Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: a non fallacy Message-ID: <2185@randvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 10-Dec-84 22:27:35 EST Article-I.D.: randvax.2185 Posted: Mon Dec 10 22:27:35 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 13-Dec-84 03:07:16 EST References: <747@oliven.UUCP> Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica Lines: 36 > [] > > > >This is worth elaborating on, for here we have a CLASSICAL libertarian > >FALLACY. Libertarians see political philosophy as a ONE-DIMENSIONAL > >spectrum: someone is either for "less" government or "more". To state > >the obvious (obvious to everyone but libertarians that is), this totally > >ignores the fact that there are DIFFERENT KINDS of government activity. > > Government is an economic cancer, granted there are DIFFERENT > KINDS of cancers. ALL of them are lethal to one degree or another. > > > danw I find this analogy curious: cancer is essentially a ``libertarian'' phenomenon, as it occurs when cells decide to multiply without regulation and against the purpose defined for them by the body (i.e. ``government''). Of course, I am equating a libertarian with an anarchist, as Dan seems to do. Perhaps there is a middle ground between totalitarianism and anarchy? I find that not only do libertarian-anarchists seem to hold a one- dimensional view of government, but they tend to have the black-or- white, either/or outlook as well. This ``true-believer'' attitude can make their spoutings pretty hard to swallow. I think libertarian-anarchists should label themselves as such; not all civil libertarians are anarchists, as Dan seems to be. -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall Note: I am a *librarian-anarchist*; my books are scattered all over my office...