At 7:51 PM -0700 on 7/10/99, Alain Farmer wrote:
>Alain : It is because it was NOT the case that "all live equally
>bad/good" that it failed. Systematic inequities sap motivation, that's
>for sure.
And certainly if person A produces 200 sprockets and person B produces 100
(both, however, are doing their best), and both get the same reward, there
is a systemic inequality?
>Anthony : We might want to take it off list :)
>
>Alain : Agreed, but I cannot host it yet because my EIMS/Macjordomo is
>still not working.
I could get one of those listbot things set up to host it.
>Alain : Nothing wrong with property. The political philosopher Rousseau
>would indeed agree with us that property is important. To be truly
>free, Rousseau states, every citizen should not be a tenant (own the
>land that they inhabit) and he should not be obliged to sell his
>workforce to insure his security. Otherwise, freedom would be merely an
>illusion because you're at the mercy of your employer and/or your
>landlord.
Heheh. No you're not. You can quit and/or move. The right to property does
not mean that you get property for merely being human, but that you have
the right to property that you aquire: That is, you have the right ot
dispose of it as you please.
>
>>While Marx ideas would of worked if his assumptions
>>about people were correct, and if everything went
>>exactly as he wanted, I argue that such cannot be the
>>case, and that Marx's ideas are thus doomed to failure.
>
>Alain : There's more to it than that. Marx was merely one theorist,
>albeit an important one. After we finish up with Marx, we can continue
>our debate by discussing other flawed political philosophies, like
>Capitalism for example (and other alternatives too).
I must state for the record that I do not believe that Capitalism is
flawed, except in implementation.
>
>> Let me add in "Altruism causes war" to the list, too.
If an altruistic country ultimately decays to starvation (which I argue it
does) it may then see a country that did not decay. It's people, being
conditioned that need justifies the means, would not hesitate to start a
war to satisfy their "need" by pluder of a more successfull nation (i.e.,
one that is capitalistic)
