Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/23/84; site ucbcad.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!faustus From: faustus@ucbcad.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: Re: Comments on Libertarianism Message-ID: <4@ucbcad.UUCP> Date: Wed, 5-Dec-84 09:55:26 EST Article-I.D.: ucbcad.4 Posted: Wed Dec 5 09:55:26 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 8-Dec-84 04:45:46 EST References: <1859@inmet.UUCP> Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group, Berkeley, CA Lines: 37 > Non-universal charities ABOUND. Just for example, the recent > listener-supported radio fund raising drive for a Boston station was fond > of pointing out that only about 20% of their listeners contribute. The > remaining 80% benefit from the station, too. Presumably, the 20% (or whatever > it turned out to be) who contributed this year count as "people", even > though they contributed in the face of this statistic. > > In fact, Wayne, you'll find that almost all arts activities are > not supported by getting a "fair share" from all of those people they serve. > > You'll find a similar pattern, I think, in donations to the Salvation > Army -- not all of those who wish the homeless to be fed give, but > enough give to enable them to work. There's a big difference between the arts and defense -- people get direct benefit from contributing to radio stations, and they tend to be very local. National defense is something that people do not directly benefit from at all, and would almost certainly not be willing to pay anything for if it weren't compulsory. Furthermore, I don't know how often organizations that live off of charity go under, but national defense is not something that should be made so risky. If th Soviets knew that all it would take to get rid of the U.S. defense would be to infuence public opinion enough, they would start supporting "peace movements" much more than they are now. > As for your notion that you can't rebuild society without rebuilding > human nature, I'm not sure what you mean by that, but > the implication is that industrialization rebuilt human nature, because > it sure rebuilt society. Nobody 'did' industrialization, it just happened. I'm sure that Fulton didn't foresee everything that would happen to human nature because of his invention of the steam engine... I can't think of many cases of large scale intentional changing of human nature... Wayne