Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uiucdcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!renner
From: renner@uiucdcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: FORCE, Democracy and Libertarian
Message-ID: <29200196@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 30-Jan-85 05:32:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.29200196
Posted: Wed Jan 30 05:32:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 00:14:59 EST
References: <419@klipper.UUCP>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:klipper:-41900:uiucdcs:29200196:000:960
Nf-From: uiucdcs!renner    Jan 30 04:32:00 1985

>> No, the world is an anarchy. The definition I use (which may not correspond
>> with any other definition) is that a libertarian society has a final
>> arbitrater (which we call a government) for disputes between members, but
>> an anarchy has no such arbitrater.
>>				-- Biep (biep@klipper)
   
>  Then by your definition, the world of countries is a libertarian
>  society, not an anarchy.  We DO have a World Court,  whether the US
>  recognizes it or no;  the World Court is SUPPOSED to act as an
>  arbitrator.  (Isn't that the function of a court rather than of a
>  government?)			-- Martin Taylor (mmt@cdiem)

I believe that what Biep wanted to say is that libertarian society has an
arbitrator which can enforce its decisions.  The World Court cannot, which
is why "international law" is a joke, why the World Court serves mainly as a
propaganda platform, and why the world is not a libertarian society.

Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner