Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site frog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!tdh
From: tdh@frog.UUCP (T. Dave Hudson)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: capitalism vs. democracy???
Message-ID: <286@frog.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Dec-85 15:13:37 EST
Article-I.D.: frog.286
Posted: Tue Dec  3 15:13:37 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 20:54:46 EST
References: <261@gargoyle.UUCP>
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 35

> The libertarian/socialist debate is really a debate about the nature,
> viability, and justice of capitalism and its relation to democratic
> political life.  To most Americans, capitalism and democracy either
> are identical or coexist harmoniously.  I think both libertarians and
> socialists are right to recognize a profound incompatibility between
> them.  Each proposes a radical cure for the ills of society which
> they perceive as deriving from this incompatibility:  (1) Smash the
> state, abolish politics, and establish a "pure" form of capitalism.

You are writing of anarcholibertarianism, not
libertarianism.

> (2) Smash capitalism by abolishing the particular
> form of property relations which are its basis, and extend democratic
> political life over a wider realm. 

Democracy is only a means of peacefully arriving at
decisions.  It does not specify what those decisions are to
be.  It is therefore by itself inadequate as a political
philosophy.

I suspect that most Libertarians share the position that
democracy is necessary.  But democracy in the U.S., even as
constrained by a constitution, already has complete control.
It is nonsense to speak of extending it over a wider realm.

It is democracy that continues to support existing property
relations (in part, rationally).  It is not democracy that
Carnes is asking for, but rather some other political
philosophy that is not specified in the above quote.
Carnes' alignment with democracy is disingenuous.

Just injecting some wonted rigor.

				David Hudson