Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Hunger and the Free Market
Message-ID: <1000@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 20:09:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1000
Posted: Thu Jul 25 20:09:44 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Jul-85 00:11:43 EDT
References: <2919@topaz.ARPA>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 33

In article <2919@topaz.ARPA> josh@topaz.UUCP (J Storrs Hall) writes:

>>Do you seriously think we're going to believe the answers are in your book
>>any more than we believe the answers are in the Bible?  Yes we can read
>>the book: but you have already.  Do us the courtesy of summarizing the
>>book's rebuttal to Taylor's argument, rather than insulting us.

>There are many issues which cannot be fully understood on the basis
>of flip repartee on netnews, and this is one of them.  One can 
>point to this social mechanism, that economic tendency; but to understand
>what actually happens when actual Communists take over an actual
>country one must consult sources more informed than net.politics.

Believe it or not, sir, everyone who is not a libertarian is not a socialist
(who we know turn into communists under a full moon).  It is not an either-or
proposition.

>I'm not writing for those who, like you and Tim Sevener, have an open
>mouth instead of an open mind;  I'm writing primarily for my conscience
>to speak out against the collectivism and love of coercion that is the
>dogma of the current intellectual elite.  If there are people reading who
>are interested in understanding why people starve in the real world,
>rather than making rhetorical points on the net, do some reading--
>but look for facts and do your own interpretation.  Rydenfelt is not
>a bad place to start; this book is a set of case histories, not an
>"argument".  

People have starved under all kinds of goverments, sir, but there seems to
be this one fascinating parallel; there was not enough to eat.  To suggest
that collectivistic politics is even the principle cause, is a bit naive.
I will put my money on greed and lust for power, myself.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe