From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Clinton Office Requests Comments
Organization: The World
	<BZS.93Jan8034450@world.std.com> <1993Jan9.001455.19708@athena.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 05:10:54 GMT


From: hhuang@athena.mit.edu (Han-Young Huang)
>>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.
>
>That is fraud, very punishable under a libertarian government.

Punishable by whom? And how does punishment clean up the mess or get
your coastline back (note: although Exxon certainly did a lot of clean
up things are hardly even close to what they were.)

>The S&L scandal was brought about by an *increase* in regulation,

Actually, no, it is generally laid to the deregulation of the banking
under the Reagan administration.

>which, ironically, funnelled money from the middle class to the rich,
>note the Keating Five and probably countless other bribes which must
>have happened at all levels of government.

Yes, that is a common effect of poorly planned deregulation (it can be
well done, that's not my point), the unscrupulous take advantage.

>>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.
>
>Let me construct one type of homophobic mob: which would go out and
>slaughter lesbians, bisexuals, and gays en masse if given the license.
>However, the American government specifically denies them that
>license.  It seems to work quite well against the mob.

Right, so we agree, so what has this to do with libertarianism?

>>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?)
>
>Can we agree that a non-libertarian is a statist of some sort.

I supposed you would have to define "statist" for me. Libertarians
seem to use the term derogatorily, so who would agree to that? The
problem is that the label is applied to the smallest difference in
opinion, and then extrapolated madly to make a questionable point.

    "Ah, so you admit you are a statist! You believe people should have
    driver's licenses! No doubt, like all statists, you therefore believe
    in branding id numbers on children's foreheads with hot irons you
    filthy child-molesting statist pig!"

At least it seems to go about like that in my experience, small
exagerrations aside...

>Who are the statists complaining to?

Who's complaining?

Well, far be it for me to say I have no complaints, but they're not
exactly of the degree and damnation one gets from libertarians.

>Plans?  Cut government at all levels, of all kinds.  Do it slowly, but
>steadily.

At all levels? Even the ones which will enforce against crimes and
frauds?

>Reform the judicial, law and tort systems.

How so?

>Phase out contracts.

Now there's an odd one I've never seen in this particular bag.

>You don't have to
>be a genius to vote LP.  You just need to be disillusioned from the
>false prophecies of statism (to begin with, there're the Democratic
>and Republican parties).

Well, I can agree with that sentiment, but can't the same be just as
easily said about communism (and often has been!) A chicken in every
pot! Who can disagree (well, it certainly appeals to people who are
short one chicken.)

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:3308 comp.org.eff.talk:8538 soc.culture.usa:9672 alt.activism:20280