That's too funny: the "apologist" confusion.
Imagine what that would do to Socrates' Apology!
Put alternatively: I got mine. Fuck everyone else.
Or, put more accurately, don't get in my way and I won't get in yours. So each of us can pursue what we want, without interference.
Problem is, there’s not much of consequence that you can do that doesn’t impinge on others in one way or another.
Depends on how loosely you define "impinge".
No, depends on how others (those being "impinged") define the term.
That somebody feels "impinged" certainly doesn't necessarily mean they were. A truer statement might be "there's not much of consequence you can do without bothering somebody's inflated sense of entitlement in one way or another".
"there's not much of consequence you can do without bothering somebody's inflated sense of entitlement in one way or another."
But isn’t that a line drawing game? “What you deem "consequential" is automatically evenhanded while others have an “inflated sense of entitlement.” Life doesn't work that way Jack.
It is a matter of philosophical differences, not a "line drawing game". I find it undeniable that many feel entitled to things they ought not. You're welcome to disagree -- but the disagreement isn't quite as trivial as you say.
As for me deeming my own philosophy 'evenhanded' and others sense of entitlement 'inflated' ... life works exactly that way. People typically find their own opinions reasonable.
Personally, I think acts of physical aggression should be where the line is drawn.. Anything else should be left to individual liberty..