Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!Glacier!decwrl!spar!baba From: baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Re: Re: Logic, fact, preference [Part 1] Message-ID: <629@spar.UUCP> Date: Thu, 31-Oct-85 00:09:43 EST Article-I.D.: spar.629 Posted: Thu Oct 31 00:09:43 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 2-Nov-85 08:34:48 EST References: <306@umich.UUCP> <28200224@inmet.UUCP> Organization: The Institute of Impure Science Lines: 17 >>If you are in a free-rider situation with other individuals to whom >>the discomfort of coercion is less significant than the benefits >>accrued, a failure to coerce the lot of you is an injustice to those >>others in exactly the same way as coercion is an injustice to you. >>Is there a solution to this dilemma, or is libertarianism a system >>that can only be practiced in a closed religious community? [Baba] > > There's a rough problem here. How to weigh my dislike of being > coerced against other peoples dislike of losing a public good? > [Nat Howard] The other people in the above scenario are not losing a "public good", but a personal material benefit. Your railings against Stalinism are, I suppose, commendable, but they hardly answer the question. Baba