Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Re: The Myth of Robinson Crusoe : reply to Sykora Message-ID: <670@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 1-Jul-85 11:24:12 EDT Article-I.D.: whuxl.670 Posted: Mon Jul 1 11:24:12 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 2-Jul-85 05:31:17 EDT References: <663@whuxl.UUCP> <2380049@acf4.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany Lines: 43 > >From me: > >Not even Communist societies prevent > >individuals from producing all the widgets they want in their own > >homes. > > From Michael Sykora: > You've GOT to be joking -- not even Communist societies? > Our own society has passed numerous laws against working at home. > Our society has created numerous laws against working at home *for profit or exchange* NOT for one's own use. My point was that no society, including Communist societies have laws against creating products for *one's own use* (unless such products themselves are banned e.g. guns and drugs). This is the Robinson Crusoe model of society and the economy: the rugged individualist producing all her/his own goods. But this hardly covers any of our actual economic life, particularly in our increasingly interdependent society. Almost all current economic life involves *relations of exchange with others*. Therefore it is not simply one individual involved but a social relation between individuals. As a social relation between individuals the members of society have the right to decide that certain relations should be regulated to insure *protection of all individuals rights*. Most people would agree that murder is an unacceptable social relation. Most people would also agree that people should not be exposed to potentially fatal risks at their job unless they are very clear about such risks. Most people would agree that workers should not be subject to arbitrary punishment at work without the possibility of lodging greivances. The capability to lodge grievances against the caprice of managers who simply take a personal dislike to somebody is an important *protection* of individual rights made possible by the labor union movement. These advances were hardly an infringement of freedom but an advance towards protecting individual's rights in the very important social relation of employer-employee. The irony is that Libertarians wish to remove these rights in the name of freedom and liberty! tim sevener whuxl!orb