't take 25-35% of our income, it'd be a lot more possible. Also, if they didn't continually devalue our default currency.

Hot take: children should be the default retirement plan.

If you do not contribute to the future of society, why should society contribute to yours?

PS: Children are social security; what the gov't calls social security is actually a scam.

That is where I am heading to. Hence why I have asked some people to allow me to bring their content here until they make their decisions to join in.

Papal Zouaves

The Chivalry Guild

ドラ課長二世（ロザリオの月）

@dorachan2se

and some others.

Weak justice systems lead to vigilante justice.

Happy Friday!

Breath some air, touch some grass.

I agree, and I hope to see more as more people join! Feel free to participate :)

Of course but this war talk is rhetoric in the end, a way among many to present the issue. And if we are to be fair and composed we should consider it from multiple perspectives. That’s why it’s important to be extremely careful with how we frame a problem and therefore how we justify the proposed solution.

In any case, it’s always very stimulating to chat with you! 🤙🏻

I understand and part of me wants to agree. But that leads me to think about many things. About the right to life, when (if anytime) it is appropriate to take one’s rights away (prison, execution), which I think that I constantly debate with myself.

I don’t believe in the Virtuous State, and so I can’t bring myself to defend any collective or individual in power having the prerogative of taking a life. But then again, some crimes are so egregious that they surely must justify the death penalty… Being consistent with your values and ideals is hard and a constant work in progress.

That also reminds me of an argument I’ve seen that libertarians cannot be against cancel culture, since according to the non-aggression principle and the right to life refusing access to problematic individuals may be the only solution to deal with them (conflating that with cancel culture is a bit facetious imo, but I guess the author was trying to be provocative).

So yeah, many things to think about 😅