Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!qantel!dual!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646 From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Re: Decisions in the Social Interest and Libertarians: re to Cramer Message-ID: <2380085@acf4.UUCP> Date: Thu, 4-Jul-85 20:36:00 EDT Article-I.D.: acf4.2380085 Posted: Thu Jul 4 20:36:00 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jul-85 05:50:48 EDT References: <675@whuxl.UUCP> Organization: New York University Lines: 50 >/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 8:23 am Jul 3, 1985 */ >Libertarians are unwilling to see that in fact everyone's self-interests >are served by providing laws and just application of those laws to >everyone. Libertarians (none that I know) have never made such blanket claims. You may be confusing us with Anarchists. >Libertarians assume that the stupidity of selfishly considering only >oneself, even when such a value leads to harm for *all*, is some sort of >"moral virtue". Libertarians don't believe this Tim, you must have dreamt it. You may be confusing us with Objectivists, but if so you would be misrepresenting them anyway. >They also assume that somehow people will be stupid enough >to agree with such a system even as it leads to chaos and a situation >in which each must battle all to get anywhere. Such a viewpoint is not libertarian. You may be confusing us with Hobbesians or Social Darwinists. >Fortunately, while people have been stupid and immoral enough to support >such institutions as slavery and war, they have never been so stupid >that they cannot see that many of their self-interests are best served by >acting together so that all will benefit. Spoken like a true Utilitarian, Tim. Fortunately as well more and more people through history have been able to see that they should have a voice and an influence in such decisions which benefit everyone in the society. >Hence the gradual rise of democracy from >Athens, in which slaves, women and those without property were unable to vote >on public decisions, . . . >. . . to modern America in which slavery has been abolished, That's a hell of a gradual rise, a gradual rise with a tremendous nadir in the middle. >Of course Libertarians will argue that such worker democracy would be >another "interference with property"...... Of course! > tim sevener whuxl!orb Mike Sykora