kfl%mx.lcs.mit.edu@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (08/24/86)
To: foy@AEROSPACE.ARPA
From: foy@aerospace.ARPA
... Some seem to say that people have a right to do anything
they want economically, but also have a right to be free from
phyusical agression. They seem to imply that these are natural
rights.
Yep. Read Ayn Rand. And the Declaration of Independence.
I would like to understand where they think these rights come
from. It seems to me that these "rights" are arbitrary sets of
rules defined by arbitrary methods, by arbitrarily selected groups
of people.
Nope. Read Ayn Rand.
To illustrate my concern with a little story: Suppose;
... He asks me to sign a piece oaf paper ... It has lots of big
words that I don't understand ... deeds and mortgage and
interest... One day a man in a Uniform ... tells me I have to
move off my farm tomorrow. ...
A contract is not a piece of paper. It is a meeting of minds. A
contract is not binding if one of the parties did not understand it.
Opponents of libertarian philosophy often bring up stories in which
the population does not consist of rational adults, but of children,
feebleminded people, criminals, insane people, or people in a sinking
lifeboat. Do we really want a system which treats everyone as if they
were like that? Is that the most realistic view of the people of this
country?
...Keith
-------kfl%mx.lcs.mit.edu@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (08/25/86)
From: foy@aerospace.ARPA
Most [Libertarians] only wanted to get the government to quit
doing things for underprivaledged.
The main problems with government are:
1) Overregulation, for instance victimless crime laws, and
2) Taxation
The objection is not to money being spent on the poor, but on
money being coerced from all of us. Most social spending goes
UP the economic ladder, not down. Government is an inverse Robin
Hood.
You are free to donate your money to the poor. You are free to try
to talk others into donating their money. All I oppose is anyone
forcibly taking money from me or from anyone.
They had a hard time even seeing the freebies that goverment
handed out to the competent, or wealthy, or powerful.
I am very much aware of these. It is a myth that libertarians favor
big business. No business should get any special favors. Nor should
any wealthy or competent people. Nor should anyone. Government's
only purpose is to ensure a level playing field, i.e. to deter
criminals and foreign invaders.
Since then I have discovered that very few people really make
decisions in a rational manner. Most of the time we make decisions
based on our gut feel. We then select the evidence to rationally
support our decision.
So? Does this mean that we must abandon the only rational political
system? Because many people sometimes act against their self
interest?
It is strange that you would use this assertion to oppose a
libertarian system. Ayn Rand makes the same assertion but draws the
opposite conclusion!
I no longer agree that there is a natural distinction between the
usew of economic power and physical power ...
I don't understand why so many people have a problem with this
distinction. It is purely an accident of the English language that
the same word is used for both.
Government power is the power to rob, to enslave, to imprison, to
torture, and to kill. Our government is one of the better ones, we
don't have concentration camps where millions are killed for no
reason. We do have government theft on the order of hundreds of
billions of dollars per year. We do have laws against victimless
"crimes".
Economic "power" is the power to gain what one wants by uncoerced
exchange with another person or group. Both sides perceive that they
have gained in the transaction.
Perhaps part of the reason for the confusion is that many wealthy
individuals and corporations spend much of their money attempting,
with some success, to influence government to legislate special favors
for them. The amount of special interest legislation in this country
would fill a large library.
Libertarians strongly object to special interest legislation. There
would be no Chrysler bailouts, no windfall tax, no tax deductions, no
taxes, no mandated monopolies, no subsidized rates, no paying farmers
not to farm, no mandated closed shops, no special license
requirements, and no import tariffs.
I still think that the government is involved in far too much of
our daily lives but I think that the way to start getting it out
is by working on the things that government uses to justify its
power, such as the arms race etc.
The arms race is perceived as being needed because of the actions of
OTHER governments.
Government has many excuses and rationalizations for its too
pervasive involvement with individuals lives, but I have never
heard the arms race being used as an excuse. In fact, usually
it is the arms race itself which is seen as REQUIRING an excuse,
not as BEING one.
...Keith
-------