Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!ima!inmet!nrh From: nrh@inmet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: gunpoint - (nf) Message-ID: <1704@inmet.UUCP> Date: Wed, 3-Oct-84 00:38:51 EDT Article-I.D.: inmet.1704 Posted: Wed Oct 3 00:38:51 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 4-Oct-84 05:52:20 EDT Lines: 41 #R:gloria:-54200:inmet:7800140:000:2065 inmet!nrh Sep 30 14:55:00 1984 >***** inmet:net.politics / mit-eddie!mit-eddie / 7:31 am Sep 30, 1984 >Most governments ARE nothing but gangs with guns, these are called >totalitarian states. Other governments are at least somewhat responsive >to the need of the populace, the U.S. govt. is one of those. > >GIVEN THAT NATURE ABHORS A POWER VACUUM, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE SHOULD >TRY TO FILL IT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS AT WORST BENIGN, LIBERTARIANS, WHO >WOULD LEAVE THAT VACUUM WIDE OPEN, ARE MERELY LEAVING THEMSELVES >VULNERABLE TO ATTACK FROM NON-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, WHICH WILL MOST >LIKELY BE MUCH LESS (AT LEAST IN THIS COUNTRY) AFFECTED BY PUBLIC OPINION. About half of libertarians are anarchists, that is, they want NO state. The rest of us would prefer a minimal state with little or no mechanism for increasing its power. Both types of libertarians would be happy to cut back the state by about 95-98%, and then we'd no doubt start squabbling among ourselves about the last 5-2%. As for your assumption that a government should be affected by public opinion, it strikes me as a fine scare tactic (gosh, if the government isn't sensitive to MY opinion, it might lock me up), but since the mechanism by which government is affected by public opinion leaves it pathetically open to special-interest-induced growth, it's not clear to me that one shouldn't wish for a government that CANNOT respond to certain "public opinions". There are (happily) parts of our own constitution that do this, and have done it well. There is no state religion, and there'd have to be a pretty strong majority to impose one (not just a sensitivity to public opinion -- you'd need a 2/3'rds majority in congress). On the other hand, we have the "National Endowment for the Arts". Isn't it wonderful that our government is sensitive enough to public opinion to commit extortion and theft to support the arts? Surely our lives must be enriched by such a policy. Sensitivity to popular opinion has its points -- the problem is that government will do immoral and illegal things to pander to it.