Originally Posted by roachboy

so what it looks like is that you, mojo, are comfortable with a state of emergency and its legal consequences, which would include the suspension of basic civil liberties? a state of war is a state of emergency, is it not?
you are also aware that the use and abuse of the state of emergency is an old favorite of authoritarian regimes that rise up from within whatever you prefer to call regime like the american....
this linkage---state of emergency and authoritarian rule--is worked out theoretically by carl schmitt (amongst others, but schmitt is the most prominent these days, for some reason)---it has a long history. even if you accept the arguments for suspension of civil liberties following from a state of emergency (which i have extreme trouble doing myself) you must be aware of the sorry history of this move and maybe on the basis of that regard the whole of it with suspicion.

or are you in fact not bothered by this?