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,net.politics.theory Subject: Re: Emigration vs. withdrawing from a group:Human Race Message-ID: <1430@dciem.UUCP> Date: Thu, 28-Feb-85 17:47:26 EST Article-I.D.: dciem.1430 Posted: Thu Feb 28 17:47:26 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 28-Feb-85 21:23:17 EST References: <1597@bmcg.UUCP> <233@tilt.FUN> <676@unmvax.UUCP> <240@tilt.FUN> Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) Distribution: net Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 22 Summary: >I interpreted your use of "governments of a more organized form" to mean >governments that adhere less to the principles of libertarianism than the >fabled (optimally libertarian) Libertaria. Hence your statement was roughly >equivalent to ~the mere existance of non-libertarian countries is a refutation >of the empirical success of Libertarianism.~ I was pointing out *your* fallacy >by analogy: ~the existance of non-capitalist countries is a refutation of the >empirical success of capitalism.~ ... gee, now where did P and Q get reversed? > >Face it, the existance of more organized forms of governments is not a >refutation of the empirical success of Libertarianism. Unfortunately, the reverse analogy doesn't work, because only the libertarian asserts that the (apparently) libertarian organization of states will allow the best to survive preferentially. So although the existence of non-libertarian states *should* embarrass a libertarian, the existence of non-X-ist states will embarrass no X-ist of another stripe. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt