From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox)
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Libertarianism vs. government
Date: 25 Jul 92 03:16:33 GMT
Organization: SSRL, Stanford, CA

In article <1992Jul24.234642.18671@leland.Stanford.EDU>, dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
> In article <1992Jul24.091039.1@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu> tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul23.231714.16273@leland.Stanford.EDU>, dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
>>
>># Come on now. Libertarianism makes the exact same assumption. Poor
>># people are told they can't take the property of the wealthy even
>># if they think that wealth was attained unjustly. I don't think
>># they'll be any more likely to listen to this than people in
>># command economies listen to the central planners.
> 
	{my attempts to resolve exactly what Libertarians are being accused
	 of deleted. We start again after I explain that Libs only
	 'commandment' is not to initiate force, and pose this question
	 based on the above statement...}

>>If you do, then perhaps you could explain when you think it is appropriate
>>to initiate force. If you are poor and you think your wealthy neighbour
>>got his wealth unjustly perhaps?
> 
> Did I *ever* say I thought this was appropriate?
> 
> All I said is that libertarianism assumes that poor people won't
> try to do it. Or at least that they won't try to do it in numbers 
> sufficient to bring down the system.
> 
> One of the reasons we have the state in the business of 
> redistributing wealth is that when the conditions get too bad for 
> the poor and they don't think they have anything to lose, they
> tend to revolt. Capitalism leads to inequal distribution of wealth;
> libertarianism, as an extreme form of capitalism is likely to lead
> to an extremely unequal distribution of wealth. If this fomented a 
> lot more events like the LA riots, then all of the liberties you
> are arguing for would disappear just in an attempt to hold society
> together.
> 
> Now maybe that wouldn't happen. But it sure seems like a possibility
> to be considered. And libertarians *do* assume that the poor will
> do what they're told and leave the wealthy alone.
> 

Perhaps I have misunderstood you. As you claim that libertarians tell the
poor that they can't take the property of the wealthy, and you are clearly
at varience with the libertarian positon, I naturally assumed that perhaps
you considered this form of redistribution appropriate. My apologies.

I have also rather slyly wondered if part of the `redistributing state'
hidden agenda is to defuse social discontent, but if this were the case,
then there are far more efficient mechanisms than the present welfare morasse.
Far better to keep them "doped with religion and sex and TV".
The modern welfare state takes money from just about everyone, rich and poor
(but mainly the rich), and for the most part flushes it down the toilet -
redistribution of sorts, I'll be the first to agree.
The "propensity to riot" is probably increased more by having to deal with
the offensive state welfare agencies than with any inherent underling poverty.
You are aware, are you not, that the `consumables' acquired during the LA
riots were, in $$ value order, video equipment, guns, and designer clothes?
Whenever I go to the DMV and see all those irritated, depressed, and obviously
miserable people lining up to get the state-mandated runaround from
the surly staff, I wonder why riots dont occur more often. Just imagine having
to go through this all the time to get your daily bread?

I find your analysis of Libertarianism leading to extreme wealth disparities
unconvincing. The disparities of wealth in the (pseudo) Capitialist
developed countries is far less than that in Socialist/Feudal countries.
`Red Flag' limo's hurtle though the streets of Beijing honking
the masses off their bicycles - not even Leona Helmsley got to do that when
she was on the loose.

So, all you Libertarians out there in net land, do you assme that the
poor will do what they are told or not? Enquiring minds want to know.

Tony Cox
Newsgroups: alt.individualism