From: hal@rain.org
Date: Fri Jan 15 1999 - 12:13:22 MST
---hal@rain.org wrote:
> Consider: a group of socialists gets together and builds themselves a
> space station. They agree that the property will be the common ownership
> of the group, with specified procedures for group decisions. This is
> analogous to how a corporation works. The whole thing is organized
> voluntarily, and all the means of production are controlled by their
> society. Where is the force?
>
> Hal
Terry Donaghe, <tdonaghe@yahoo.com>, replies:
> Good point, but I was referring to governments. In the case of the
> spaceship we may not be talking about a government. What if someone
> on the ship worked really hard to create something *really* valuable
> and then decided not to share it with her crewmates. Since she's
> confined to a spaceship, her association with her crewmates is no
> longer voluntary. Would they have to resort to force to make her
> share her creation or would the socialist commune partially dissolve?
Distinctions between governments and mutual agreements go by the wayside
if we assume that everyone involved voluntarily agreed to live by the
rules of their society. Newborn children are a sticky issue with this
approach, since they are born into society without agreeing to anything.
Generally you can consider that while minors they are bound to obey
their parents, and then when older they have a choice between accepting
the rules of society or leaving.
This would work best in a system where emigration was possible, such as
the space station (not space ship) I was proposing, where the assumption
is that other space stations with different rules would exist, or of
course on a planet where different countries existed with varying rules.
We have even discussed the possibility of people choosing their rules
on an individual basis, rather than on where they live, although that
gets pretty complicated.
The lady who made something and then wanted to keep it is violating
the rules that she herself agreed to (assuming that private ownership
was not allowed in their society). This is unfortunate for her, but
that is the price we pay for saying that people own their own lives.
They have to be able to bind themselves to rules.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:02:50 MST