That’s an enormous difference. “I’m going to take your house and you can pound sand” is much more objectionable than “I would like your house and will offer you fair compensation, which can implicitly be negotiated.”
Note that the latter is what governments around the world do with eminent domain, and only right-wing cranks think that’s a fighting matter.
I can’t speak for the world, but often in the US, imminent domain is often used to transfer land to wealthy corps at a fraction of the actual value with no negotiation. Other times, it’s used to destroy minority communities. If you think that makes me a right-wing chud, I’m not sure what to say to you.
When you definitely know what you’re talking about
Obviously I’m not talking about the clearly objectionable misuses of eminent domain. If I say only chuds have a problem with seatbelt laws you wouldn’t start talking about how cops misuse seatbelt laws to pull over black people at a higher rate than white people; all laws can be abused. The point is that the concept behind the law is not some crazy government overreach.
Getting back to the discussion, a land swap is not something so objectionable that your country has an excuse to go running to the Nazis for help. Especially when the threat of the Nazis is the reason for the land swap in the first place.
That makes zero difference. They were still demanding land from another state under threat of invasion.
That’s an enormous difference. “I’m going to take your house and you can pound sand” is much more objectionable than “I would like your house and will offer you fair compensation, which can implicitly be negotiated.”
Note that the latter is what governments around the world do with eminent domain, and only right-wing cranks think that’s a fighting matter.
I can’t speak for the world, but often in the US, imminent domain is often used to transfer land to wealthy corps at a fraction of the actual value with no negotiation. Other times, it’s used to destroy minority communities. If you think that makes me a right-wing chud, I’m not sure what to say to you.
When you definitely know what you’re talking about
Obviously I’m not talking about the clearly objectionable misuses of eminent domain. If I say only chuds have a problem with seatbelt laws you wouldn’t start talking about how cops misuse seatbelt laws to pull over black people at a higher rate than white people; all laws can be abused. The point is that the concept behind the law is not some crazy government overreach.
Getting back to the discussion, a land swap is not something so objectionable that your country has an excuse to go running to the Nazis for help. Especially when the threat of the Nazis is the reason for the land swap in the first place.
“You didn’t proofread after autocorrect, so I need to insult you.” Stopped reading after that. Have a good one.