Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics,net.philosophy Subject: Re: Re:Democracy and Libertarianism Message-ID: <427@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 11:48:07 EST Article-I.D.: whuxl.427 Posted: Mon Jan 14 11:48:07 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 15-Jan-85 02:06:42 EST References: <395@ptsfa.UUCP> <12@ucbcad.UUCP> <2585@sdcc3.UUCP> <32@ucbcad.UUCP>, <408@whuxl.UUCP> <614@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> Organization: Bell Labs Lines: 37 Xref: watmath net.politics:6842 net.philosophy:1359 >is > is me, tim sevener) > Address: from ea!mwm to ucbjade!mwm > > From orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Wed Dec 31 16:00:00 196 > > Most union representation votes are approved by over 80% of the membership. > > Great. What about the other 20%? Do they have to join the Union if they want > to keep their job? What if they would rather be in a different union? If they don't want to join the Union then they also should get none of the Union's privileges-- job protection, increased wages, etc. If they wish to be represented by a different Union then they can call for a vote on changing their Union and hope that they win the election. That's the way democracy works. It also happens to be the way, tho in a different sense that stock ownership works. Those with the majority of the stock can set policy for the whole corporation. If other stock owners disagree then they can either try to persuade a majority of the shareholders or sell their stock. > > Libertarianism really accepts no concept of community or even group rights > > or responsibilities. > > Bull. Communities and groups can decide to take on responsibilities if they > so wish. What they *cannot* do is coerce others into taking on those > responsibilities. > Then how are those responsibilites to be allocated? Being subject to certain responsibilities is part of being in a group or community. Let us take a very simple everyday example- the common household or family. Certain odious tasks such as washing dishes, doing the laundry, etc. have to be done to keep the household going. Is it unreasonable for the members of the household to demand that all the members pull their weight? What should be done if somebody complains that they are being "repressed" by being expected to wash the dishes their share of the time? Is this "coercion" or part of the cost of being in a group? tim sevener whuxl!orb