“What�s the ikker here? … but it�s not coercion if people agree to it.”
I think thats the ikker
What do you mean by “people agree” if you mean a majority then that is what government is*. If you dont like our rules then like in HOA as you said “Anyone can just leave the pack at any time. Where�s the coercion there?”
You said “You would look into the HOA rules before buying a home, right? By buying it, you are agreeing to the rules.” Same is true when you (or your ancestors) immigrated here you look into US laws before settling here by living here you are agreeing to the rules
Why isnt a state or a larger country (like you I agree this distinction today is arbitrary) simply a large HOA?
(The only distrintion I can think of is, I’m not sure you should be bound by your parents’ immigration thats why I included “or inherited a home in HOA” but at least for an immigrant who willingly came here why is it wrong to have them follow the laws (including system in place to create new laws) that they agreed to follow by living here
* unless when you meant by “People agree” it has to be ALL people even if the bylaws stated that questions are decided by the majority that is inheritly amoral and wrong which is what I thought you were saying by “but I sort of reject the whole idea of �groups.�” but later you say “Yes, obviously, and so do you. If this imaginary HOA built into the contract that they can evict or fine people even for headphones, then I guess it wouldn�t make a difference in that universe…. it�s not coercion if people agree to it.” implying you are ok with the group trumping an individual.