From: Paul Hughes (paul@planetp.cc)
Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 15:10:50 MDT
GBurch1@aol.com wrote:
> I personally think that the fact that you have found members of "the
> intelligentsia" to condemn extropian thinking as "fascist" is simply the
> result of a lack of understanding of the extent to which a rigorous and
> honest approach to questions of human liberty results in questioning sacred
> cows. Mainstream political thought assumed that a powerful state is the sole
> and only safeguard of liberty for so long that any questioning of that idea
> was immediately condemned as somehow "anti-liberty".
Please keep in mind I have never called extropians fascists - I was simply
echoing the sentiments of others. As most of the people I'm referring to also
share many of our extropian goals, they have every right to question you back
when you're advocating that all civil rights protections become commodities up
for sale to the highest bidder. I don't think I would be out of line by saying
that the extreme version of free-markets being advocated in these circles is
nothing short of a full-blown Piracy!
The problem escalated when I attempted to point this out and suggest that their
must be a better way that does not involve government intervention. I have
played "devils advocate" in an attempt to get answers from people who are
obviously more informed than me. There have been a few rational exceptions, most
noticeably yours and Hal Finney's, however the majority of comments have
consisted of:
"What is this the Muppet Show?!", "You are obviously a closet marxist!", "No,
there is no other way - the poor by definition do not deserve anything!", "You
can dish it out, but you can't take it!", ad nauseum.
And what utterly befuddles me is why people are either gleeful about that fact
that the poor get screwed or at best refuse to admit their is a problem, or
"Things will just work out, trust me, have faith". And yet ironically, I'm the
one being accused of not debating this rigorously. I should have added to my
list rampant hypocrisy as well.
For the record, I would always prefer a free-market solution over a government
one - **assuming it does a better job!**. So as Michael Lorrey said, "don't fix
something that ain't broke". Well, the current system we have is obviously
broken, but is the fix going to makes things better or worse? For the umpteenth
time I going to turn this around again, and say if free-markets can do such a
better job at tackling the complex issues of civil liberties, then show me! I'm
not the one around here making any claims.
There is a saying, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". The claim
of free-marketers is that they will do a better job at handling civil liberties
issues. Well, I'm still waiting.....
Paul Hughes
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:49 MST