From: pjs269@tijc02.uucp (Paul Schmidt)
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Clinton Office Requests Comments
Organization: Advocates for Self-Government - Davy Crockett Chapter
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 15:16:12 GMT

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
: 
: Well, for starters there's the Exxon Valdez...I hear Exxon makes quite
: a bit of money. But one can quibble that I suppose, so how about the
: organized crime types who were picking up toxic waste and dumping it
: off on road sides when no one was looking? I hear they made millions
: posing as legitimate toxic waste removal services.

I don't want big companies to be responsible to repair damages they
make.  Currently the government taxes us, using guns if necessary, to
pay into environmental clean-up funds.  Libertarians would have wanted
to have Exxon to pay for all the clean-up of their actions.  If they
were forced to pay their own insurance (instead of tax money going into
a super fund.), the whole accident may never have happened.  It would
have been likely that they would have been more careful as required by a
private insurance company that promised them lower rates for certain
safegaurds such as a double hulled ship and sobriety testing.  The book
"Healing Our World," by Dr. Mary J. Ruwart explains this much better
than I can.
: 
: >Or how someone can
: >make a few million raiding people's savings, when a crucial point of
: >libertarianism is that one's property cannot be taken without one's
: >consent, whatever the circumstance.
: 
: I assume you missed the recent Savings and Loans scandal that's
: costing the US around $500B?
: 
: Or is the plan that under libertarianism there will be no one pushing
: the envelope of what they can get away with? A lot of the folks who
: made money off the S&L crisis technically didn't break a law, perhaps
: they used "poor judgement" or caused others to do that by loaning on
: property of questionable value, but hey, all the way to (or is it
: from?) the bank...

The book "Healing Our World" again gives an excellent overview of what
happened.  The S&Ls are insured by a federal agency rather than a private
insurance company.  All banks pay the same rate on their insurance no
matter how questionable their loans and investments are.  This
encourages more "poor judgement" and does not reward "good judgement."
No private insurance would insure bad risks the same as good risks.  
: 
: Yes, so stupid as to hand their money over to banks for deposit who
: then go belly-up after loaning all the deposit money to their
: brothers-in-law. You must have an amazingly naive notion about
: punishment and accountability. Even if these scum are caught do you
: think they ever have the money? Do you think victims get paid back? Do
: you think punishing them pays people back?

Many libertarians agree with you that punishing aggressors is not the 
solution but restitution, making the criminal compensate the victim,
will lead to a world of less crime and aggression.  "Healing Our World" 
deals with this topic inn more detail.
: 
: What gives ``the electorate'' the right to decide if you murder, rape
: or steal that you can be held in a cage at gunpoint?
: 
: It's the same "right".

Many libertarians agree with you that what the electorate decides is not
moral or just.  These rights come from something more solid which some
people call morals, others call them principles.  An excersize I do is
to ask myself how I would treat my neighbor.  Would I break his door
down with a gun drawn if I knew she was using drugs?  Would I force him,
at gunpoint, if necessary, to pay a babysitter a wage I thought was
better?  Would I force them to pay for my and their children's
education?  "Healing Our World" shows how this leads to a pattern of
aggression.  I use aggression against my neighbor and then he has the
same right to use it against me.  By honoring our neighbor's choices and
not using aggression, we are coming up with the basis for what is right
or wrong.
: 
: >The whole problem with a democratic society is that at any time, 50.1%
: >of the society can vote to wreck the livelihoods of the remaining
: >49.9%.  Do you consider this good government?  Does sound quite
: >dictatorial to me...
: 
: You will never escape the will of the mob, about the best anyone has
: ever figured out to do is herd them into voting booths. That's hardly
: an opinion.
: 
: In the end that's the pathos, it's impossible to understand who
: libertarians are appealing (complaining) to? Is your point that people
: should democratically vote what you assert they will not? Or are you
: going to force them into libertarianism at gunpoint, or what? (And
: don't repeat the catechism about coercion to me, what are your plans?)

Libertarians are totally against using guns to force their point of
view.  There are around 80 libertarian organizations that have different 
plans.  Some are think tanks, some are educational, a few are political.
(The best known is probably the Libertarian Party which is political.)
My goals are to do things that will help others acheive harmony and 
abundance.  Libertarian ideas are very promising to decrease the poverty
and suffering in this world.  I plan to help people to examine these
ideas with an open mind, and if these ideas are correct, I hope these 
people would embrace them.  (80% out of a sample size of over 600 have.)
: 
: I suppose that is why they are so pugnacious, anyone who doubts them
: is at least something to push against. It must be frustrating shouting
: at the air most of the time.

If I have ever appeared to be shouting, please tell me, it was not
intended to be that way.  It is natural for people to be hesitant about
these ideas.  It is also natural for those that discover libertarianism
to get very excited about the benefits and want everyone to know.
Marshall Fritz, founder of the libertarian educational organization the
Advocates for Self-Government recognized this and called these
libertarians "lapel-grabbing" libertarians.  Almost all libertarians
can relate to this as at one time or another we have grabbed lapels (I
say from experience.)

Shouting at someone, or pushing something down their throat makes them
LESS likely to accept the idea.  That is why the Advocates was formed.
For those libertarians out there who want to know how you can more
effectively inform people about these ideas instead of being "frustrated
shouting at the air most of the time" should call the Advocates at
1-800-932-1776 to get a catalog of products that will help you
communicate the ideas in a fulfilling way.  People can encounter these
ideas, honestly evaluate them and eventually embrace them.

Those of you who are not libertarians can call also and get introductory
books on libertarianism.  Although "Healing Our World" is one of the
most persuasive, I would like to recommend "Libertarianism in One
Lesson" as a first starter book.  Also find out if a group in your area
is doing a five week seminar on the book -- called Seminar 1 -- run by
the Advocates.

Lastly, I do not want to persuade or brow-beat anyone into embracing
these ideas.  If someone evaluates them and thinks they have a better
idea, I am willing to listen.
: 
: -- 
:         -Barry Shein
: 
: Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
: Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
-- 
Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President
706 Judith Drive, Johnson City, TN 37604, (615)283-0084, uunet!tijc02!pjs269
"Freedom seems to have unleashed the  creative energies of the people -- and
leads to ever higher levels of income and social progress."  --  U.N. report
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.amateur-comp,soc.culture.usa,alt.activism