In reply to Egon Willighagen.

Thank you for replying Egon.

Democracy is in fact, immoral, precisely because people do not have a choice in wether or not to hand over money to the State, or to not participate in it.

Your understanding that the public has 'agreed' to pay the State to fund public research is wrong. The entire structure of Democracy is built on violence and coercion. In some countries, like Australia, it is even illegal to refuse to participate in voting. There can be no other description of this other than that it is immoral.

You do not have a choice to opt out of anything the State is doing, and if you try to, armed men come to your house to violently seize you and your property.

If society was purely voluntary and non violent, then none of this would be an issue, and scientists could then have a debate on the ethics of data release, privacy and all of the other important subjects outlined here.

As I say in my comment, this immorality stretches directly into the health of millions of people, as described in 'Against Intellectual Monopoly'. The irrational State monopoly on ideas granted to companies (Patents) keeps medicine out of the hands of people who need it, but also keeps ideas out of the labs of scientists who are trying to solve problems that have a cumulative positive effect on society.

These issues are very important. I know that they are difficult to accept at first, but after becoming acquainted with the ideas behind them, all rational, scientific minded people must come to the same conclusion about the true nature of the State, based only on the evidence.

See the books that IÂ recommendÂ in my comment to the owner of this blog.