Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!ucdavis!ucbvax!ucbjade!mwm From: mwm@ucbopal.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Government and stability Message-ID: <131@ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: Sat, 26-Oct-85 00:50:17 EST Article-I.D.: ucbjade.131 Posted: Sat Oct 26 00:50:17 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 31-Oct-85 05:20:23 EST References: <1473@teddy.UUCP> <28200189@inmet.UUCP> <1496@teddy.UUCP> Sender: network@ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: mwm@ucbopal.UUCP (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer) Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica Lines: 49 In article <1496@teddy.UUCP> lkk@teddy.UUCP (Larry K. Kolodney) writes: >Right now, world government is a plutochracy. The courts and police are >controlled by them that gots. That is how it would be in libertaria as well. Right. This is a good reason for stripping the courts and police of much of their power (ditto for politicians - whom you forgot to mention). Can you describe a system where that isn't true, and won't become true as them that gots spend what they gots to make it become true? >But I must admit I overstated my case. TRADE does not require a government, >only people willing to exchange things. But there's more to an economy besides >trade, namely PRODUCTION. I would argue that PRODUCTION (and investment) >requires the stability provided by government. [Cheap shot coming, please excuse me :-] [Engage sanity check - cancel cheap shot. :-] Larry is backpedalling from his previous position that Government requires trade. He's found a worse position where he maintains that 1) Government implies stability. 2) Stability is required for production. If this were anybody but Larry (or a few others), I'd assume that "stability" mean "nobody stealing your means of production." But since it is who it is, I'm going to use "not readily changed or easily destroyed" (paraphrased from OAD). So, let's look at #1. Governments are neither necessary nor sufficient for stability. Consider the Louisiana Territory before the last wave of immigrants (whites) showed up. A very stable society, with little or no government above the intertribal level. Now, consider the same Territory after the US government has moved in to stabilize things. The buffalo die off, the people living on the land are thrown off, trees start growing in the Great Plains, etc. Most decidedly *not* stable. [Other examples of both cases provided for the asking.] Now, consider #2. Stability is *not* necessary for production. Just consider what production in the US did during the *very* unstable period from 1939 to 1945. In fact, production *implies* change. You've either got more of what you're producing, or (if this was a replacement), a *different* one (or more) of what you're producing. Ok, Larry, now tell us what you meant by "stability," and I'll do this again :-).