From: Reason (reason@exratio.com)
Date: Tue Aug 27 2002 - 22:37:19 MDT
It may be that it's a little late at night, and your argument is shaped less
like a mobile phone that my current abilities enable to me to deal with, but
I'm not sure I grasp your point. Yes, "need" was imprecise usage. What I
mean is that if there is no commons, there is no ongoing requirement for
entities to interfere in other people's property, activities and business to
maintain said commons.
If you guys bought Central Park and turned it into the TallLand themepark
then you would be maintaining it. No need for other entities to manage the
place or form up strange legislative bodies to try and do a Ostrich Canute
on human nature and basic economic truths.
So the bit I'm missing out on is the bridge between TallLand, false and
damaging beliefs in equality through mediocrity, and losing access to human
resources.
Reason
http://www.exratio.com/
--> Robert J. Bradbury
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Reason wrote:
>
> > A good view (not sure if it's the libertarian view anymore,
> with or without
> > definition-shifting quotes) is that there shouldn't be any
> public places.
> > Everything should be privately held; then you wouldn't have
> these issues, or
> > indeed any need to be a busybody and worry about how other people are
> > managing their lives and property.
>
> Come now. If Spike and Max and I formed a cooperative to purchase Central
> Park and take it private, only allowing people over 5'8" (my height)
> to enter the park "free" (shorter people have to pay $1.00/entrance)
> do you really think the need to be a "busybody" would go away?
>
> The "need" to be a busybody would seem to be cast in the framework
> that everyone *should* be equal. It is the desire to level the
> playing field -- is is derived from "we hold these truths to be
> self-evident" (that all men and women are created equal). Not!
>
> Spike is a better engineer than I am, Amara is a better scientist
> than I am, Eliezer is a better theoretician than I am, Max is a
> better philosopher than I am, Greg may be a better logician than
> I am (to be resolved at some future date). If the agenda of
> libertarian privitization of "public" resources would end up
> denying me access to such resources, can you make the case that
> I should support that process?
>
> Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:27 MST