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