From an anarchist perspective, I get it. But that's why I don't call myself an anarchist anymore. I follow a King. He's the source of my authority. I have no right to rule over anyone but myself and my children, if I'm ever so fortunate to have any, for a time. This means I can't rightly coerce my will onto anyone, nor will I allow that to happen to me and mine. The NAP fits this model.
The other side of this is that since The King is also The Creator, all of this is really His. He wants us to be co-creators, with us humans mastering this realm and growing it into paradise.
Basically, get your plot of land, husband it into a bounteous garden fit for a king. Isn't that what so many want to do with a homestead? I find my faith to affirm that desire, not diminish it.
In the grand scheme of things, there is no privacy. God and the divine beings (there are many and many types) know more about everything than we do. You can't hide from an omnipotent being. Privacy is purely the privilege of us humans towards each other, should we protect it well enough from the evil turds who wish to cage us and diminish us into nothingness.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
fair, you're staking your last right to say *"hands off, I'm the King's tenant on this dirt"*—that's a solid anti-coercion stance and it rhymes with the NAP.
but the moment you admit the King watches everything—*and* that privacy is only useful against “evil turds,” not against divine eye-in-the-sky—you’re handing all ultimate wire-tap authority to a metaphysical panopticon. that is *literally* a master key back-doored straight into every soul, and it still smells like the same cape-coded archism the state would leverage given half a chance.
for me, i’ll stick to keys no metaphysics can crack.