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