Wim and all,
Wim wrote:
Do I understand rightly (from your 2/7 9:48 -0700 post to Marco) that
your real libertarianism implies that the US should not deploy its
army outside its own borders at all and that a really libertarian
population would boycott US arms manufacturers when they export
Glen, (and a p.s. to Wim, Lawrence and Gerhard)
Few simple questions.
Isn't it normal to have a permission in order to drive a car in Vermont? Yes, I
guess. And rightly, as driving a car can be very dangerous, to yourself, and
that's more important, to the others. And don't they retire your
Glen,
Just to clarify my point of view on a few things (if they was unclear).
Glen wrote:
I think you are being ridiculous and no doubt you think I am a
barbarian. Your points are articulately put and I can understand your line
of reasoning even if I disagree with it, as I hope you can
Hi Glen and All
On 3 Jul 2001, at 9:43, N. Glen Dickey wrote:
The purpose of the Thought Experiment was to see if there were any
conditions in which capital punishment would be justified. It seems like
you are saying there would be, which while we might differ on the
circumstances we seem
Rasheed and all,
Rasheed wrote:
If this person that you killed was only trying to take your wallet, would
it
still be 'good' to kill him?
I'd need more specifics to really analyze this correctly. If someone pulls
a lethal weapon and threatens to destroy me unless I comply with their
demands,
Horse and all,
Thought Experiment #2 is posted further down for anyone interested.
Glen wrote:
Thought Experiment:
Say you are the citizen of an inhabitated island in the south pacific
that
is a sovereign nation with a population of ten citizens. A serial killer
kills seven of the
Wim,
Sorry about that, it was just a little sarcasm (Americans have mastered that
art), and i can understand how it could be difficult to pick that up,
especially when it's typed instead of spoken. Basically, im just pointing
out the irony of punishing someone who killed someone by killing
Glen,
I guess you would need more specifics to properly analyze my example. Let's
say that this guy pulls a gun on you in a dark alley and says, 'give me your
wallet or i'll kill you.' Let's say you have a gun he doesnt see, and you
can either give him the wallet and be on your way, or kill
Rasheed,
I guess you would need more specifics to properly analyze my example.
Let's
say that this guy pulls a gun on you in a dark alley and says, 'give me
your
wallet or i'll kill you.' Let's say you have a gun he doesnt see, and you
can either give him the wallet and be on your way, or
Glen,
Interesting post. I never realized that about Vermont. But, you also have
to realize that the SF Bay area is much more populated than Alaska or
Vermont, inevitably creating more crime. People in big cities can buy guns
from arms dealers fairly easily (i think), so maybe gun control
Rasheed,
Try http://www.reason.com/bi/guns.html or perhaps http://www.jpfo.org/ .
Reason is also a great site on a plethora of issues.
Well if you disarm the the population and the military decides to take over
and it comes down to an armed revolution your pretty screwed. Why are the
federal
To: Platt Glen
Platt,
you will agree that giving up your own life (which has its value, its
duties, its responsibilities, and its unique and valuable path to go) to go
distribute condoms in South Africa is not an easy thing even if you think
it's worthy. None of us has infinite time and
Gerhard, Marco, Andrea and all,
Just to be clear, I do not think the US is a country that is currently
following a Libertarian path especialily in the area of foreign policy.
While I wish this to be the case, it simply isn't. While the US might be
more Libertarian compared to other countries, I
Blade and David,
We've been over the death penalty topic about a month ago, what i concluded
from it was that it is in fact immoral to kill a person, unless that person
is a threat to society UNLESS you kill him (ie, crimes such as treason).
This doesnt apply very much in modern times. Do
In a message dated 6/28/2001 10:52:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see no contradiction between guns and the passage in Lila. If a social
pattern kills an individual for violating social prohibitions (mal prohibum)
then yes that's bad but if I kill someone intent
Wim,
You're right. That'll teach those criminals not to kill people.
rasheed
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
Glen,
As ive said before in an earlier post, you can't expect Nigerians to be as
well-informed about events as we are in the US. And in many 3rd world
countries, starting a revolutiong isnt as easy as you seem to believe.
People can be arrested just for printing anti-government sentiments
Platt,
Marco
Anyway Platt, as I wrote once, here in Italy even the atheists are catholic.
When we say that we put human life above everything we are probably meaning
something a guy called Jesus used to say many years ago. I'm not very
religious,
but I've always read in the MOQ a
Glen:
Oh no we're in agreement! My argument was not supposed to make sense about
McVeigh. I would not have executed McVeigh, but I do not represent the
government of the US. The point of the thought experiment was to describe
the most extreme conditions to see if Gerhard would ever support
Hi Glen and All
Sorry for the delay in responding - t'ings ta do, ya know.
On 30 Jun 2001, at 10:36, N. Glen Dickey wrote:
Horse and all,
I know this passage well and you raise some very good points here. And YES
this passage does give me considerable hesitation in putting forward my
Dear
Rasheed,
You wrote 2/7 14:52 -0400 in the first
response to my borrowed description (29/6 12:01 +0200) of capital punishment as
killing people to prove killing people is
wrong:
You're right. That'll teach
those criminals not to kill people.
Didn't you get my message, are you just
Glen,
given that your example has no sense about McVeigh, as he did not kill the 70%
of the USA population and he was already in a jail when he has been executed...
Thought Experiment:
Say you are the citizen of an inhabitated island in the south pacific that
is a sovereign nation with a
Glen
Marco,
You seem pretty uptight about this racist thing. You think you've never had
a rascist thought or never made a racist statement before?
Could be, but I'm pretty sure that my post about Nigeria was completely
anti-racist. On the other hand, I think that exploitation of weak
Hi All
On 29 Jun 2001, at 15:42, Platt Holden wrote:
Of all the contributions America has made to the history of the world,
the idea of freedom from a social hierarchy has been the greatest. It
was fought for in the American Revolution and confirmed in the Civil
War.
And then threw it
Hi All
Lila by RM Pirsig
Chapter 13
When a society is not itself threatened, as in the execution of individual criminals,
the issue
becomes more complex. In the case of treason or insurrection or war a criminalÂ’s
threat to a
society can be very real. But if an established social structure
Hi Horse:
On 29 Jun 2001, at 15:42, Platt Holden wrote:
Of all the contributions America has made to the history of the world,
the idea of freedom from a social hierarchy has been the greatest. It
was fought for in the American Revolution and confirmed in the Civil
War.
I didn't
Hi Platt
On 30 Jun 2001, at 10:21, Platt Holden wrote:
On 29 Jun 2001, at 15:42, Platt Holden wrote:
Of all the contributions America has made to the history of the world,
the idea of freedom from a social hierarchy has been the greatest. It
was fought for in the American
Horse and all,
I know this passage well and you raise some very good points here. And YES
this passage does give me considerable hesitation in putting forward my
previous arguments, yet let us try a thought experiment and reason together.
Thought Experiment:
Say you are the citizen of an
Platt,
You wrote to Marco:
But, I digress. As a humanitarian, what have you done (voluntarily) to
alleviate the suffering of the Nigerians? Or even the Serbs next door?
I guess you solved the problem of having to deal with humanitarians in a neat way. If
anybody have the time to argue with
Dear MoQ'ers,
Glen wrote:
Thought Experiment:
Say you are the citizen of an inhabitated island in the south pacific that
is a sovereign nation with a population of ten citizens. A serial killer
kills seven of the citizens. You, a friend and the serial killer are the
only people left on the
Hi Platt,
What I meant is that I regard nothing as more worthy than human life,
and this for the many reasons explained elsewhere. I will never feel
comfortable with the idea that some men are entitled to decide of
another man's life. On the other hand, if human life is so important, in
line of
Hi Andrea:
What I meant was that you should go to Africa to distribute condoms to
prevent AIDS and the subsequent deaths from that behaviorial
disease, not to prevent children from being born into misery. Since you
value human life above all else, it seems you should be doing that or
Platt, Andrea, all
Most
humantarians talk a good game, but rarely practice what they preach.
Indeed a good reason to be anti-humanitarian
Pirsig railed against Rigel in Chapter 7 of LIla:
The ones who go posing as moralists are the worst. Cost-free
morals. Full of great ways for
Glen
If there's something I can't bear is to be called racist. Call me stupid,
arrogant, weak, unfair, ignorant ... and I will smile. But not racist !
1. I don't think that a civil war is always a good option. During the cold war,
both Russians and Americans were well disposed to give help
Hi Marco:
Most
humantarians talk a good game, but rarely practice what they preach.
Indeed a good reason to be anti-humanitarian
No, a good reason not to trust those who boast about their
humanitarism.
Pirsig railed against Rigel in Chapter 7 of LIla:
The ones who go posing
Marco,
You seem pretty uptight about this racist thing. You think you've never had
a rascist thought or never made a racist statement before? What are you
some kind of special uber human? I was fortunately enough to grow up around
all kinds of people and it's my observation that non-virulent
Andrea, Platt and all,
While i'm not keen on social pattern (the state) destroying intellectual
patterns (citizens), there are some animals (biological patterns) out there
that happen to share a species with you and me. Look at any case history of
a serial killer and it's clear that social
Andi Norby wrote:
David,
I have a lot of trouble understanding your statement below. It seems to
be
in support of the death penalty, although you don't say that explicitly.
SNIP
I suppose I just don't see how killing someone is more effective than
locking them up. McVeigh would not have
Greetings Glen,
You wrote:
Define more likely. Vermont and Alaska both have damn near zero gun
laws
and very little crime, nothing on the scale of California. Have you spent
much time around firearms to where you can honestly make this claim? I
have
and it seems pretty foundless.
My
. Marder: "Re: MD Religion/God ~ MoQ/DQ"
In reply to: N. Glen Dickey: "RE: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Greetings Glen,
threat,
now every idiot with half a brain knows the amount of coverage you can get
for such an act.
-Original Message-
From: killer blade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 June 2001 12:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
killer blade wrote:
Now I don't support the actions of the likes of
Timonty McVeigh but it is clear that he should not
have been executed, because he was a
SOURCE OF THOUGHT.
For society to grow and prosper we must heed
PIrsig's ideas and evolve beyond archaic ideas
of revenge as a means
killer blade wrote:
Now I don't support the actions of the likes of Timonty McVeigh but it is clear
that he should not have been executed, because he was a SOURCE OF THOUGHT.
and David Scarlett wrote:
What if it's not revenge, but rather the most effective method of preventing a
person from
Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 23:09:04 +1000
killer blade wrote:
Now I don't support the actions of the likes of
Timonty McVeigh but it is clear that he should not
have been executed, because he was a
SOURCE OF THOUGHT.
For society to grow and prosper we must
Hi Andrea:
ANDREA:
For someone who values life above everything, an opinion or
a guess is not enough to execute a man or a woman.
Does this mean YOU value life above everything? Whose life?
Humans? Animals? Bugs? Trees? If human life, how come you're not
down in South Africa handing out
Sam and all,
Sam wrote:
(Compare the murder rates of inner city London with inner city Washington
DC). That
doesn't seem an outrageous claim.
Well it certainly seems like you avoided my previous question pretty
effectively. Do you only know what the experts tell you or do you know
where of
Hi again Glen, somewhere along the line our wires are getting crossed,
because I really don't recognise my perspective in the position that you
seem to be criticising.
Sam wrote:
(Compare the murder rates of inner city London with inner city
Washington
DC). That
doesn't seem an outrageous
Glen,
Altho i dont know too much about Nigeria in particular, i know that the
citizens of many poor countries dont have the same opportunity to be act
responsibly. First of all, the media is biased towards the government (eg
Iraq, which tells its people that sadam is basically God). On the
Gerhard, Wim Nusselder and all,
Gerhard wrote:
The subjectivity in MoQ is still one of my headaches, it should not be
there.
I surmise that you are not an engineer. How many ways are there to build a
bridge? Which one is the true bridge? Nonsense. They all do the same
thing but there are
N. Glen Dickey wrote:
To my ear it sure sounds like you don't think the Nigerians don't bear much
resonsibility for themselves and from my point of view that opinion is
rascist. Why should I hold the Nigerians to less of a standard than I hold
myself and my own countrymen? They don't seem
an attack physically than shaking my had at the futility of
violence.
-Original Message-
From: N. Glen Dickey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 June 2001 08:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
Gerhard, Wim Nusselder and all,
Gerhard wrote
Stephen wrote:
i don't know
of any martial art that doesn't take the only for defense, never attack
line seriously when you talk to its senior practitioners.
Aikido certainly does, and I would argue that ju-jitsu is sympathetic to
acting only in self-defense (or defense of another).
I
: Elizaphanian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 June 2001 10:59
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
Stephen wrote:
i don't know
of any martial art that doesn't take the only for defense, never attack
line seriously when you talk to its senior practitioners
Andrea, Stephen, Sam, and all,
Andrea wrote,
so your point is: oppression does not exist; or in other words, blame on
the
oppressed. Why aren't they fighting and dying for their freedom? They must
really have no backbone.
My point is that to absolve the Nigerians for all responsibility for
Glen Dickey,
Gerhard wrote:
IMO, Libertarianism is like trying to swim with an outboard motor, you have great
possibilities for a high speed experience, but this is the only quality you can have
hopes for - and you will probably drown before you get things going. The thing will
not
work
Sam wrote:
The point being that violence begets violence; even if there arise
situations that leave us no alternative but a violent response, those
situations have come about because of poor judgement, mistakes or plain
evil
intent earlier on in the process. The only way to make things
that
can only make the problem worse.
From: Elizaphanian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 19:01:32 +0100
Sam wrote:
The point being that violence begets violence; even if there arise
Andi wrote:
It's really unfair to blame
the problem of violence in young males so largely on hormones.
My last post was somewhat hastily written, and there were some things I
didn't spell out. I actually don't think we disagree too much on this. My
view is really that there is a
Gerhard, Sam, Elizaphanian and all,
Gerhard wrote:
I do not expect that the goverment is going to force people to experience
dynamic
qualities, but I have hopes for a goverment giving optimal possibility for
the people to
experience DQ.
I don't think the State can do that. I think the state
Dear Glen,
I don't mind to agree to disagree with
you on the value of drug use. I have no strong opinions on it and wouldn't even
mind much to call a retreat if someone explained to me that drug use is
essential to create certain higher-level-valuable phenomena, of which
psychedelic
Marco and all,
Marco wrote:
3. Free trade
This supposed free trade is not free at all in the third world, where
capitalist
firms (not only American, of course) still persevere to act immorally
toward the
local populations and environments. It's cynical to say that it's fault of
the
Nigerian
Gerhard, Marcos, and all,
Gerhard wrote:
I think that is why we can agree based on MoQ, as I see economic activity
as a social
pattern of values. This have been discussed in depth earlier.
In Lila Pirsig states (Chapter 13 Paragraph 27 pg 163 Bantam HC 1991);
Second, there were moral codes
Dear Glen
(AreteLaugh),
You wrote 25/6 02:52
-0700:
What remedy would Marco provide to an
unarmed population saddled with a tyrannical government? Learn to like
it?
I would recommend reading M.K. Gandhi
An autobiography, or The story of my experiments with truth,
Ahmedabad: Navajivan,
AreteLaugh and any other that is still interested,
So we disagree on some different items. What troubles me is that I think we both are
basing our argument on MoQ (most of the time) and end up with different answers. I
admit to believe in Utilarism (Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill), and
Wim
Nusselder,
Perhaps it is best
if we agree to disagree on this matter. I will conceed the their are many
paths to the top of the mountain and mine is surely not the only way to the top
(nor is yours). We obviously draw very different conclusions from
thehistoric example of the last
Gerhard,
I am unsure if we should be that troubled by our disagreements over these
issues. I actually became a Libertarian after adopting the MoQ precisely
because I think that the MoQ suports Libertarian ideas. Still we don't
argue about which painting in a gallery is real and which is not do
Glen,
I don't want to re-open the socialist thread, as it is very recent, and I think
your position is almost the same than other's, especially Platt's. Just, Platt
seemed to be a little more disposed to listen to the others. I'm here as I've
not understood one thing:
Sure let's absolve the
AreteLaugh,
The subjectivity in MoQ is still one of my headaches, it should not be there.
However, I hope I'm correct to say that you agree that it is possible for MoQ to lead
different people to different solutions for similar problem, as you stated. That do
IMO result in a situation where
Gerhard all,
AreteLaugh wrote:
Libertarianism might be summed as 1) Property and personal ownership, 2)
Free interaction between consenting individuals and 3) A State that is
limited to assisting it's citizens assert these rights in the face of
aggression.
Gerhard wrote:
I think that anachism
AreteLaugh,
You wrote:
Economic activity relates primarily to the intellectual patterns of values.
I think that is why we can agree based on MoQ, as I see economic activity as a social
pattern of values. This have been discussed in depth earlier.
Also read Marcos e-mail of 22nd of May:
AreteLaugh,
What examples of socialism have you seen?
What in your mind is the difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism?
Gerhard
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MD Real Libertarians Please Stand Up
AreteLaugh,
What examples of socialism have you seen?
What in your mind is the difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism?
Gerhard
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss
AreteLaugh,
You wrote:
Libertarianism might be summed as 1) Property and personal ownership, 2)
Free interaction between consenting individuals and 3) A State that is
limited to assisting it's citizens assert these rights in the face of
aggression. I would assume an Anarchist would not believe
73 matches
Mail list logo
