Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ea.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm From: mwm@ea.UUCP Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: re:replies to ??? on libertarianism Message-ID: <9800036@ea.UUCP> Date: Mon, 29-Oct-84 15:01:00 EST Article-I.D.: ea.9800036 Posted: Mon Oct 29 15:01:00 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 1-Nov-84 03:48:01 EST References: <113@iwlc8.UUCP> Lines: 36 Nf-ID: #R:iwlc8:-11300:ea:9800036:000:1823 Nf-From: ea!mwm Oct 29 14:01:00 1984 ["Why should a blockhead get one in ten?"] This is a blatant attempt to get the libertarian discussion out of the greed vs. extortion rut it's been in since its inception. Libertarians disagree about whether the government can pass laws regulating the use of property, and about what is and isn't property. This ranges from everything being property (anarchy) on the far right, to natural resources and production facilities not being property - and hence controlled by the government (socialism) on the far left. [Personally, I'm far left; democratic socialism is a right-wing plot. :-] What seem to penetrate to the core of libertarianism is something that hasn't been discussed here. Namely, that i own my body. [I *hope* there aren't any libertarians - or anyone else - who thinks that people should be property!] The statists, either on the right or on the left, appear to disagree about this, and pass laws to control what I can do with my body. For instance, the use of recreational drugs other than those in the "correct set" draws cries of "that's bad for you, you'll be a menace to society" and laws against it from the right-wing statists. On the other hand, trying to use medicinal drugs other than those in the "correct set" draws cries of "that could be dangerous, you could get hurt" and laws against it from the left-wing statists. Both groups of people, though they are urging entirely different sets of laws on the populace, are doing the same thing. They have decided that they know better what's good for me than I do, and are trying to protect me from myself. I don't really object to people trying to protect me from myself. What I object to is throwing people in jail when they don't agree with you on the subject, and act in what *they* think is their best interest. Comments, anyone?