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...