mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (07/06/85)
>Did it ever occur to you that the reasons the broadcasting of such debates >doesn't yield as great a profit as other programming is because the >public prefers watching other things? Should we force them to watch >these debates because you and others deem them important. Could such >actions be defended in the name of "freedom of speech?" Hardly. They >could in fact be attacked on the grounds that they violate this freedom. >(Note that I haven't said anything about how boring political debates >are. :-) > Mike Sykora Sykora raises a most interesting point. A society is most vulnerable when its members lack interest in its continuation. Demagogues can best control masses of people who have not considered the issues on which they rely. Perhaps an autocratic society should prohibit any political debate, to ensure its own stability, but it may be that a peculiar form of coercion might assist the prolongation of freedom in a democratic (or libertarian) society. Perhaps people SHOULD be forced to listen to opposing points of view on public issues, whether the debates are boring or not. (Note that I am not agreeing with this proposition, but think it worth analyzing in debate). The base question: Is overall freedom enhanced by the curtailment of some freedoms. All sides in the libertarian-socialist debate have agreed to a "Yes" on this one. The question then becomes segmented into a series of minor questions about which freedoms could or should be curtailed in order to maximize the overall freedom of individuals to have and to make choices. In my view, one freedom that should be curtailed is the freedom to be uninformed (or uneducated, perhaps). -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (07/09/85)
>/* mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) / 1:04 pm Jul 6, 1985 */ >The base question: Is overall freedom enhanced by the curtailment of >some freedoms. How do you define "overall freedom?" Is it a simple sum? The question then becomes segmented into a series of minor questions about which freedoms could or should be curtailed in order to maximize the overall freedom of individuals to have and to make choices. >In my view, one freedom that should be >curtailed is the freedom to be uninformed (or uneducated, perhaps). What constitutes uninformed? Since no one can no everything, which information will be stressed most? Here come the Thought Police to take us to the "re-education cneters." >Martin Taylor Mike Sykora
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (07/10/85)
>/* mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) / 1:04 pm Jul 6, 1985 */ >The base question: Is overall freedom enhanced by the curtailment of >some freedoms. How do you define "overall freedom?" Is it a simple sum? >In my view, one freedom that should be >curtailed is the freedom to be uninformed (or uneducated, perhaps). What constitutes uninformed? Since no one can no everything, which information will be stressed most? Here come the Thought Police to take us to the "re-education centers." >Martin Taylor Mike Sykora
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (07/18/85)
>>In my view, one freedom that should be >>curtailed is the freedom to be uninformed (or uneducated, perhaps). > >What constitutes uninformed? Since no one can no everything, which >information will be stressed most? > >Here come the Thought Police to take us to the "re-education centers." > >>Martin Taylor > > Mike Sykora Precisely the opposite; the Thought Police could get nowhere if the populace made sure to get the facts as best they could, and to think about them. Actually, my statement was a kind of cat-among-the-pigeons statement. It has an obvious truth in its intent, and an obvious impossibility in its execution. Kind of like libertarianism as expressed on the net :-) More seriously, though, a lot of people seem to go out of their way to ensure that they remain uninformed about certain matters, and that their children are not exposed to uncongenial ideas. It's a natural enough reaction, but one that should be strongly discouraged. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt