Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fortune.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!fortune!rcb From: rcb@fortune.UUCP (Robert Binstock) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: Rent control, etc. Message-ID: <3568@fortune.UUCP> Date: Mon, 11-Jun-84 12:15:12 EDT Article-I.D.: fortune.3568 Posted: Mon Jun 11 12:15:12 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Jun-84 00:42:17 EDT References: <151@oliven.UUCP> Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA Lines: 69 ----------------------------------------------- >>So, I finally get to your first line. It is clear from this statement >>that you completely missed my point (of some time ago) and you missed >>Price's point and you are missing Nat's point. None of us places any >>faith in "other institutions". They may be there for our use in >>extremity and they may not. Where all three of us places his faith is >>in ourselves. Each of us has learned, perhaps the easy way but more >>likely the hard way, that when you put yourself in the hands of >>government or any other institution you give up something of yourself. >>You give away a bit of your freedom. You give up a piece of your >>integrity. Personal integrity and freedom are the most valuable things >>that a person can have. And they cannot be obtained from others. >>Most particularly, they cannot be obtained from a government or from >>any other institution. >> Chris Prael Let us agree to disagree, Chris Prael. Your final point (quoted above) is well taken. I agree that the risk of loss of freedom and personal integrity is implicit in modern society (or even in being human). It may surprise you to learn that I worry about it all the time. I didn't "miss" that point; you are the first one to have raised it in this discussion, and I applaud you for doing so. The thing is, I feel that respect and concern for others is necessary to maintain integrity and freedom, and self-respect as well. In my opinion, you can't remain free - in practice, not just philosophically - unless you are more-or-less constantly concerned with the freedom of other human beings; you can't have integrity unless you are sure that your treatment of others is honorable; and you cannot respect yourself unless it is certain that you respect others. I recognize (and share) the concern you are addressing in the quote above, but it is not the only concern that I consider important. Life is a tightrope walk at best, juggling various fragile and valuable items. I also think that there is an option midway between "putting yourself in the hands of" institutions and abandoning all involvement with institutions entirely. People tend to associate in various ways - they always have and they always will. Sometimes this is detrimental to large groups, sometimes beneficial, sometimes mixed. In my opinion, it is necessary to recognize the existence and importance of institutions and to attempt to cope with them in some way, rather than evading from them OR "putting yourself in their hands." I am not a dupe of the government or any other institution, believe me. My concern with institutional actions and effects on me is a result of careful consideration, just as yours is. I've come to a different conclusion, that's all. I understand your desire to remain free. I feel that you are putting yourself at risk by not going to the heart of the problem. I don't think there is any such thing as living outside of institutions. They affect you whether you like it or not. I know that you don't agree with the above. I think I honestly understand and respect your point of view. Our concerns may be more closely related than we realized; the difference is in a profound disagreement over how to best address those concerns. Bob Binstock [PS: I don't accept your analysis of the historical role of government. I STILL think, as I said in my response to Nat, that we could all sit here until Doomsday quoting good and bad examples of actions of various groups and individuals, governmental and otherwise. I am refraining not because I can't do it but because it would go on forever and prove nothing. The disagreement lies in each of our personal, subjective viewpoints, which were created by a lifetime of individual experiences; it is not about "facts".]