Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!voder!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.college,net.politics
Subject: Re: E.g. Student Gov't Project.
Message-ID: <516@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Feb-86 18:24:25 EST
Article-I.D.: kontron.516
Posted: Tue Feb 18 18:24:25 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Feb-86 00:14:38 EST
References: <168@bucsd.UUCP>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Irvine, CA
Lines: 51
Xref: linus net.college:1072 net.politics:12853

> 
> >Speaking of allowances, I hope those progressive sorts in Michigan decide
> >to ban ALL parts of the U.S. Government from recruiting because of the
> >CIA (just to be consistent, of course).  Can you picture our progressive
> >friends trying to keep the REST of the Federal Government's agencies from
> >hiring on campus?  Can you picture those students refusing Federally 
> >guaranteed student loans, Federal grants, Federal funds to the University
> >itself?  Of course not.
> 
> therefore, following your argument, citizens should not in any way
> protest or question their government's actions or any agency thereof
> unless they are ready to reject the entire government and all benifits
> derived. Gee, I know some totalitarian govs that would love to have you!
> You'd be a model citizen.
> 

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.  If the opposition is to
terrorist organizations, and you define CIA as a terrorist organization
(a point I wouldn't argue with you about), you should be consistent and
get the rest of the governmental apparatus that CIA is part of as far from
you as possible.  But that would hurt, so most progressives start to make
minor distinctions between "good" parts of the government and "bad" parts
of the government.

If you really believe in democracy, that means you need to be willing to
go along with democratic decisions ONCE THEY ARE MADE.  If you believe that
freedom is more important than democracy (as I do), there's no reason to
go along with the majority view -- just don't pretend you believe in
democracy.

> Look, these reductio ad absurdum arguments just make you sound silly,
> a citizen has a right (maybe a duty) to question and, if need be,
> protest the actions of their government in a democracy, the opposition
> has a right to defend itself and somewhere out of that competition
> should come consensus. Why are people right of center so uncomfortable
> with this, tending to prefer blind, silent obedience? I find it very
> disturbing. Express your views, even put some pressure on your opponents
> within some sense of fair play (which in politics stops somewhere around
> assassination, not denying access to the privilige of utilizing career
> centers.) It's ok, that sort of discordance is what this country is
> all about. It makes people feel more comfortable with the outcomes they
> end up having to live with, at least their viewpoint was given a chance
> to be considered and perhaps rejected, but not for lack or fear of trying.
> 
> 	-Barry Shein, Boston University

I'm not looking for blind obedience -- I'm a firm believer in violent
overthrow of the U.S. Government.  What I object is the hypocrisy of
supporting unlimited democracy on the small scale (MSA prohibiting CIA 
recruiting on campus) while opposing it on the large scale (the foreign
policy of the United State).