Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site klipper.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!teddy!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep From: biep@klipper.UUCP (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) Newsgroups: net.politics,net.philosophy Subject: Re: FORCE, Democracy and Libertarianism Message-ID: <406@klipper.UUCP> Date: Mon, 7-Jan-85 16:07:04 EST Article-I.D.: klipper.406 Posted: Mon Jan 7 16:07:04 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jan-85 00:22:40 EST References: <408@whuxl.UUCP> <811@ariel.UUCP> Reply-To: biep@klipper.UUCP Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 50 Xref: watmath net.politics:6719 net.philosophy:1345 [] The main thing which bothers me in Libertarianism is that they want me to fight. I have to forsee everything, and take my measures. I want to work and live *for* a society, not to fight *against* it. My first question (what if my neighbo[u]r buys all the land around me, or in another way controls all the resources I need) was answered in that way (you should have forseen that, and acted accordingly). My second question (do parents have the right to abandon their dependent children so that they will die "because they didn't take the appropriate measures") wasn't answered at all, I guess because it was "hidden "in a satirical article. Now I would like a third question, taken from reality. I will not say whom it concerns, however, since that might have bad effects. The situation: A labo[u]r union almost controls an industry. Many years ago a man looking for work (which was scarce) came at that industry. Three and two years ago two of his sons did the same. All three had more or less the same experience. They weren't communists and didn't want to be. However, the union was. So they didn't want to share the union. I will leave away the physical threats, since I assume the Libertarians will agree with me on that point. I want to jump to the next step. The board of directors of the industry was told: "There are non-unionists in this industry. Choose: either tell them to either go away or become a union member, or we'll go on strike." Now all three are union member, and pay to the communist party. I guess that, according to Libertarian standards, the "unionists" didn't initiate force (I'm not talking about the threats), so it was their right to do so: They had the right of strike, and anyone may decide not to want to work with anyone he doesn't want to work with. After all, for each of the unionists, the board of directors could have fired him. They only could not fire *all* of them. At the moment, the go[u]vernment tries to break the labo[u]r union force, but it's difficult. P.S.: This history is situated in France. -- Biep. {seismo|decvax|philabs}!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep I utterly disagree with everything you are saying, but I am prepared to fight to the death for your right to say it. --Voltaire