Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!yale!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Newsflash! [JoSH on Socialis
Message-ID: <28200180@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 18-Oct-85 15:00:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: inmet.28200180
Posted: Fri Oct 18 15:00:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 22-Oct-85 06:38:34 EDT
References: <876@water.UUCP>
Lines: 42
Nf-ID: #R:water:-87600:inmet:28200180:000:1868
Nf-From: inmet!janw    Oct 18 15:00:00 1985


[ Mike Huybensz	:...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh]
> In article <28200170@inmet.UUCP> nrh@inmet.UUCP writes:
> > Please bear in mind that the forces of freedom from government don't
> > propose to break down anyones door, send your young men off to war
> > unwillingly, or tell you what to do with your life, but the forces 
> > FOR government have, at one time or another claimed that these things
> > were necessary to pay "the price of civilization".
> 
> Right.  Instead, your forces of freedom from government is proposing to
> throw away our current system of keeping people from breaking down our
> doors for an untried and probably impractical one.  The systems can't
> coexist: the current one depends on being the only one.

Right question, wrong answer. This test of (temporary) coexistence
*is* all-important for a new social order proposal. As the International
goes (a socialist anthem; I'm translating from another language, not having
the English text):

We will destroy the whole world of coercion
Down to the ground, and then
We will build our world, a new one.
He who was nothing, will be all.

It has been tried, and the results are well known.

On the other hand, I see nothing in libertarian proposals
that cannot be introduced incrementally, and tried, and tested
without prejudging the next step. Every deregulation ,
each Civil Service staff reduction is a libertarian reform.
Libertarian systems aplenty exist right now, and coexist
with coercive ones. I challenge you to name *one* government
service that couldn't be phased out gradually, provided
(I don't prejudge this) alternative systems are successful.
E.g., from courts to arbitration (like People's Court),
from police to Guardian Angels. Again: don't knock these
alternatives, that's not the point. The point is gradualism
and coexistence.

		Jan Wasilewsky

		Jan Wasilewsky