Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!etive!hwcs!nick From: nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor) Newsgroups: comp.society.futures Subject: Big Brother (Was Re: Who Controls The Network?) Message-ID: <2089@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> Date: 14 Dec 88 14:00:56 GMT Reply-To: nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor) Organization: Computer Science, Heriot-Watt U., Scotland Lines: 61 Since there has been no traffic in this group lately I shall take the opportunity to follow up the comments from Jeff Daiell and Doug Thompson on the Big Brother issue. I know that what follows is only vaguely related to comp.society.futures but c.s.f. was where this debate started. In reply to my earlier posting Jeff states > ... I equate every Government on Earth with Big Brother ... Doug's response was > ... Ok. That's a good starting point ... In the opening paragraph of The Federalist No. 1, Publius (on this occasion Alexander Hamilton) says > It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the > people of this country [the USA!], by their conduct and example, to decide > the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not > of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they > are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on > accident and force. Jeff and Doug obviously believe that the verdict (200 years on) is that such good government cannot be established and Jeff further suggests that the group of accidents to which we ascribe the collective term 'free market' are actually to be preferred. I am deeply worried by such sentiments - the freedom to express which only exists because of the imperfect democracies which protect them. Some of us have been lucky enough to inherit representative forms of government from our forebears and like most inheritances it is easy to be complacent about them and attribute little worth to them. A democratic form of government is probably the least stable and most easily overthrown form known to man - we must always be on our guard lest we lose it. If Jeff's views are common then I think that democracy in the USA is on a very slippery slope. If the US Government really is subordinate to the free-market anarcho-capitalists then it is probably too late to save it. I shall watch your wretched, poor and hungry with great interest as you 'laissez-faire'. Doug equates this laissez-faire approach with feudalism. He does not go far enough. Even in a feudal system the powerful individuals will recognise that they have responsibilities that extend beyond their own selfish desires and freedoms. The large corporations which would be the equivalent of the feudal lords would have no such sense of responsibility. Witness the vain attempts of the current British government to persuade the business world to inject private funding into education. There is no profit. How could these companies justify such philanthropy to their shareholders? No, once again the 'libertarian' argument boils down to the law of the jungle. The Anarcho-Capitalism which Jeff dreams of may well provide an ideal environment for him to excel in (although I doubt it) but it would certainly not give any succour to the weak. Jeff's three small children had better not be weak if they are to inherit his kingdom. Nick Taylor Department of Computer Science JANET : NICK@UK.AC.HW.CS Heriot-Watt University ARPANET : NICK@CS.HW.AC.UK 79 Grassmarket /\ / o __ /_ UUCP : ...!UKC!CS.HW.AC.UK!NICK Edinburgh EH1 2HJ / \ / / / /__) Tel : +44 31 225 6465 Ext. 491 United Kingdom / \/ (_ (___ / \ Fax : +44 31 449 5153