[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody is forcing you to retain the citizenship you were born with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, unless you make a significant amount of money. Then the IRS will do everything in its power to prevent you from renouncing.

[ QUOTE ]
If you think the political ideology of another country is better, then move there.

[/ QUOTE ]

This presupposes that the government in question trumps the inviduals property rights. Target doesn't tell me to move outside of their jurisdiction if I wish to shop at Wal-Mart. In fact, I can patronize both without any conflict.

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to enjoy the prosperity that that liberal democracy has brought us, then you have to accept some of its coercive elements as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this is a self-contradictory statement, a self-evident statement, or a threat.

If I want to enjoy X, which is provided by Y, and Y also provides Z, then it's obvious that if I agree to Y that I am accepting both X and Z.

On the other hand, it's *not* obvious that I *must* accept Z in order to get X. I see no proof that you cannot get X without Z.

Z cannot be involuntarily imposed if X is voluntarily selected and X and Z are part of a package deal. Either I'm agreeing to X *and* Z, or I'm not. It can't be voluntary and involuntary at the same time. So the alternative in this case to avoid such a contradiction must be that X and Z are not inseperable.

On the other other hand, this could be a threat; "accept our terms or we will starve you to death."

Please clarify.