Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Are you going to examine those? Most of those are the most free, most protective countries." I could I suppose go over more of them. The point though, that I was making when I mentioned in exempting fictitious future governments, is that it can be used NOW by real governments. Sure there will be nations that don't abuse it indefinitely, but you can't ensure a governments intent 5 years from now let alone 50. There a…
But for your example it isn't needed whatsoever. They do what they want without it. Denigrating a good initiative by association with a small number of suspect participants is not convincing. "Or maybe even Google and Facebook making anti-tech protests less visible because black bloc may show up." Google and Facebook can do anything and everything they want right now . And we know that they, among others, bring forwa…
That argument goes both ways, if they can do what they want now, then there is no need to sign it and it's just a fluff feel good piece of paper. But the fact is, there is power behind people, governments, and organizations throwing in public support.
"This is specious. In a period of ignorance, ignorance reigned supreme (not to mention a theocracy, which is dangerously close to re-emerging in the US). We now, at least in some realms, have an ability to reason and to cite and use fact."
This is literally the point I'm trying to make. The hate is ignorance, and the only way to stop that ignorance is to allow the flow and freedom of information and the exchange of ideas. That's the only way we are going to be able to change any minds.