In real world in 1788, NOTA was not an option for the American people or for your slave, although he did have two other actual options, attempt to escape or death. We will never restore liberty until we can successfully cope with reality. This in no way implies that we should not have and continue to promote ideals as you are doing quite well.
For life and liberty, David Macko NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President. ----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Hogarth To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 9:12 AM Subject: Re: Hard Questions was Re: [Libertarian] Re: Ron Paul: a Good Thing for the libertarian movement and the Libertarian Part On 1/19/07, David Macko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Would you have rather been ruled by the British, French or Spanish monarchies or the merciless Indian savages? Please observe that NOTA was not an option. NOTA is *always* an option when you're asking my opinion baout who I'd rather be *ruled by*. Otherwise it's just like asking a black person if he were alive in 1779 would he rather be on a plantation as a slave or in a tonwhouse as a slave? Interesting question, but I'm guessing he (and mostly slaves) would have preferred 'NOTA'. > I strongly recommend that you read a good biography of Washington. An understanding of George Washington is a necessity for any revolutionary. I'm not sure I do consider myself a revolutionary. Revolutions seem to represent merely a change in rulership (although I will say that 'merely' is often a wonderful thigns for the folks with the new rulers - especially at the beginning!). I would like to think of libertarians as offering an evolutionary change in how humans interact. -- Susan Hogarth http://www.colliething.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
