Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!XX.LCS.MIT.EDU!WLIM From: WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Newsgroups: mod.politics Subject: Re: Reply to WLIM Message-ID: <12256308848.26.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU> Date: Wed, 19-Nov-86 21:35:18 EST Article-I.D.: RED.12256308848.26.MCGREW Posted: Wed Nov 19 21:35:18 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 20-Nov-86 02:29:55 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 54 Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu Regarding duels... From: "Keith F. Lynch" I don't understand the question. How can I explain why it's not a problem when you have never said why you think it is a problem? Duels unlike other things involve the deliberate taking of at least one life. That one life may be that of the President, the smartest general in the Pentagon, a key member of a super top secret weapons development team, etc. You don't think that this is going to be a problem as you argue that there should be no regulation whatsoever on duels. For example if the KGB/GRU cooks up a very ingenious plan to kill an important person in the US via a duel and that person is willing to take part in the duel, that's is ok. You don't see any need for regulating duels even in the interest of national security. Or do you? Regarding the society of nations.... No, I explained why there was no comparison. Countries are not anything like individuals..... But countries can trade with each other without a super-government being involved. Countries also have to deal with problems like acid rain/pollution from neighboring countries. The point is that some (but not all) countries seem to get along fine without a super-government. I would think that you should be able to generate strong arguments for less government using countries as examples. Regarding the prerequisites for a libertarian society... I wish I knew. (-: I do see an opportunity for you or other libertarians to write a book on this so that other libertarians can preach it using a government subsidized network. :-) The difference being that a libertarian government would not have the power to tax, to make or enforce laws against victimless crimes, to wage war except when invaded, to draft anyone, or to spend money on anything but defense of individual liberties, i.e. police, courts, and military. Is it possible for a libertarian government to be incompetent or corrupt or engage in illegal activities? If so how can it be held accountable? Through the courts? The ballot boxes? Willie ------- -------