Does anyone have a good view on where the idea that we shouldn't oppose or try to stop people from doing terrible things, only compromise with them started? It's been getting a real foothold, and is especially damaging in this last decade.
In short with the idea of constitutions and civil rights.
In a barbaric society everyone can do, oppose, and stop what ever they currently have the power to do, oppose, and stop.
But (starting with the Greeks?) we now have a basic social agreement, that within certain borders we don’t stop the activities of each other, and those borders are put down with the core laws of the land.
So there may be people thinking that eating meat is a terrible thing, but as long as it’s not against the LAW, then they shouldn’t stop other people’s pursuit of happiness in eating a steak.
So yes, while I support many grassroots push for change, then "having many people agreeing with me" doesn’t give anybody the right to
stop others.
Unless an outright (by definition illegal) revolution is called to change the LAW, then we all have to compromise and just influence each other.
In theory democracy should make it easier to change the LAW to match the current will of the people, but as this thread suggests, then it feels like an uphill battle.