I see it not as a violation of the non aggression principle.
Someone not talking to you in the way you want is not a violation.
For if the NAP was violated it would justify you using force to defend yourself.
And someone saying a bunch of words or flagging, does not justify that.
Example
If someone would say to me, I hate you or you are an ...... (fill in the blanks), not talking PC enough, or flagging me for whatever reason, he or she is not violating me or the non aggression principle.
Politeness has nothing to do with it. That is not what it's about.
I'm not addressing thoughts or what someone said to someone else, in this reply I'm just addressing the NAP and what it means and what not.
Hope you understand.
A genuine question.
Do you believe in hate speech? And would you justify leaders (what I call rulers) or groups to use violence to make people not talk in a certain way ,flag or express their opinion in a certain way?
Maybe you feel that way but you are not silenced. I can and do read flagged reply's ;)
You or I can of course always challenge or discuss others in their language use the power of disassociation and excommunication ourselves of someone we don't want to talk to. If enough people feel that way about language, it will happen.........just like that.
But I can not force someone with violence to be tolerant or nice to me that would not be tolerant of me. The NAP is about physical force. Not verbal, for if it was, the way someone feels about words would justify physical force. I believe in freedom of speech and with that of course freedom of association to boycott or disassociate.
I don't need or want a (religious) leader. (I don't believe in the "great man theory") You are of course free to pick a leader for yourself who will preach or teach, to people how they are suppose live according to you or him/her. Just like a Jehova witness can tell people they are suppose to live a certain way for everything to be like they want (heaven), but they can not force me to live that way.
I believe we grow just by living and talking or not talking, saying dumb things, seeing others saying dumb things, and we need that freedom to make mistakes and do dumb things.
Freedom, for me, is not an objective to be gained through this or that ideology (or collectively) in the future.
It is now and here within me, and what I DO in the physical world and in my relationships (in reality) is more important than an ideology or a plan (what I SAY) and how everyone else needs to listen to me or the thought leader I want them to follow to make the world how I want it to be.
I'm a bit busy and replying in between, and my native language is not english so maybe some words might be not completely correct or I said something twice or so. ;)
Thanks for the reply.
Peace :)
Group mentality is not a good thing, and being aware to not become part of one and following all it's dogma's is a good thing too i.m.o.
I try to look at one individual at the time, and what that person does.
So even "the group of people that run the world" is not to be hated as a whole, by the people of "the other (opposite) group".
That would be the divide and conquer game all over again. (making a boogie man and a great man)
It's better (for me as an individual), to discover who is doing good deeds and who is pretending to do good deeds, one individual at the time and call out the ones who try to rule me or someone else, through their deeds.
Hey thanks for the conversation.
Peace.