October 16, 2019

USA: Democrat Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib Will Endorse Bernie Sanders For President Who Wants 97 Percent Tax Rate On The 400 Richest Americans.

Apparently "Progressive" now means Marxist Communism and Islamism the two most oppressive ideologies on the planet. Both of these ideologies want to regress civilization back to the stone age. They both hate Western Civilization, especially America and Capitalism. (emphasis mine)
Newsweek
written by Christina Zhao
Wednesday October 16, 2018

Democratic congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, three of the most influential voices among young progressive liberals, will all reportedly endorse Senator Bernie Sanders in his 2020 bid for the presidency.

In an article published on Tuesday evening, The Washington Post reported that two unnamed sources with knowledge of the plan said Ocasio-Cortez, 30, will join Sanders, 78, at a campaign rally on Saturday to announce the surprise endorsement. During the fourth Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday, Sanders revealed that a "special guest" would join him in New York. "We're looking forward to Saturday," Corbin Trent, a spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez, told the Post.

Although Sanders' campaign declined to comment on the report, another person with knowledge of the move also confirmed Ocasio-Cortez's endorsement.

Roughly half an hour after the Post's report was released, CNN politics reporter Greg Krieg revealed that congresswomen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib will also be endorsing Sanders in New York on Saturday. The "Bernie's Back" Saturday rally will be held in Queens, near Ocasio-Cortez' congressional district and hometown, according to the Post.

"New: Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib will also endorse Sanders, according to source. AOC will, as @daveweigel and @WaPoSean first reported, will [sic] do the same on Saturday in NYC," Krieg tweeted.

Omar confirmed her endorsement for Sanders in a statement issued late on Tuesday evening.

"Bernie is leading a working class movement to defeat Donald Trump that transcends generation, ethnicity, and geography," she said. "That is why he is fighting to cancel all student debt. That is why he is fighting to make all school meals universal. That is why he is fighting for a humane immigration policy that treats immigrants as human beings and not criminals. And it's why Bernie is fighting to end our forever wars and truly prioritize human rights in our foreign policy–no matter who violates them."

Omar added: "And it's why I believe Bernie Sanders is the best candidate to take on Donald Trump in 2020."

The three young liberal congresswoman are all part of the so-called "Squad," a group of four progressive lawmakers elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections. All four squad members are women of color and under 50 years old. It is unclear whether Ayanna Pressley, the fourth member of the group, will also back Sanders. Her name was not mentioned in any of the reports.

News of the new endorsements comes two weeks after Sanders suffered an unfortunate heart attack, which appeared to disrupt the momentum he has built on the campaign trail. The support from his fellow progressives will likely boost the senator's popularity among young voters at a time when he has experienced some decline in the polls.

Prior to being elected into Congress, Ocasio-Cortez volunteered for Sanders during his 2016 presidential campaign. When the congresswoman was elected last year, Sanders praised her long-shot campaign, saying: "What she did is talk about the real issues."

๐Ÿ‘‡ MUST WATCH ๐Ÿ‘‡
Muslim: "We don't accept churches. Behind your back we hate you so much. You guys are so blind. When we come to your countries we are not coming because we are friends. In our hearts, in our houses, we talk about you guys like you are our biggest enemies. Allah says in the Quran that the Christians and the Jews are your enemies."

Interviewer: So are you planning to come to America and do like a terrorist attack?

Muslim: We have people already there. We are not going to attack. You know what we're going to do? We're going to get into your government. That's what we're going to do. And look right now who you elected. You elected a Somalian woman as one of your servants, one of your ministers. And look 85% Minnesota are Somalians. And soon it will not be 85%, it will be 100%. Soon, they will bring us over and we will come to take over your whole country. Do you know what Christian people do? They hide under the floor. Do you know why? We will never accept them as human beings. EVER!

Interview: Look at what you just said. You just said that they hide under the floor yet they are Somalian.

Muslim: You are kaffir (non-Muslim). You are allowed to be lied to.

The antisemitism surrounding Rashida Tlaib

The Brains Behind AOC Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

USA: Leftist Cancel Culture Is Deeply Offended Because Actress Gina Rodriguez Best Known For Starring In 'Jane the Virgin' Posted Video Of Herself Singing Lyrics To Famous Song On Instagram.

Yahoo News
written by Susie Byrne
Wednesday October 16, 2019

Gina Rodriguez has released a second apology for her use of the N-word after her first one was widely criticized.

The Jane the Virgin alum, who is of Puerto Rican descent, posted a video to social media showing herself singing along to the 1996 Fugees track “Ready or Not,” including the line, “Fronting n****s give me heebie-jeebies.” Rodriguez, who previously faced accusations about being “anti-black,” faced immediate backlash, so she deleted the video and issued an apology.

But that apology — “I am sorry if I offended anyone by singing along to The Fugees, to a song I love that I grew up on” — wasn’t well-received. She was slammed for not actually apologizing for using the slur. The apology was called “weak,” “patronizing” and “disingenuous.”

So early Wednesday, Rodriguez apologized again in a statement shared on Instagram. In it, she wrote she was “deeply sorry for the pain I caused.” She also acknowledged, “The word I sang carries with it a legacy of hurt and pain that I cannot imagine.” And added, “I have serious learning and growing to do.”

Her entire apology read: “In song or in real life, the words that I spoke should not have been spoken. I grew up loving the Fugees and Lauryn Hill. I thoughtlessly sang along to the lyrics of a favorite song, and even worse, I posted it. The word I sang carries with it a legacy of hurt and pain that I cannot imagine. Whatever consequences I face for my actions today, none will be more hurtful than the personal remorse I feel. Watching my own video playing back at me has shaken me to my core. It is humiliating that this has to be a public lesson but it is indeed a much deserved lesson. I feel so deeply protective and responsible to the community of color but I have let this community down. I have some serious learning and growing to do and I am so deeply sorry for the pain I have caused.”

Rodriguez turned off the comments for her apology post after being slammed left and right on social media the day before, which led to her trending on Twitter.
๐Ÿ‘‡ THIS IS A TASTE OF WHAT YOU'VE MAINSTREAMED ๐Ÿ‘‡
๐Ÿ‘‡ THIS IS WHAT YOU'VE GLORIFIED AND MAGNIFIED ๐Ÿ‘‡
๐Ÿ‘‡ THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE CHILDREN BELIEVING IS COOL AND ACCEPTABLE AND WANT TO EMULATE ๐Ÿ‘‡
๐Ÿ‘‡ THESE ARE LYRICS CHILDREN ARE MEMORIZING ๐Ÿ‘‡


Tyga - Taste (Official Video) ft. Offset with 842 MILLION VIEWS

Trinidad James - All Gold Everything 38 MILLION VIEWS

October 15, 2019

I'd Like To Share A Twitter Exchange I Had With A Person Offended I Agreed With Another Person I Will Never Vote Democrat Again After Watching Trump Supporters Assaulted Leaving A Rally.

UPDATE 10/15/19 at 10:22pm: Added tweets below.

Look at Ilhan Omar smiling when ask, "Will you condemn Antifa?"
UPDATE 10/16/19 at 5:32pm: Added tweet below.

USA: Statues of Christopher Columbus Vandalized In Multiple Cities Across America Amid Continued Calls To Change The Name Of The Federal Holiday. This Is So Wrong. It's NOT OKAY To Destroy Property.


ABC 10 News published Oct 14, 2019: A statue of Christopher Columbus standing at a Chula Vista park was vandalized on Columbus Day, police said. 
The Marxist Leftist groups who destroyed these historic statues passed out fliers that read, "This is our land. This is our fight." My gosh, they hate Western civilization.  They don't have a right to destroy property that offends them. I hope the police can identify whoever did this. They should all be arrested. (emphasis mine)

ABC News
written by Matt Zarrell
Monday October 14, 2019

Statues of Christopher Columbus were vandalized amid continued calls to change the name of the federal holiday honoring the Italian explorer.

Red paint, along with messages about genocide, were sprayed on landmarks in both San Francisco and Providence, Rhode Island, on Sunday.

A sign that read "Stop celebrating genocide" was placed at the foot of the Columbus statue, located in the Elmwood neighborhood of Providence, ABC Providence affiliate WLNE reported. The statue was covered with red paint.

The statue was also vandalized in 2010 and 2017, according to the station.

In San Francisco, a Columbus statue near Coit Tower was also sprayed with red paint. Graffiti at the bottom read, "Destroy all monuments of genocide and kill all colonizers." Supervisors in the city voted to change the holiday to Indigenous Peoples Day in January 2018, ABC San Francisco station KGO reported.

Police said they're investigating the incident, KGO reported.
Columbus Day observes the anniversary of the explorer's arrival on what is now the Bahamas on Oct. 12, 1492. Many Italian Americans honor their heritage on Columbus Day with parades and festivals.

However, in recent years, indigenous people and others have rallied against the holiday, claiming Columbus enslaved and murdered many indigenous people. There is now a growing movement to reclaim the day in honor of indigenous people and their unique cultures and contributions.

At least eight states and 130 cities have legally changed the holiday to Indigenous Peoples Day, including Wisconsin, where Gov. Tony Evers signed an executive order on Oct. 7.

Other states are attempting to find a middle ground. Earlier this year, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Sitt signed legislation recognizing the day as both Native Americans Day and Columbus Day.

Some have replaced Columbus Day with other titles related to the Native American community. Summit City, Ohio, selected "First Peoples Day" and Hawaii switched to "Discoverers Day."

The city council in Washington, D.C., passed emergency legislation last week to rename the federal holiday. For the change to become permanent, it requires congressional approval within 225 days, according to the city council.

NETHERLANDS: A Muslim Man From Afghanistan Who Stabbed Two American Tourists In Amsterdam 'To Protect The Prophet Mohammed' Was Handed Down 26 Year And 8 month Prison Sentence.

The Daily Mail, UK
written by Ryan Fahey
Monday October 14, 2019

Dutch judges on Monday sentenced an Afghan man to 26 years and eight months in jail for stabbing two American tourists at Amsterdam's Central station in a terror attack.

The 20-year-old, identified only as Jawed S., was also ordered at Amsterdam district court to pay almost £2.6 million in damages following the August 31, 2018 assault.

One of the two victims remains in a wheelchair after the attack, which sent midday commuters at the city's busiest station into a panic. Police shot Jawed S. in the lower body before arresting him.

'He never showed any regret or remorse during his trial, repeatedly saying he would do the same again if his religion was insulted,' the judges said.

'The risk of a repeat offence is therefore very high and the court finds it essential that society is protected against him as long as possible.'

During his trial at a heavily-fortified courtroom, Jawed S. said he travelled to the Netherlands from Germany to 'protect the Prophet Mohammed.'

He also mentioned anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders, and his knife assault came a day after the far-right MP announced he was cancelling moves to stage a cartoon competition to caricature the Prophet Mohammed.

Dutch prosecutors charged Jawed S. with two counts of attempted murder with a terrorist aim and judges found all accusations against him had been proven.

'He (Jawed S.) came to the Netherlands to kill as many people as possible,' the judges said.

The wheelchair-bound victim has a severe spinal cord injury, while the second American man was stabbed in the right chest and arm.

'Despite the fact that the threat was short-lived, it had a devastating effect on the two Americans and their spouses,' the judges said.

The wife of one victim also had a miscarriage two months after the attack.

'The question whether she'll ever have children remains,' the judges said.
I'm sharing the article below because it has additional information the article I shared above doesn't have. His application for asylum was rejected in Germany. This is why it's good to read articles from different sources to get a better understanding of the whole picture. Like the article below doesn't mention the miscarriage, nor the severe spinal cord injury. (emphasis mine)
The Washington Post
written by AP staff
Monday October 14, 2019

AMSTERDAM — A Dutch court on Monday convicted an Afghan asylum-seeker and sentenced him to nearly 27 years imprisonment for stabbing two American tourists in a terror attack at Amsterdam’s main railway station.

The 20-year-old man, identified by Dutch authorities as Jawed S, was shot by police shortly after he stabbed two 38-year-old American men at Amsterdam Central station on Aug. 31 last year.

Both victims survived but one was left partially paralyzed by the attack, Amsterdam District Court said in its written judgment.

The court convicted Jawed S. of attempted murder with a terrorist motive and sentenced him to the maximum possible 26 years and eight months.

It ruled that he traveled by train to the Netherlands from Germany, where his application for asylum was rejected, to avenge what he perceived as insults to Islam and did not know his victims were Americans.

During his trial, he “never showed any remorse and in fact repeatedly said he would do the same thing again if his religion were insulted,” the court said in a statement.

๐Ÿ‘‡ IN OTHER RELATED NEWS ๐Ÿ‘‡


Ruptly published December 8, 2017: Netherlands: A Muslim man with Palestinian flag smashes windows of Kosher restaurant in Amsterdam. A Muslim man waving a Palestinian flag smashed the windows of a Kosher restaurant with a wooden stick in Amsterdam on Thursday morning. The incident happened soon after US President Donald Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

BBC News published March 18, 2019: A gunman has opened fire inside a tram and at several other locations in the Dutch city of Utrecht, authorities say. Several people have been injured and one is feared to have died, media reports say. Police say the gunman is still at large. Trains and trams have stopped running and schools have been asked to keep their doors closed. Counter-terrorism police reportedly say the shooting "appears to be a terrorist attack". Dutch anti-terrorism co-ordinator Pieter-Jaap Aalbersberg said all efforts were now focused on catching the gunman. He also said there could be more than one perpetrator.

The Wall Street Journal
written by Valentina Pop
March 18, 2019

Three people were killed and others wounded in Utrecht attack authorities were treating as terrorism.

Dutch police arrested a Turkish-born suspect believed to be the gunman who killed at least three people and wounded several others on a tram in the city of Utrecht, an attack authorities were treating as a possible act of terrorism.
I am emphasizing that he is a Turkish-born Muslim terror suspect who is accused of killing 3 people and injuring several others on a tram. (emphasis mine)
Police identified the man as 37-year-old Gรถkmen Tanis and said he had a criminal record, but wouldn’t comment on whether he had been previously flagged as a terror suspect.

“Evidence points to terrorism, but we can’t exclude other motives,” Dutch prosecutor Rutger Jeuken said at a press conference in Utrecht on Monday. He added that possible accomplices were also being investigated, with one person having been taken in for questioning during several house raids carried out earlier in the day. A second suspected accomplice was taken into custody late Monday, police said.

Mr. Tanis’s family told Turkish news agency Anadolu that he shot a relative and others who tried to help that person, as part of a family dispute.

Police published pictures taken from surveillance-camera footage and showing the suspect a few moments before the shooting occurred, according to the time stamp on the images taken inside the tram.

The suspect is believed to have fled the scene after hijacking a red Renault Clio, which was found by police two hours later and a few miles north, said Rob van Bree, police chief of operations for central Netherlands. Mr. Tanis was arrested near where the car was found.

Utrecht Mayor Jan van Zanen said three people died and five were injured, three of whom were in critical condition.

A witness told Dutch public broadcaster NOS that the attacker shouted “Allahu akbar,” Arabic for “God is great.”

In recent years, the Netherlands had been spared the kinds of terror attacks in France, Belgium, Germany and the U.K. carried out by Islamic State or terrorists it inspired.

Counterterrorism measures, surveillance and deradicalization programs have been stepped up in the Netherlands since the murder of Theo van Gogh, an anti-Islam filmmaker killed in broad daylight in 2004. His murderer, a Dutch-Moroccan terrorist, is serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole.

Last year, Dutch authorities foiled three terror plots, in cooperation with neighboring countries. In one of the cases, three people were arrested after their DNA was found on guns at a hideout linked to the 2016 Brussels terror attacks.

FRANCE: 5 French Muslim Women Were Handed Down Between 5 And 30 Years Prison Sentence For Trying To Detonate A Car Bomb Near Notre-Dame Cathedral In Paris In 2016.

BBC News
written by Staff
Tuesday October 15, 2019

Five French women have been sentenced to between five and 30 years in jail for trying to detonate a car bomb near Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris in 2016.

The case is said to be the first to involve a group of women attempting to stage an Islamist attack in France.

They failed to ignite half a dozen gas canisters placed in the vehicle.
Thank God they failed to blow up this historic monument. That's what Islamist like to do. Especially destroying Christian Churches and Jewish Synagogues worldwide. (emphasis mine)
Inรจs Madani, Ornella Gilligmann, Sarah Hervouรซt, Amel Sakaou and Samia Chalel, now aged between 22 and 42, are all converts to Islam.

Madani, who posed as a male Islamist militant to recruit women for the Islamic State (IS) group, was given 30 years, while Gilligmann, a married mother of three, was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Hervouรซt and Sakaou were given 20 years each, while Chalel received five years for helping Madani hide after the failed attack.

Madani's lawyer described the sentence as "an excessively harsh punishment", given there had been no deaths nor injuries as a result of the failed attack.

Prosecutors had requested life imprisonment for four of the women.

How did the bomb plot unfold?

On 4 September 2016, police were alerted to an abandoned grey Peugeot 607 vehicle parked near the cathedral, which is located in one of Paris's busiest tourist locations.

The car's licence plates had been removed and its hazard lights were flashing.

Inside, officers found half a dozen gas canisters, three jerry cans of diesel and a half-smoked cigarette. The contents of the vehicle had been doused in fuel, but the cigarette had failed to ignite it, police said.

Investigators said the bomb attempt would probably have been successful had it not been for "the wrong choice of fuel", which was difficult to light.

The discovery prompted an urgent police search.

The car was found to belong to Madani's father and fingerprints belonging to Madani and Gilligmann were collected from the inside.

Did the women act on their own?

Madani, 22, was arrested a few days later at an apartment in a Paris suburb along with two other defendants, Hervouรซt and Sakaou.

The trio put up a fight, brandishing knives. Hervouรซt stabbed one officer in the shoulder, and Madani was shot in the leg while charging at another.

Gilligmann was arrested in southern France on 6 September.

Police said they found a handwritten pledge of allegiance to IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi inside Madani's purse.

The women are suspected of planning the bomb attack on the instructions of Rashid Kassim, a so-called handler for IS who was based in Syria at the time. Kassim is thought to have been killed in Iraq in 2017 and was sentenced in absentia to life in jail by the French court that convicted the women.

France has suffered a series of attacks in recent years by jihadists who have declared allegiance to IS.

In November 2015, 130 people were killed and many more were injured in co-ordinated suicide bombings and mass shootings around Paris.

On 14 July 2016, dozens of people were killed, including children, when a lorry ploughed into a large crowd watching a fireworks display in Nice, southern France, to mark the Bastille Day holiday.

USA: Six People Were Killed In A Mass Shooting Between Rival Drug Gangs In Rรญo Piedras Housing Project In Puerto Rico And Gunfire Left Two People Dead A Day Earlier. 129 Murders Year To Date.

The Washington Times
written by AP staff
Tuesday October 15, 2019

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — Puerto Rico’s governor called an emergency meeting Tuesday after six people were killed in a mass shooting in a San Juan housing project and gunfire left two people dead a day earlier in the island’s north.

Automatic weapon fire and screams could be heard in videos circulating on social media of Monday’s shootout at the Rรญo Piedras project. A police statement said the violence left five men and one woman dead. It followed the killing of two people Sunday in the city of Guaynabo.

The brazen murders led Gov. Wanda Vรกzquez to convene a gathering of her security team, led by public security chief Elmer Romรกn and justice secretary Dennise Longo Quiรฑones.

After Tuesday’s meeting, Romรกn said the National Guard would not be activated because a police reform requires officers to have training that Guard members don’t have. He said increased air and land patrols were discussed, along with reinforcing social programs.

“We’re going to see more patrols while this case is clarified,” he said. “There will be security and control.”

Officials said a patrol assigned to the Rio Piedras residence was not there at the time of Monday’s shooting but at a nearby housing project.

The justice secretary said three prosecutors had been sent to the scene.

“This is a complex crime scene,” Longo said. “We need the time and space to carry out an exhaustive and thoughtful investigation.”

The spate of crimes adds to Puerto Rico’s problems, which include a prolonged recession, a devastating hurricane in 2017 and a political crisis that led to the ousting of the island’s governor. According to Puerto Rico’s police, there have been 129 murders in the capital so far this year compared to 106 over the same period last year.

October 14, 2019

Personal Autonomy

This picture has nothing to do with the message below. Or does it? I'm sharing this picture with you because it's a whimsical colorful stone pathway design that appeals to my taste. You may be appalled by it. But that's okay. You don't have to like it, and no one is forcing you to like it. At the same time, I don't expect you to force your dislike for my taste upon me. I'm not going to change it to make you feel good. After all, you wouldn't want someone to do that to you, right? Do you want someone to tell you how to dress, how to think, how to express yourself, how to live and then threaten you when you refuse to do as they say? I hope not. So why would you want to do that to me? or anyone else for that matter who doesn't agree with you, who doesn't think like you?

Personal Autonomy
[source: Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

Without question, the majority of contemporary work on autonomy has centered on analyses of the nature and normativity of personal autonomy. Personal autonomy (also referred to as ‘individual autonomy’) refers to a psychological property, the possession of which enables agents to reflect critically on their natures, preferences and ends, to locate their most authentic commitments, and to live consistently in accordance with these in the face of various forms of internal and external interference. Personally autonomous agents are said to possess heightened capacities for self-control, introspection, independence of judgment, and critical reflection; and to this extent personal autonomy is often put forth as an ideal of character or a virtue, the opposite of which is blind conformity, or not ‘being one’s own person.’

As mentioned above, personal autonomy has an essential relation to authenticity: the personally autonomous agent is the agent who is effective in determining her life in accordance with her authentic self. Personal autonomy is thus constituted, on the one hand, by a cluster of related capacities (often termed ‘authenticity conditions’), centered on identifying one’s authentic nature or preferences and, on the other hand, by a cluster of capacities (often termed ‘competency conditions’) that are centered on being able effectively to live in accordance with these throughout one’s life in the face of various recalcitrant foreign influences. These capacities may be possessed singly or in unison, and often require a considerable amount of life experience to assume robust forms.

One of the most intractable problems surrounding personal autonomy concerns the analysis of the authentic self (the ‘self’ in ‘self-determination’, as it were). Some philosophers have claimed that no such self exists; and indeed, some philosophers claim that no self exists at all (for an overview of these problems, see Friedman 2003 and Mackenzie & Stoljar 2000). Most philosophers accept the possibility of the authentic self at least as a working hypothesis, however, and concentrate attention on the question of how authenticity is secured by an agent. The most popular and influential account is based on the work of Harry Frankfurt and Gerald Dworkin. According to their ‘hierarchical’ account, agents validate the various commitments (beliefs, values, desires, and so forth) that constitute their selves as their own by a process of reflective endorsement. On this account, agents are said to possess first-order and second-order volitions. Our first-order volitions are what we want; and our second-order volitions are what we want to want. According to the hierarchical model, our first-order desires, commitments, and so on are authentic when they are validated by being in harmony with our second-order volitions: that is, when we want what we want to want.

Following from this model, an agent is autonomous in relation to a given object when the agent is able to determine her first-order volitions (and corresponding behavior) by her second-order volitions. A simple example may help to illustrate the model. Say that I am a smoker. Although I enjoy lighting up, I do not reflectively endorse my smoking; I desire it, but I do not want to desire it. On the hierarchical model, smoking is not an aspect of my authentic self, because I do not reflectively endorse it; and to the extent that I am unable to change my habits, I am not autonomous in relation to smoking. Conversely, if I can bring my first-order volitions into harmony (or identity) with my second-order volition, then my desire is authentic because it is reflectively endorsed; and to the extent that I can mold my behavior in accordance with my reflective will, I am autonomous in relation to smoking. Persons who possess the requisite capacities to form authentic desires and effectively to generally live in accordance with them are autonomous agents according to this model (see Frankfurt 1971, 1999 and Dworkin 1988).

The hierarchical model remains–in outline, at least–the leading account of authenticity undergirding most contemporary accounts of personal autonomy, although it has been attacked on many fronts. The primary objection tendered against this account is ‘the problem of origins.’ As we have seen, authentic selfhood as reflective endorsement holds that my authentic self is the self that I reflectively ratify: the self that I endorse as expressing, in a deep sense, who I fundamentally am or wish to be. The problem of origins arises when one attempts to explain how this act of reflective endorsement actually constitutes a break from other-determination (that is, from foreign influence). For, could it not be the case that what appears to me to be an independent act of reflective endorsement is itself conditioned by other-determining factors and therefore ultimately an other-determined act? If this is the case, then it doesn’t seem that the possession of autonomy or the making of autonomous choices is possible. In short, the problem is how to sustain an account of self-determination that is not threatened by the pervasive effects of other-determination (see Taylor 2005 for elaboration on the problem of origins and related sub-problems). Much work on theories of personal autonomy has been explicitly devoted to addressing precisely these sorts of difficulties.

Besides analyzing and clarifying the authenticity conditions necessary for autonomy, philosophers have also worked on providing a thorough account of the competency conditions necessary for the presence of autonomy (see Meyers 1989, Mele 1993, and Berofsky 1995). Competency conditions, as we have seen, are those capacities or conditions that need to be present in order for one to be effective in living according to one’s authentic self-conception in the face of various kinds of interference to that end. Examples of competency conditions include self-control, logical aptitude, instrumental rationality, resolve, temperance, calmness, and a good memory.

In addition to authenticity and competency conditions, many theories of personal autonomy require the presence of certain external enabling conditions: that is, external or environmental (social, legal, familial, and so forth) conditions which are more than less out of the agent’s control, but which must be in place in order for fully autonomous living to be possible. Such enabling conditions include, for example, a modicum of social freedom, an array of substantive options for choice, the presence of authenticity-oriented social relations, and autonomy-supporting networks of social recognition and acknowledgment (see Raz 1986 and Anderson & Honneth 2005). Without these conditions, effective autonomous living is said by some to be impossible, even where authenticity and competency conditions are robustly satisfied.

Different autonomy theorists place different emphases on external enabling conditions. Some contend that external enabling is a necessary condition for autonomy (see Oshana 1998). Others hold that autonomy more properly concerns agential satisfaction of authenticity and competency conditions, regardless of whether the external environment allows for actual autonomous expression (see Christman 2007). Both views can claim some intuitive support. On the one hand, it is reasonable to hold that it is only fitting to call a person ‘autonomous’ if that person is in fact effective in living according to her authentic self-conception. Yet, it also makes sense to call persons ‘autonomous’ who have formed an authentic self-conception and possess the requisite competency conditions effectively to express that self-conception, but happen to lack the contingent socio-relational conditions that allow for the expression of that authentic self. A possible solution to this impasse may be to avoid seeking hard and fast borders to the existence of autonomy, and say that autonomy is present in both cases, but is more robust where the proper external enabling conditions are in place.

The question of normative commitments associated with personal autonomy possession has also been a matter of some dispute. Many philosophers hold that autonomy is normatively content-neutral. According to this account, one (or one’s commitments) can be autonomous regardless of the values one endorses. On this account, one could commit to any kind of life–even the life of a slave–and still be autonomous (see, for example, Friedman 2003). Other philosophers hold that autonomy possession requires substantive normative constraints of some kind or other–at the very least, it is argued that one must value autonomy in order to be truly autonomous (see Oshana 2003). As with the debate just mentioned, both sides of this debate can claim some intuitive support; this can be shown through the asking of opposing but seemingly equally compelling (apparently rhetorical) questions; namely, ‘Can’t one autonomously choose whatever one wants?’, and, ‘How can we call someone autonomous who doesn’t value or seek autonomous living?’ One possible solution to this debate is to say that while almost any individual choice can be autonomous, persons cannot live autonomous lives as a whole without some commitment to the value of autonomy.

Unlike moral and existentialist autonomy, personal autonomy is possessed in degrees, depending on the presence and strength of the constellation of internal capacities and external enabling conditions that make it possible. While not all persons possess personal autonomy, it is commonly claimed that virtually everyone–with the exception of the irredeemably pathological and the handicapped–possesses the capacity for personal autonomy. In addition, the links between personal autonomy possession and moral agency are usually said to be thin at best. Even those who hold that personal autonomy possession requires substantive normative commitments of some kind (such as, for example, a commitment to the value of autonomy itself), they usually hold that it is quite possible to be an autonomous villain. Some philosophers have argued that personal autonomy possession requires the presence of normative competency conditions that effectively provide agents with the capacity to distinguish right from wrong (see Wolf 1990), but this strong account is in general disfavor, and even if the account is correct, few would argue that this means that personally autonomous agents must also always act morally. In the face of this, one may wonder why autonomy-based claims are said to generate demands of respect upon others. This question will be dealt with in more detail in section 4 below.

Lastly, a word should be given on the relation between personal autonomy and freedom (or liberty, which is here taken to be synonymous with freedom). Although it is not uncommon to find the terms ‘(personal) autonomy’ and ‘freedom’ used essentially synonymously, there are some important differences between them.

More often than not, to claim that a person is free is to claim that she is negatively free in the sense that she is not constrained by internal or external forces that hinder making a choice and executing it in action. There is a clear distinction between autonomy and negative freedom, however, given that autonomy refers to the presence of a capacity for effective authentic living, and negative freedom refers to a lack of constraints on action. It is entirely possible for a person to be free in this negative sense but nonautonomous, or–on accounts that do not require the presence of external enabling conditions for autonomy to be present–for a person to be autonomous but not (negatively) free.

Some writers also speak of positive freedom, and here the connections with autonomy become much deeper. Speaking very generally, to be free in this sense is to possess the abilities, capacities, knowledge, entitlements or skills necessary for the achievement of a given end. For example, I am only (positively) free to win an Olympic gold medal in archery if I am extremely skilled in the sport. Here it should be clear that one can be positively free in many ways and yet not be autonomous. Some philosophers, however, following Isaiah Berlin (Berlin 1948), have described positive freedom in such a way that it becomes basically synonymous with personal autonomy. Like autonomy, the conception of freedom that is operative in a given discussion can vary considerably; but more often than not personal autonomy is distinguished from freedom by the necessary presence, in the former, of a connection to the authenticity of the agent’s self-conception and life-plan–a connection that is usually not found in conceptions of freedom.