poli-sci@ucbvax.ARPA (11/13/84)
From: JoSH <JoSH@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Poli-Sci Digest Tue 13 Nov 84 Volume 4 Number 104
Rear, n. In American military matters, that exposed part of the
Army which is nearest to Congress.
--Ambrose Bierce
Contents: Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of Evil
Congress: a Proxy on both your Houses!
Billing as a Pollution Remedy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 1984 19:41 EST
From: ASP%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Evil Empires
Date: Thursday, 8 November 1984 10:56-EST
From: sde at Mitre-Bedford
To: Poli-Sci at MIT-MC
Re: Evil Empires
An overwhelming distinction, and one which virtually defines the difference
between truly evil systems and those which are merely bad, is the presence
or absence of the right to freely leave a system, place, organization, or
entity.
Neat. I've always had a feeling that there was something wrong with the U.S.
Government for imposing censorship on many who have left its service, but I
never quite understood the enormity of the problem.
Thank you for removing the blinders from my eyes, so that I may now understand
the purest evil that crawls the streets of Washington.
Jim.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 1984 20:01 EST
From: ASP%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: The greatest of them all ...
Rick McGeer:
I'd have said that the greatest evil in human history (WWII and the
slaughter of the Jews) was caused in part because the civilized world would
not resist Hitler when very little was required to stop him, and because
the world refused for many years to acknowledge Hitler for what he was.
The greatest evil in human history? A war that lasted six years, and the death
of a six million people? Let's not be too wedded to the evils of our lifetime.
I'd make a plug for the Thirty Years War, which consumed most of Europe in
plague, combat, and religious persecution for two generations, or perhaps the
Huguenot persecutions in France (the St. Bartholemew's Day Massacre saw the
death of over 140,000 Huguenots in six hours of continuous slaughter, for
example.)
Both of these events were the result of one or more parties deciding that
another group was, by its innermost nature, evil (as was Hitler's relatively
ineffective program). I think that, before you hold up the deeds and supposed
intentions of the Russian empire as an excuse for your accusations, you should
consider that you predecessors in this line of thinking were the ones holding
up the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Excuse my cynicism,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 84 19:50:16 pst
From: Rick McGeer (on an z29-e) <mcgeer%ucbrob@Berkeley>
To: ASP%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Re: The greatest of them all ...
My predecessors in this line of thinking sat on the Opposition
benches in the House of Commons during the thirties, shouting warnings about
Hilter that went unheard...
There is a strict difference between a warning about the nature of an
adversary and a demand that he be exterminated, now. You should not confuse
the two.
Rick.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 1984 15:41 EST
From: ASP%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: The greatest of them all ...
I'm afraid that I remain unconvinced. The National Socialists of the early
thirties made no demands that the Jews be exterminated; this was a much later
program, carried through without the knowledge of the German people under the
guise of "containment" of a potential internal threat. I apologize for
suggesting that you might be advocating a policy of genocide; I merely intended
to indicate that the invocation of a good/evil dichotomy in any political
discussion might be warped into the very demand for extermination that we
both revile.
Jim
------------------------------
Date: 12 Nov 1984 11:50:33 PST
Subject: Electronic Democracy -- proxy system
From: David Booth <DBOOTH@USC-ISIF.ARPA>
Re: "An idea!!! (forgive me if this has been proposed before;
I've been avoiding much of the recent discussion) How about if
everybody gets one vote on every issue, but can assign that vote
to a representative (proxy)."
This certainly has been proposed before: it was what started the whole
Electronic Democracy discussion! Unfortunately, this discussion began
in the HUMAN-NETS interest group, and moved to POLI-SCI mid-stream.
Send me a message if you want a copy of the previous articles pertaining
to Electronic Democracy and the proposed proxy system.
-- David Booth DBOOTH@USC-ISIF.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 84 17:06:26 est
From: bedford!bandy@mit-eddie
Subject: polluting the enviroment
The penalty for an organization polluting the enviroment
should be that the government will clean up the mess (and
maybe make it a little better than it was in the process),
and then BILL that organization for what it cost the feds
to clean it up. This should be more than adequate incentive
for the polluters to clean up their act themselves (we all
know how, shall we say, well the government spends its
monies.
andy
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 1984 21:22 EST
From: "Robert L. Krawitz" <ZZZ.RLK%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: polluting the enviroment
Throw in a fine as a penalty, and that idea's not bad.
Robert^Z
------------------------------
Date: Mon 12 Nov 84 14:14:28-EST
From: Larry Kolodney <UC.LKK%MIT-EECS@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: polluting the enviroment
Bandy's solutions to environmental polluters:
"The penalty for an organization polluting the enviroment
should be that the government will clean up the mess (and
maybe make it a little better than it was in the process),
and then BILL that organization for what it cost the feds
to clean it up. This should be more than adequate incentive
for the polluters to clean up their act themselves (we all
know how, shall we say, well the government spends its
monies."
This suggestion is unrealistic and inefficient. Suppose a
company was to cause some massive environmental damage.
1. It might not be discovered until IRREPARABLE damage had occured.
2. If the damage was serious enough, the cost of clean up might
very well bankrupt the company. This would cause loss of jobs,
and the government would still end up picking up the tab for the
difference. (while the managment retires on their generous pensions)
3. The short term benefits (to an individual manager) of
polluting often outwiegh any percieved statistical cost due to
getting caught. No criminal expects to get caught.
Thus, this plan is not a likely disincentive to polluting.
------------------------------
End of POLI-SCI Digest
- 30 -
-------