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.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Libertarianism as ideology (repl
Message-ID: <1477@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Mar-85 18:24:59 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1477
Posted: Sun Mar 24 18:24:59 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Mar-85 00:14:50 EST
References: <inmet.2042> <1467@dciem.UUCP> <ucbtopaz.834>
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 54
Summary: 


>[Enter parody mode.]
> 
>In article <1467@dciem.UUCP> mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) writes:
>>Nat makes the common mistake of confusing the benefits received
>>from society with the benefits received from people in the society.
> 
>Martin makes the common mistake of confusing a collection of people with an
>entity that can act on its own. In this case, Nat was pointing out that
>most people do not act to benefit Nat, so Martin is claiming that those
>actions aren't the ones that Nat owes society for. Martin, would you be so
>kind as to point out actions which benefit Nat which were not undertaken by
>a person?
> 
>>I think this failure of distinction may well lie at the root of
>>the philosophical differences between libertarians and the people
>>libertarians like to call "socialists."  Libertarians seem to regard
>>society as the sum of its people, whereas "socialists" recognize that
>>the *organization* of society itself contributes very strongly to the
>>benefits people get from society.
> 
>I think this illusion of distinction may well lie at the root of the
>philosophical differences between socialists and the people socialists like
>to call "libertarians." Socialists seem to regard society as an active
>entity, whereas "libertarians" recognize that the people and their
>interactions constitute the sum total of society.
> 
>[Exit parody mode.]

"Parody mode" is the easiest way of avoiding an argument, isn't it?

You miss the point entirely.  It is true only in a very restricted
sense that "the people and their interactions constitute the sum
total of society."  JoSH made a very good analogy with a radio.  Sure,
it consists only of its transistors, resistors, etc. and their
interconnections, but it is a radio, not a collection of parts,
simply because the connections have a specific organization that works
as a radio.  Similarly, it is the *organization* of society that
determines how you live, not the simple fact that there are interacting
people.

I reiterate: [Libertarians] makes the common mistake of confusing the
benefits received from society with the benefits received from
people in the society.

If you still can't see the distinction, think some more about the radio.
As to the proper recipient of the cheque (unquoted part of the article)
anyone duly authorized to collect it on behalf of society will do.  All
organization needs external support, and money is one way to provide it.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt