Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!ucla-cs!strig
From: strig@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Libertarianism: Anarchism, Schools, Defense, Society
Message-ID: <2975@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 27-Dec-84 22:15:53 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.2975
Posted: Thu Dec 27 22:15:53 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Dec-84 10:10:23 EST
References: <399@ptsfa.UUCP> <33@ucbcad.UUCP>
Reply-To: strig@ucla-cs.UUCP (Lorenzo Strigini)
Distribution: net
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 19
Summary: 

>You don't really need a definition of good, because most people will agree
>on what is good and what is not.

This is not correct, at least when people talk not about 'good' in abstract,
but about practical choices and priorities: the fact that we use elections
(in democratic countries) to decide proves that people disagree.

For this discussion, this implies that every decision by the government will
require some people to do, or pay for, something they consider (ethically or
practically) wrong.  This compulsion causes animosities among citizens,
conflicts between moral and political obligations, etc, that are therefore
necessary evil effects of any increase in the power of a government.
(I am not drawing any general conclusions: just stating one of the many facts
that need to be considered in this kind of discussions).

							Lorenzo Strigini
	...!{ihnp4,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!strig
or
	strig@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA