From: Suresh Naidu (snaidu@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca)
Date: Tue Oct 15 1996 - 08:15:23 MDT
Suresh Naidu
occaisonal student
math 1a, computer science
Ask not what your brand name can do for you,
but what you can do for your brand name.
On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Ian Goddard wrote:
> On 10/12/96, a Left leaning Anarchist thinker wrote:
> >
> > [ The capitalist sells food ]
> > . . . for more than the cost of production, he has
> > to make some type of profit or he couldn't even buy the food he's
> > selling! If you sell a hamburger for 20 cents, sure it's cheap and you
> > have covered cost of the ingredients, but what are you supposed to eat,
> > or use to cover the utilities bills, or the workers you hire...I mean
> > enslave, sorry about that (?!?)
>
> IAN: Yes, exactly . . . [ but ]
>
> > ...the problem comes when they get too greedy
> > and try to make more profit than they need,
>
> IAN: Therein arises a key question:
>
> Who is to determine the proper level of " need " ?
> ^^^
Yep. Valid question. This is why decentralization is the key to any
equitable society. In small scale communities, people can keep tabs on
each other, done with a feeling of "hey, this hurts people, why
don't you stop it" . if you have any form of centralization, a huge power
imbalance occurs, because the ones in charge can dictate to those not in
charge. It becomes self-perpetuating, and is thus communism.
But, thanks to such technologies as the internet, people can raise
discussions all over the world, and so everybody will have the
opportunity to discuss what need is.
> Each person measures their own need. I cannot know everything
> about the specific needs of even those right around me, and
> even less about the needs of people in the next city, county,
> or country. However, for equitable distribution of wealth to
> ever be a reality someone MUST have such GLOBAL knowledge
> upon which to measure proper levels of "need."
>
> That "someone" will be a central cabal of economic planners.
> These planners will, by human nature, exploit the masses for
> personal gain through economic / social control and command.
>
> Private property claims can be enforced
> locally, requiring only LOCAL knowledge.
>
> ERGO: Private property does NOT
> require a central State.
No, but is does require force to back it up, which is just as bad.
>
> Collectivist social theory requires a central
> cabal with GLOBAL knowledge, that is to say,
> with knowledge derived from a broad section
> of socail indicators and incomes, from which
> "equitable" distributions are determined and
> based upon which legal decrees are issued.
>
> ERGO: Collectivized property
> require a central State by design.
>
>
No, because I have enough faith in people that they can coordinate
themselves, share knowledge through electronic means, and then discuss
the issues this raises.
> Furthermore, the collectivists theory of the
> " socail contract, " that is defined as a
> personal debt to the socail welfare that
> abolishes any concept of private ownership,
> weaves a logical and factual LEGAL web of
> social debt that binds all people to one
> another and in turn binds them to the
> central cabal of planners that oversee
> the allocation of social debt, who are
> know as are "The People's" Party,
> or the slave masters.
>
It's not a legal web, it's an economic one. However, if anyone wants to
leave they can, and do whatever they want. But people will not stand for
theives or dictators. Noting stops a person from going off and living off
the land, and they might even keep ties with society. Imagine a woodsman
opening a solar powered laptop to offer environmental reports.
> On the other hand:
>
> The free market price system spontaneously transmits
> the necessary information for local planers -- owners --
> to adjust their activity toward to service of consumer,
> i.e., socail, need. The free market society is run
> by the invisible hand, the invisible hand is the
> invisible planner, is the mind of the masses.
> The free market is the spontaneous and
> decentrally directed collective.
>
No it is not, because the fundamental relationship is one of slavery:
worker-employer. There is a huge power imbalance there. And since there
always will be more workers than employers, the majority of people will
be screwed.
> ************************************************************************
> IAN GODDARD <igoddard@erols.com> Q U E S T I O N A U T H O R I T Y
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> VISIT Ian Goddard's Universe -----> http://www.erols.com/igoddard
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:47 MST