Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site ea.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm From: mwm@ea.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: gunpoint Message-ID: <22400013@ea.UUCP> Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 16:49:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ea.22400013 Posted: Thu Sep 20 16:49:00 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 01:19:39 EDT References: <542@gloria.UUCP> Lines: 27 Nf-ID: #R:gloria:-54200:ea:22400013:000:1224 Nf-From: ea!mwm Sep 20 15:49:00 1984 /***** ea:net.politics / gloria!colonel / 11:53 pm Sep 18, 1984 */ >> Perhaps we who are libertarians are just a little more >> concerned at how tacky it is to point guns at people and force >> them to go along with us (however well-intentioned the cause). "Tacky" is hardly the word! And those of us who are not libertarians accept that in any society the people with guns and followers will force us to go along with them. When central goverment relinquishes or loses this power, gangs assume it. -- Col. G. L. Sicherman ...seismo!rochester!rocksanne!rocksvax!sunybcs!gloria!colonel /* ---------- */ But does it have to be that way? A libertarian government (government == those with the guns) would only use force to dissuade others from the use of force [Ok, I concede, that would be an ideal libertarian government, with ideal people. Probably not with real people.] Since the US doesn't have such a governmnet, we support the "gang" that comes closest to doing what we want, as do the non-libertarians. The difference is, if our "gang" came into power, you would be free to do what you wanted until you started interfering with someone else's freedom to do so. How many other "gangs" is that true for?