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: Financing the government of a free society
Message-ID: <1582@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Jun-85 19:26:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: dciem.1582
Posted: Wed Jun 19 19:26:58 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Jun-85 00:10:22 EDT
References: <3841@alice.UUCP> <acf4.1340199>
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 25
Summary: 


>I imagine everyone seeks to limit the scope of democratic control for 
>practical as well as ethical reasons.  On the ethical side, the
>fact that some people advocate a position, be these people a majority or
>not, does not justify a position morally.  On the practical side, it
>would indeed be ridiculous to attempt to subject every decision made
>by any member of society to "voters' preferences."
>
>                                                        Mike Sykora

This brings up a (to me) strong argument for government "interference,"
to counterbalance the overwhelming forces toward social conformity.
If the government does not allow my neighbours to force me to go to
church, to have the "right" flowers in my garden, and so forth, my
freedom is thereby enhanced.  If the government supports my neighbours
in these things (as local governments so often do in the name of
democracy), my freedom is reduced.  Government is needed in the name
of freedom, but government must be distinct from direct democracy.
I fear social pressure to conformity more than I fear (here and now)
government controls on my behaviour.
-- 

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