Often I've heard that in a free society there would be no incentive to make sure other people besides you yourself have justice.
Given the extent of attention Kony got and the speed with which Treyvon's case was heard about nationally and protested, doesn't this present evidence at least that such ostracism/awareness is possible?
Now, I don't know the final verdict on either of these cases, but the point is - society doesn't appear unwilling to crack down on these people.
Imagine Kony trying to walk into a store in San Francisco to buy something.
Wheylous:Now, I don't know the final verdict on either of these cases, but the point is - society doesn't appear unwilling to crack down on these people.
If anything, a free society would yield responses faster and to a greater extent, as it would be without an institution, based on aggression, which seizes the means by which people could ameliorate the given situation. People would have more money to give to charities if it wasn't taxed away from them and there would be more of an incentive to lend a hand given the absence of a state already attempting to resolve the problem (problems usually caused, if not exacerbated, by its “social policies”). Also, the news would be more accurate, with greater competition, if there was an absence of a state-approved cartel of media outlets to report the news. But, yeah, Kony 2012 and Trayvon's murder provide empricial confirmations of these theories which may appeal to some.
If I had a cake and ate it, it can be concluded that I do not have it anymore. HHH