orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (07/01/85)
> > Excuse me, but challenging you to find a person who can know your wants > better than you do consistently seems to me to be a perfectly valid > question to ask of those who claim that governments should have the power > to force their decisions on you for your own good. For any choice > you face with respect to your own interests, another person may > > A) Feel you are qualified to make the choice better than he is. > > B) Feel that he knows better than you what the choice you should > make is (and be right). > > C) Feel that he knows better than you what the choice you should > make is (and be WRONG). Again, I should like to point out that I don't think government has any business intruding in my private decisions which affect primarily only *my* self-interest such as the decision to smoke or not to smoke tobacco, the decision to smoke or not to smoke marijuana, the decision to engage in whatever sexual activity I may prefer (so long as it involves no physical harm to another) On the other hand, my right to commit suicide by smoking tobacco does not include my right to kill others with my tobacco smoke and the same for marijuana smoke. Libertarians have talked a lot about "straw-men" - I think it is a blatant strawman to insist that democratic socialists on this net support the suppression of individual liberties which involve solely the individual. On the other hand I also think I have the right as the citizen of a democracy to join with other citizens to enact laws which benefit all of us. Stopping at red lights is not a question of simply my own interest but in every motorists interests. For government to enforce such a law benefits all motorists. Speaking of civil liberties: what do Libertarians think about the New Jersey law to force high school students to take drug tests? tim sevener whuxl!orb
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (07/04/85)
>/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 8:49 am Jul 1, 1985 */ >On the other hand, my right to commit suicide by smoking tobacco does not >include my right to kill others with my tobacco smoke and the same for >marijuana smoke. And if someone feels threatened by my smoking in their presence in my house or place of business, they are always free to leave. If he/she is a friend, guest, customer., etc. then I wouldn't be so rude as to smoke in his/her presence. If he/she is not, then what is he/she doing in my home or place of business. >Libertarians have talked a lot about "straw-men" - I think it is a blatant >strawman to insist that democratic socialists on this net support the >suppression of individual liberties which involve solely the individual. I disagree. Since democratic socialists seek to restrain people's liberties regarding the employment of non-scarce resources as well as resources which can only belong to an individual (e.g., his time and effort), they are clearly seeking to suppress individual resources. >Speaking of civil liberties: what do Libertarians think about the New Jersey >law to force high school students to take drug tests? I think it is an outrageous violation of civil liberties. Incidentally, would you happen to know if the law includes private schools within its scope? > tim sevener whuxl!orb Mike Sykora
mwm@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer) (07/11/85)
In article <669@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: >Again, I should like to point out that I don't think government has any >business intruding in my private decisions which affect primarily only >*my* self-interest such as the decision to smoke or not to smoke tobacco, >the decision to smoke or not to smoke marijuana, the decision to engage >in whatever sexual activity I may prefer (so long as it involves no >physical harm to another) Uh, Tim, I have bad news. Many conservatives (seem to be darn few of them here; must be to busy running the country to argue about how it should be run :-) feel that "wanton sex" and drug abuse do harm society, so the government has a legitimate say in those activities. >Libertarians have talked a lot about "straw-men" - I think it is a blatant >strawman to insist that democratic socialists on this net support the >suppression of individual liberties which involve solely the individual. Tim, if you were a libertarian, it would be the socialists who talked a lot about straw men. And this claim is another of your straw men. I (and I suspect most other libertarians) don't think you want to suppress individial liberties. However, democratic socialism, like national socialism before it, will lead to the curtailment of liberties. See Hayek's oft-recommended "The Road to Serfdom" for details. >On the other hand I also think I have the right as the citizen of a >democracy to join with other citizens to enact laws which benefit all of us. You mean laws like those governing drug abuse and wanton sex? Of course, nobody could think that the government interfering with my selling my time to someone else could benefit society, so such laws won't be passed. As should be obvious, different people have different ideas about what will benefit or harm all of us. This is the brush that tars statist of all stripes. They know what's best for people, and are going to pass laws (or regulations, or royal pronouncements, or whatever) to see that those things are done or not done. We have another word to describe that kind of society; we call it a dictatorship. <mike
tonyw@ubvax.UUCP (Tony Wuersch) (07/16/85)
In article <669@whuxl.UUCP>, orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: > > > > Excuse me, but challenging you to find a person who can know your wants > > better than you do consistently seems to me to be a perfectly valid > > question to ask of those who claim that governments should have the power > > to force their decisions on you for your own good. Who said this, Tim? No one I've read has stepped yet into the dog shit of suggesting that someone else can know all of an individuals' wants better than that individual consistently. However, change that "all" to "some" and I'd agree with that -- maybe I even said it once. For instance, government knows better than I what I want when I think that I want to avoid eating rancid food. No flames for my using a trivial philosophical example, please. This is net.politics.theory. Tony Wuersch {amd,amdcad}!cae780!ubvax!tonyw "And if you don't believe all the things I say, I'm certified prime by the USDA!"