Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!jj
From: jj@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Regarding libertarians and arguments thereof
Message-ID: <3594@alice.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Apr-85 10:41:33 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3594
Posted: Fri Apr 19 10:41:33 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 03:17:56 EST
Organization: New Jersey State Farm for the Terminally Bewildered
Lines: 54


Dan McK comments that he would find the discussions of libertarianism
more interesting/enlightening/whatever if those who were discussing
it would not build straw men (ideas deliberately developed and
untruthfully associated with libertarianism) and then shoot down these
carefully, or occasionally not so carefully, constructed falsehoods
that have been set forth for the purpose of being misleadingly
dismantled.  (I will include the deliberate emotional blackmail
of the "women's rights" issues, even though there isn't a trace
of logic in it  in this discussion simply because it's a deliberate,
and conciously misleading method/act of debate.)

Dan McK, I feel, does not realize the one fear that many people have
of libertarianism<If he does indeed realize it, he is far too
politic to explain it>, namely that under a libertarian philosophy,
individuals will be responsible for their own actions, triumphs,
and errors(, as well as much more, but let's not cloud the
issue.)  Many individuals fear that they cannot survive under such
circumstances, and are thus driven to use any tactic that they
can conceive of or uncover to discredit or slow the spread of a system
that they regard as threatening to their way of life.  In fact,
it is terrifying to many people to think that they must, in the
end, rely on only themselves. (Children often appear to learn
about "growing up" when they begin to understand the concept and
feel the terror.)  It is indeed unfortunate that many people who
have either been mislead or who, in fact, feel this terror would
fare much better under a less restrictive and more individually responsible
system.  

Note that I attach no malicious intent to the behavior of most
individuals.  The question of fear, and that of malice, are
entirely independant, and should remain so.(I have noticed a trend
among some "Objectivists", although not on this net, to ascribe
all such behavior to overt malice, a position that is destructive
to all involved.)

I have noticed, at least in my own discussions of libertarianism,
that some individuals will proceed immedately to the question
of "is this system stable" (a concern I regard as well founded,
although certainly unanswered in either direction) or some other
concern related to the behavior and functioning of the proposed
system, and some will proceed to "well, what you mean is... " 
and then on to some sort of sophistry.  

I leave the reader to make his or her own conclusions regarding
the motivation behind the varying behavior of individual 
debate participants. <Now there's a  debate tactic!:->

'Nuff said?
-- 
DO TEDDY BEARS HAVE OPINIONS?  ASK YOURS TODAY!
"I'm amazed that men like you can be so shallow, thick and slow"

(ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj