[Platt] Politics and economics is all about what people do. Too often that simple fact is forgotten and the products of human effort magically emerge without acknowledgment or regard for the individual effort required.
[Krimel] Certainly no one I have read in this forum denies the value of the individual. What is missing is your acknowledgement that individual effort is only meaningful even expressable in its social context. [Platt] All you are saying is that when two or more individuals combine their efforts the result is "collective." The collectives I speak of those who combine to exercise political or social power over others. [Krimel] Then all governments, societies and systems of morality are collective. They all set limits on the freedom of individuals. They all seek to promote static patterns in the behavior of members of society. [Platt] Indeed. How about happiness? [Krimel] So how would you measure this? Without some reference point how do you know whether happiness is up or down? How can you say which systems produce more or less of it? [Platt] Again, a systems approach. On the contrary, I believe the political and economic system is especially relevant to individual choice. [Krimel] Of course a systems approach; we are talking about systems for influencing the probably distributions of human behavior. We want to know given a range of options or a set of rules what individuals are likely to do. [Platt] I would measure the quality of a society by the degree of individual freedom from government interference it provides, the less, the better. [Krimel] So you favor anarchy? I suppose you are not alone. But I would favor a system that regulates a host of forms of interference from ignorance and disease to poverty and pollution. You continue to ignore the unchecked power of concentrated economic forces which are largely ignored in the US constitution but are enormously influential in constraining individual liberty in favor of collective wishes. [Platt] I think the history of liberty in America and elsewhere pretty much validates the benefits of individualism. [Krimel] History is a cup of tea. You can read what you want into the sludge at the bottom. [Platt] The less constraint from the coercive power of government the better wouldn't you say? [Krimel] Generally speaking I would seek to balance cohesive power in a number of forms, economic coercion included. It is not a question of whether we have rules or whether we coerce the behavior of citizen but what set of rules and which behaviors we want to increase or decrease. These are decisions that can only be made collectively. >[Krimel] > Again, what you choose to measure is critical to your evaluation. [Platt] Indeed. How about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a start? [Krimel] Again how do you measure these? The society with the highest population? The society without laws? And again with happiness... What did you say that is again? Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
