[net.politics.theory] Newsflash! [JoSH on Soci

janw@inmet.UUCP (11/24/85)

[tedrick@ucbvax]
>In general, the idea that a competitive market allocates resources
>well has a lot to be said for it, but the competition needs to occur
>within an overall framework of cooperation/regulation. Without
			        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>this regulation what is to stop the competitors from lieing,
      ^^^^^^^^^^
>cheating, stealing, destroying the environment, and killing each other?

You omitted "cooperation" the second time over. Can cooperation
go on *without* regulation from above ? That is the whole
question, isn't ? A lot of it does. E.g., unmoderated net.groups
do not dissolve in flames. Companies make products compatible
to each other. Cars on a road avoid collisions. All of these
are notoriously imperfect - but so are regulated systems.

People who want to do away with *government* don't want to
abolish *society*. And society, of course, means cooperation.

		Jan Wasilewsky

tedrick@ernie.BERKELEY.EDU (Tom Tedrick) (11/27/85)

In article <28200328@inmet.UUCP> janw@inmet.UUCP writes:
>
>[tedrick@ucbvax]
>>In general, the idea that a competitive market allocates resources
>>well has a lot to be said for it, but the competition needs to occur
>>within an overall framework of cooperation/regulation. Without
>			        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>this regulation what is to stop the competitors from lieing,
>      ^^^^^^^^^^
>>cheating, stealing, destroying the environment, and killing each other?
>
>You omitted "cooperation" the second time over. Can cooperation
>go on *without* regulation from above ? That is the whole
>question, isn't ? A lot of it does. E.g., unmoderated net.groups
>do not dissolve in flames. Companies make products compatible
>to each other. Cars on a road avoid collisions. All of these
>are notoriously imperfect - but so are regulated systems.
>
>People who want to do away with *government* don't want to
>abolish *society*. And society, of course, means cooperation.
>
>		Jan Wasilewsky

Excellent point. I have been thinking about that problem
for a long time. It is rather deep. A lot depends on social
conditioning (i.e. if the population has adopted a belief
system that restrains certain behavior it may not be 
necessary to attempt to restrain it through regulation).
It seems to me that an enormous amount of social interaction
*IS* based on cooperation and trust. When some elements of the
population are willing and able to successfully exploit the
situation for their short term advantage it may become necessary
to overtly restrain behavior that was formerly unregulated.
(examples might be leaving doors unlocked in houses: when
I was young it was normal to leave houses in our area 
unlocked. With all the thieves these days it is normal
to have alarm systems, etc.)

Like I said this is a deep subject. There are other
aspects of the problem to be considered besides 
the above. Perhaps I will say more later.

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.

   -Tom