Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> We have had no public weapons industries except for the Springfield
> Arsenal, which deals exclusively with artillery and light infantry
> weapons research. Claiming that someone that is a government contractor
> is getting a collectivist push is only so because only government has a
> monopoly on the use of massive force. Corporations don't open
> your wallet at the point of a gun.
This missed the point of my note. The MO of the government is to do
the hard part by supporting in one way or another private enterprise. Now
weapon technology was only one of many examples referred to where the
collectivistic drive has made a fundemental difference. Anyway, government
violence, at least in recent time, receives its mandate from the population.
Initially,
the American population support the Viet Nam war, once the government effort
lost popular support it was forced to change its tactics then eventually
withdraw.
> >
> > What history says to me that individualistic or collectivistic societies
and
> > philosophies are premised on distorted perspectives of who and what
> > human beings are. We are both social (collective) and individual so our
> > societies need to reflect a similar balance which is no mean trick and
not
> > always successful, but it is none the less the most correct approch.
>
> Who is social?
All of us are social by our nature. We would not be human if we had no
interaction
with others since it is others who teach us to be human. This, of course, is
not addressing
personal traits of being gregarious, solitary, or anything in between. If
you are not
living alone in a cave you exist in and are part of the collective
experience. Sorry.
Robert Wasley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:44 MDT