Delegating responsibility (to the 'ones at the top') has always been the primary means of mitigating guilt. It does not come as a surprise that your argument strongly supports possibility number one.
I'm under no illusion that there is no systemic component to the problem - that is to say, replace the "one at the top" with someone else, and you'll often still get the same outcome. But that doesn't invalidate anything I said so far: these policies are still not laws of nature; and they, and indeed society, have been changing as awareness increases. To give obvious examples: slavery and racism are no longer viewed as being acceptable; women can vote; popular participation in policy decisions is increasing; etc.. So, I fail to see how, in your view, my argument supports the idea that this will lead to an overcoming of individual free will through force (I imagine you mean, forming the equivalent of a totalitarian state) - that is, unless your idea of free will is doing any and everything you want, without having to deal with the consequences (like jumping out of a cliff and not having to fall).
Unfortunately it is impossible for me to further elaborate on my comment without challenging your fundamental understanding of the world. Proceeding past this point on an intellectual level will only lead to a dead end, it is unavoidable. From here you have to come to your own conclusions. Good luck!
That seems like a cop-out. Feel free to challenge my fundamental understanding of the world - I like to learn new things. But you'll have to make do with rational arguments, not hand-waving.
I think you should try and read my second comment again, this time with a more relaxed mind, there is more to it than what your comments suggest you've understood. All I'll say is that I don't use words randomly and that all my comments/responses are complete (by that I mean they contain all essential information and don't require follow-ups)
The reason I don't wanna discuss this topic further is simple, it will not achieve anything. It is clear from your second comment that your understanding cannot realistically be challenged, it is not yet set in stone but I estimate my chances of penetrating your defenses to be less than 3%. This means that writing pages of text, while time consuming, will have little to no effect. I believe however that you have enough material to work with (from our comments so far) in case you are genuinely curious
