On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:47 PM, Cory Nott wrote: > Jim Syler: >> Umm...Constitutional? Isn't the Constitution an initiation of force? >> Isn't any government an initiation of force? > > Yes, it is. What is your point?
Well, I'd tell you if you hadn't deleted all the previous discussion below (please don't). ::grumble grumble:: Alright, there it is: > While everyone loves power, libertarians are aware that they would > fall prey to the same issues and once in power would quickly move to > minimize the ability to be corrupt by enacting term limits and putting > the country back on solid Constitutional ground such that even the > most corrupt President could do little in the way of harming the > country. Everyone else would be more likely to slide down the path to > totalitarianism if the powers that controlled the state at least > agreed with their values to start with. Umm...Constitutional? Isn't the Constitution an initiation of force? Isn't any government an initiation of force? My point is that how could "real" (in your view) libertarians--that is, NAPsters--work to getting this country back on solid Constitutional ground? Wouldn't that be a violation of their principles? j -- The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another. -- Milton Friedman [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
