From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Illustrating a lack of intellectual content
Date: 29 Jan 93 00:54:38 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

To remain consistent, and having asserted that this post by Mr. Runyan has
very little intellectual content, I shall now expand. Any coward can make
an assertion -- very few have the courage to explain and justify.


In article <C1Ks4B.AAB@cup.hp.com> runyan@cup.hp.com (Mark Runyan) writes:
>Phil Ronzone (phil@netcom.com) wrote:
    >>How sad. Do you really believe this? It's the same concept
    >>that the USSR used in confisticating and then taxing the Jews
    >>that wanted to leave.
    >>
    >Yep, any one idea taken to extremes can rationalize
    >atrocities, especially yours.

Null assertio and name calling. No illustration whatsoever of why Mr. Runyan
says this. And he edited out useful context.

Well, Mr. Runyan?

You say the State provides "benefits". Benefits at the point of a gun aren't.
As you deleted, the Jews HAD NO CHOICE in matters such as education,
which the Soviet State used as an excuse to confiscate their property
when they tried to leave.


    >>I am not allowed to string my own power lines, nor to take
    >>back my property that the State stole and gave to the power
    >>companies so they could run power lines across my property.
    >>
    >By your reasoning, you stole resources from your parents,
    >teachers, and city workers to acquire your property, so
    >what's your problem?

Not only another bald assertion with no explanation, but bizarre as well.


    >>>>What actually happens of course is that some set of people
    >>>>gain enough control of the means of coercion to force another
    >>>>set or sets of people to hand over their property at gunpoint
    >>>>for the first set to dispose of.
    >>>>
    >>>And while you make fun of the analogy of Social Contract by
    >>>asking for a piece of paper, allow me to ask for a picture of
    >>>the gun pointing at you. :-)
    >>>
    >>Oh? Stop paying your income taxes or property taxes. The
    >>State WILL come and take YOUR property away, without your
    >>consent.
    >>
    >Yep, and you continue to use those resource, services, and
    >facilities that the government provides you and your family,
    >almost as if you had contracted for them.

Weak and pathetic. A contract is a MUTUAL agreement between two or more
people. Even YOU should know by now that it sure ain't mutual. Oh, and as
for the "provide" part, I pay for those services, typically well above
market price at that.

    >The solution you are so fanatic about is only one of several
    >possible ways of having groups of people interact with each
    >other, and it has its problems as well.

Lack of any other discussion as to WHAT these alternatives are. Fanatic tossed
in as a slur.

    >Mark Runyan
    >
    >P.S. to Phil: Discussion about solutions can be entertaining.
    >Talks regarding ideals can be equally entertaining. But when
    >you resort to the tactics you use, Phil, it isn't a
    >discussion, debate, or exchange of ideas. The sad part is,
    >you actually have something worthwhile to say. At least, it
    >is sad for me, for I can no longer listen to the way you say
    >it.

Tactics not named. Admits ideas are worthwhile.

P.S. to Mark: Ideas are what it is about. If you can't stand the ridicule
you get from some of your ludricous positions, too bad. Truth hurts only
when lies are involved.



-- 
There are actually people that STILL believe Love Canal was some kind of
environmental disaster. Weird, eh?

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Newsgroups: ba.politics,ca.politics,talk.politics.misc