From: Eric Watt Forste (arkuat@pobox.com)
Date: Tue Dec 31 1996 - 14:28:59 MST
Eli writes:
>If bullets were the only way to control crack, I wouldn't use them,
>because they wouldn't work. I know the story, too. That's why I favor
>biological warfare instead of coercive force.
In what way is biological warfare not coercive?
Let's say I own some plants. Hell, just for grins lets say that I'm an
impoverished Peruvian farmer. I can grow coca and sell it to the mob
and send my kids to the big university in Lima, or I can grow something
else and my kids can fight over who gets the farm after I die. Now all
of a sudden all the coca plants in South America die and my options are
reduced to the latter unpleasant option, thanks to Eliezer Yudkowsky's
"noncoercive" biological warfare agents.
If this isn't coercive force, I suppose you don't think taxation is
either.
Now if, on the other hand, you were planning to *buy* all the coca
plants and seeds in the world *before* destroying them, I'd have no
problems with your plan. But I'd be very curious about how you plan to
finance it.
-- Eric Watt Forste ++ arkuat@pobox.com ++ http://www.pobox.com/~arkuat/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:56 MST