Do you trust Proton?
For starters, such a question is coming at it from the wrong perspective. One should have trust in the software -- if such sowtware is, indeed, trustworthy -- and not in the entity that created it. If one seeks privacy, then they should be of the mindset that every entity is malevolent.
It matters because American culture currently prefers everyone to have a college degree as opposed to any other type of education. [...] If this avenue was cut off then the attitude of the public would change to allow other means of education.
I completely agree that our favoring of, or requiring of post-secondary degrees for employement is an important cultural issue. I don't agree, however, that the solution is to make the provision of loans illegal -- illegalization is rarely anything else than a band-aid on top of a gaping wound. An argument could be made that the government provision of student loans should be stopped (in countries where that occurs e.g. Canada), but I don't think the solution is to simply make all student loans illegal.
and then yoke them into debt for the rest of their lives.
Hm, that is an assumption. There's a few issues with that statement. The total cost of one's loans are directly related to the cost of the post-secondary institution that they decide to attend. There is little reason to go to a very expensive institution. I do understand that some employers are elitist in that they won't hire anybody outside of an ivy league school, but I would wager that that issue is not very prevalent -- the free market should take up the slack. Furthermore, one's ability to get out of such debt is related to the income that they expect from employment after attaining their degree, as well as their level of monetary responsibility, and savviness. If one decides to blindly go into student debt for studies that will offer little in return, that is one's own risk to take. You must also not forget that there is no requirement that one must do white-collar work. Trades do not require such degrees, and are just as well-paying, if not better.
I presume that anywhere where interest-free loans are offered, they are offered by that country's government. Canada, for example, as of April 1st 2023, offers federal student loans interest-free. Depending on the province, some may not have interest on provincial loans, as well.
What issue are you looking to solve? You state that you believe people are able to seek out, and attain their education independently through resources like the internet. So why would it matter if there are alternatives that cost money which one can pay, and receive loans for?
[...] he wasn’t setting any precedent with his ruling because he was just applying the existing text history and tradition test established by the Scotus in Bruen.
Indeed. It is rather unfortunate.
That said, the use of fallacious arguments is the tool by which one gaslights. They aren’t mutually exclusive.
Fair point in that they aren't mutually exclusive, but I would disagree that logical fallacies are then only means used to gaslight. Gaslighting is the action by which an abuser sews doubt in one's own judgement, and beliefs -- that can be done any number of ways.
When you use fallacies intentionally to convince someone that their basic and true point is wrong… That’s a form of gaslight.
Gaslighting isn't necessarily attempting to convince someone that what they believe is wrong, it's meant to cause someone to question reality, their own sanity, beliefs, memories, etc. This can of course be used to sway average public opinion in the direction of a desired agenda, but it's not trying to convince change in one's opinion, I would argue.
The term doesn’t need to only apply to relationships. Political gaslights have become increasingly prevalent through social media.
Oh, for sure. A simple example would be the official denial of a true event's occurence.
I would say that the following is the main point of issue:
[...] ruling Friday that it lacked a historical basis and is therefore unconstitutional.
Deciding on laws based on tradition, and historical context has potential to be quite damaging -- these decisions should be made based on principle.
The latter raises the question for me: What does it really take for a society to function well? What is the core, what is the essence that is sufficient to enable everyone to live the best possible life?
The answer to this necessitates a high degree of contextual dependence. It depends on what one believes is the purpose of the state, and what they think is a "well functioning society". To answer such a question with certainty, I would argue, is to believe in moral absolutism, rather than moral relativism -- to be completely fair, however, I don't think that I would say that libertarianism is mutually exclusive with moral absolutism, but it does change the framework of the question that you are asking. I would argue that libertarianism, itself doesn't provide exact answers to such questions, but is, instead, a collection of ideals that seek to maximize one's level of freedom under the state. True, it can be said that, for it to be inline with liberalism, it must have, at the bare minimum, an acknowledgement of one's fundamental rights, but I would not go so far as to argue that this is the sole answer to "What is a properly functioning society?", or "What is sufficient to ensure that everyone lives their best possible life?". That being said, the best answer to the latter, I would argue, does seem to be the existence of a competitive free market.
Could someone who is downvoting explain their rationale for doing so? It's of little constructive benefit to downvote something because of simple disagreement.
Ok, seems fine.
What is the context behind this post?
Are you referring to email?