From: MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com
Subject: Re: Andre Marrou on Larry King
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:50:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.065454.27678@panix.com>
tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) writes:
 
>In article <1682EC8E0.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com writes:
>
>If a few thousand people die cold and hungry on the streets, why is it up to
>someone else to decide that they should die thus rather than risking death by
>fire as the price for actually living in a building at all?  Freeze or burn --
>at least one way you get a _shot_ at a better life.  I think a lot of the
>homeless would be perfectly willing to take the gamble.
>
Right....just allow slumlords to build uninspected firetraps, and all
will be well.  The Libertarians in action.
 
>>
>>Libertarians usually fail to follow their proposals to their logical
>>conclusions.  They really believe their own propaganda, and that all
>>would be right with the world if their proposals were enacted.  There
>>is no point in arguing with the true believers.  They start from a
>>totally different set of premises, so logical arguments are wasted on
>>them.
>
>One might accuse you of exactly the same thing, but I bet you buy the name-brand
>Demoblican or perhaps the Republicrat snake oil instead, don't you?  There are
>no easy solutions.
 
I do not buy the program of either party totally.  I even acknowledge
the Libertarians have some good ideas, especially in the field of civil
liberties.  You do, however have a hard time with economics.
 
And is there are no easy answers, why do the Libs keep proposing their
easy answers as a solution?
 
>                    Please act mature enough not to attack people personally
>just because they have different beliefs than you do, yet hold them just as
>dear.  "They're hopeless, so I won't bother to argue with them, because I
>can't convince them, which makes them by necessity wrong." contains the same
>mistaken belief in one's own "propaganda" and selfsure, cocky assertion that
>"all would be right with the world if [your] proposals were enacted" that you
>criticize.  Can we return to debating the ideas in question, instead of
>sniping at the people who express them?
 
I personally believe Libertarians are hopeless, but that is not what I
said in my post.  Saying that logical arguments are useless is not
necessarily the same thing.  You start from a Libertarian set of
premises, from which you draw conclusions.  I start from a different
set that leads to different conclusions.  Neither of us has the
slightest chance of being convinced by the other.
 
Look at the abortion debate.  One side starts from the premise that
life begins at conception - therefore all abortion is murder.  The
other side starts from the opposite premise - therefore, abortion is
not murder.
 
Fundamentalist Christians start with the premise that the Bible is the
infallible word of God.  Any arguments about religion are useless,
because their arguments flow from that premise.
 
I class Libertarians more in the mold of Fundamentalist Christians.
You are true believers, and arguing with you is a waste of time.  The
Libertarian platform is the true word of God (or someone else).
 
>--
>Thor Lancelot Simon      tls@panix.COM
>
Jim McMaster
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections