From: mark robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [Disclaimer for readers of all "libertarian vs anarchist" > debates: > > > > Although the "opponents" usually seem totally opposed to each > other's viewpoints (even their names: "libertarian" / > "anarchist"), both are in agreement on the main problem (big > government and non-consensual force) and the obvious solution > (reduction of the problem). Both philosophies (boyd's & paul's) > value the minimization of force/aggression & govt. The difference > lies in the details of best achieving this reduction. Even though > the debate process usually includes each side passionately > accusing the other of questionable motives and likely failure, > neither view intends to support force; both intend to reduce it. > But each sees their own view as superior and the other as > inferior, in regard to the best chance of eventual / long-term > success of achieving and maintaining the goal. > > > > Judging the validity of either side is not the purpose of this > disclaimer. Said disclaimer would be wise to refrain from any > more positioned comment than to say "it is a dilemma". But said > disclaimant is a fool to think that comment (or this disclaimer) > will be able to retain a perfectly neutral position - inserted in > the middle of the debate. Even so, he thinks such a reminder of > the common denominator is warranted, even if only for the benefit > of the reader.]
this is actually very well thought out and informative post. And until we get much further along the road to liberty and freedom, it is really only a theoretical debate on an obscure point of philosophy. And I will willingly concede that until then it is a moot point. BWS 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/
