From: Damien Broderick (d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Sun Jul 22 2001 - 23:31:22 MDT
At 11:30 AM 7/22/01 -0400, Jerry commented on Barbara's:
>>I'd like to live in a world where every person was guaranteed basic food,
>>shelter, and medical care.
>Well luckily, you are free to help all that you feel could use it, but your
>not free to take your crusade to save the world (children, homeless,
>crippled, etc....) and make everyone else finance it.
Actually she *is* free to bring about this situation if by brilliance of
advocacy and canny backroom deals she can persuade a plurality of voters in
a psephological state to endorse the program of a winning party with this
option as one of the major planks in its platform.
Is this method unendurably wicked? Yes, if the majority of voters are
persuaded to choose a regime whose declared policies are racist, say, or in
some other way intolerably criminal. But this is a real world operating on
realpolitik, and we make minimax adjustments. Heinlein's novels, e.g.,
often show his doughty individuals paying `squeeze' or even bribes to get
their way or save their skins. In a world of driven hominids, sometimes
it's easier all round to pay off the bullies or the officious, educate and
perhaps conscript their children via the Pure Light of Reason, and keep the
peace while improving your lot. And sometimes, of course, it's necessary to
throw up the windows and scream with all your might, `Fuck it, we're not
putting *up* with this shit any more.' But your neighbors might disagree
over what precisely constitutes the shit, and decide not to put up with it...
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:02 MST