Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsstat!laura
From: laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: YARL (Yet Another Reply to Laura)
Message-ID: <1436@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Nov-83 07:24:11 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.1436
Posted: Tue Nov 15 07:24:11 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Nov-83 10:13:32 EST
References: <522@ubc-visi.UUCP>
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 25

Sorry, I rewrote and reorganised and should have changed a 'first' to a
'second'. (or vice versa, I forget now). Personally, I think that we
no longer have a democracy but a mobocracy which is not the same thing,
no matter what you call it.

I am a strong advocate of anarchy. I do not think that we are mature enough
as a society to stand this right now, however. But I do not think that
sheltering and protecting us, and preserving a false idea of security
is any way to make people more mature. I want lots of freedom precisely
because it will make a lot of people have to think about how to behave
responsibly. 

Incidentally, you will have to look up "paranoia" again. It is generally
used to describe certain human behaviour which I do not exhibit. The
tendancy to say that because X motivates Y all people who believe X
also exhibit Y is strong, but not justified.

While you are at it, you might want to look up "delusion" and think about
how you might go about discovering whether your belief in security is a
delusion. Hobnob with mprvaxa!tbray on "induction and deduction and the nature
of reality and perception, truth and opinion" if you want to do more on
this.  (he is closer to you than I!)

laura creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laura