Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: freedom and taxes: Reply to Barry Message-ID: <1346@dciem.UUCP> Date: Sat, 2-Feb-85 22:25:28 EST Article-I.D.: dciem.1346 Posted: Sat Feb 2 22:25:28 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 3-Feb-85 01:08:00 EST References: <630@wucs.UUCP> <452@whuxl.UUCP> <421@topaz.ARPA> <459@whuxl.UUCP> <4499@ucbvax.ARPA> <462@whuxl.UUCP> Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) Distribution: net Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 28 Summary: > Sevener's notion of 'freedom' seems to be rather different from common >usage. With his definition, it seems as though nobody is free unless nobody >has anything. Or unless everybody has everything. And then if you produce >something, they're not free any more until you give whatever you produced to >everybody. Is a person free if they cannot keep the product of their labor, >but must give it to the community? According to sevener, they are diminishing >everyone's freedom until they give away the products of their labor. > As a favor, would everyone use the word 'S-freedom' when they are talking >about the concept which Sevener means by 'freedom' in order to avoid confusing >those of us who like the traditional meaning of the word? >-- >Jeff Sonntag I didn't read Severner the way Sonntag did. To my eye, Severner was ridiculing the ridiculous libertarian notion of "freedom", which DOES depart dramatically from the everyday notion. How about using L-freedom to refer to the libertarian concept, to avoid confusing those of us (including Sevener, I think) who like the traditional meaning of the word? The problem in arguing with extremists is that a moderate position is labelled extreme. This being the case, who can assert which side of the argument is in fact extreme? -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt