HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge? (was: NatCom Endorses Facelift...)
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:08:08 GMT
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences

In article <1k2sncINNcde@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:
}Okay, Tim:  I score 100/90 on the WSPQ.  I believe we should:
}
}1.  Abolish the draft.
}
}2.  End all censorship for any reason.
}
}3.  Repeal all laws against sex by consenting adults.
}
}4.  Repeal all drug laws.
}
}5.  Repeal all immigration and emigration restrictions.
}
}6.  Abolish farm subsidies.
}
}7.  Abolish all tariffs.
}
}8.  Repeal all minimum wage laws.
}
}9.  Stops paying for the national defense of Japanese and Europeans.
}
}What's missing?  I am not sure, in my heart, that we can completely 
}eliminate involuntary taxation.  I checked that box "maybe", and I am willing
}to have taxation continue in some form, if it cannot be *proven* that
}the gov't can be funded by voluntary means..and I suspect that it cannot
}be proven.  Since taxation, by definition, cannot be accompished without
}the initiation of the use of force, *in principle* I should not sign
}the oath.  But I do anyway, because it seemed to me at the time to be
}an acceptable compromise.
}
}So what does that make me?  Unprincipled?  Just "another conservative" who
}should not be "granted haven" in the LP?

Strongly libertarian, but partly conservative.

}Or would you be willing to call me a libertarian and have me work with you
}to try to move this country in a directio nwe both want it to go?

I welcome help from any source.  I merely object to supporters of coercion
being allowed in as LP members.  If you or others like you join, then you
should agree not to support it for the term of your membership.

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: radio waves as public property
Date: 21 Jan 1993 23:26:01 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <clary.726938330@pv031e.vincent.iastate.edu>, clary@iastate.edu (Jeffrey S Clary) writes:
> >Just because a code is well known doesn't mean it's not still a code.

> Guess we'll just have to disagree on terms here.  I am speaking from a computer
> science perspective, where encryption does indeed carry the connotations I
> mentioned above.  Would you consider the English language an encryption?  

Under your definition? :

>> Encryption implies encoding
>> information in such a way that, with a piece of data presumably known
>> intended receivers (a key) the message can be decrypted easily, but without 
>> that key the message can only be decrypted with great computational expense.

It is to many immigrants, as theirs are to me.  Would you consider the Navajo 
language an encryption?  It was used VERY successfully as one in a FORMAL
MANNER during WWII.

> I would think that any being who intercepts Explorer (or was it Voyager?)
> would have as much trouble decoding an actual audio message in English as
> they would a video disc.

Well, thanks for arguing my side.  (And you're right, it WAS Voyager.)
--

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:3882 comp.org.eff.talk:9174 alt.amateur-comp:657 soc.culture.usa:10048 alt.activism:21283
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge? (was: NatCom Endorses Facelift...)
From: parvin1@husc11.harvard.edu (Douglas Parvin)
Date: 24 Jan 93 21:12:30 GMT

bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:


>In a previous article, sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) says:

>>Would someone please post some of the objections to the pledge?  I didn't 
>>really have a problem with it, and I'm curious as to why anyone would object 
>>(note that I wouldn't have signed the pledge without that key word 
>>"initiation"...is it that there are some versions of the pledge without that?).

6) It goes against the principles of a large number of libertarians who
support the down-sizing of government because it is by nature wasteful,
unimaginative, corrupt, etc.  These libertarians might not have a beef with a
theoretical utopian government that didn't exhibit these traits, but believe
that it is impossible in practice due to human nature, lack of individual
motivation, etc. Therefore, they pragmatically support a libertarian agenda  
and feel alienated by the categorical universality of the pledge.  They do
not hold to one shining guiding principle.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas Parvin
parvin1@husc.harvard.edu                  "Homercles cares not for beans"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: brown@pollux (Daniel Brown)
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge?  (was: NatCom Endorses Facelift...)
Organization: University of Georgia
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:26:13 GMT

In article <1jt6a7INNk8m@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:
>
>In a previous article, sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) says:
>
>>Would someone please post some of the objections to the pledge?  I didn't 
>>really have a problem with it, and I'm curious as to why anyone would object 
>>(note that I wouldn't have signed the pledge without that key word 
>>"initiation"...is it that there are some versions of the pledge without that?).
>[...]
>3.)  There would be a few people who could not sign it because their religion
>does not permit oaths.

The pledge that I signed did not say "I swear" -- it said "I hereby certify."
This sounds more like a contract than an oath.  I know of no religion that
forbids signing contracts.

-- 
Daniel W. Brown (brown@pollux.cs.uga.edu, dbrown@ai.uga.edu)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Linksvayer)
Subject: Re: Building a Society From Scratch (NOT!)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 00:29:21 GMT

In article <tervio.19@katk.Helsinki.FI> tervio@katk.Helsinki.FI (TERVI| MARKO J) writes:
>   Adopting libertarianism as such would be great if we were establishing
> a new society for example on an uninhabited island.  But while we live in
> societies with certain characteristics and histories, the applying of 
>libertarian principles needs , at least initially, some practical compromises
>(it's called politics).

Establishing a new society on an uninhabited island also rquires
practical compromises. The NAP does not say anything about how
to convert something which is nobody's property into somebody's
property. Libertarian principles can only be applied to existing
societies (imperfectly, unless the society is already 100%
libertarian) or new societies created out of a vacuum. About the
closest one could come would be a constucted island or space
station.

You make some other good points, which I will not quote.
Opposing all traffic laws as a violation of individual liberty
is silly. Of course privat roads would have rules. However this
does not mean that libertarians should not oppose traffic laws
which do not make safety sense or are primarily methods for
prosectuing the WoD. If roads were private many people would
have the choice of taking another route if they did not like the
rules of one owner. With the government monopoly the only way to
fight bad rules of the road is through politics, just like any
other bad law.

On the subject of eliminating regulation I think you may be
underestimating the costs of government intervention. I would be
very glad to eliminate the F(ascist) D(eath) A(dministration)
even if there were no private drug testing organizations. However,
I will grant that advocating radical reform may be more
productive at this point than advocating abolition - for
political candidates at least.
--
Mike Linksvayer   mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu   "Inside my head"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Linksvayer)
Subject: Re: Party line
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 09:25:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.022011.15215@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>It's not complicated--except that it means if I support most of the things you
>do, but disagree about a minor issue like government-funded public libraries, I
>would be kept out of your party, even if I want to join because, say, I dislike
>the War on Drugs, gun control, no-knock searches, and the Social Security
>system.

He's an ally folks. What is a bigger threat, the WoD and Socialist
Insecurity or public libraries? Very few people are opposed to
the WoD or SS. If the LP cannot get the support of people
opposed to both of these things it may as well throw in the
towel. 

I am not saying that the LP should drop its opposition to public
libraries. However, it should be made clear that you don't have
to agree with NCP doctrine on everything to be a member of the
LP. You don't have to sign off on the entire GOP platform to be
a Republican, nor should you have to sign off on the entire LP
platform to be a Libertarian. The LP is the party that should be
using that train analogy that GOP con artists use to try to get
libertarian support.
--
Mike Linksvayer   mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu   "I got a catholic block"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser)
Subject: Re: "Its all over for the political ruling class!"
Organization: TECHNET, Singapore
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 03:12:41 GMT

In article <C1FAMF.3Gz@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Mason.L.Allen@dartmouth.edu (Mason L. Allen) writes:
>So who says a couple of Brits deserve medical care paid for by American
>taxes?  In a perfect world, they should and would get it. 

No, silly.

In a perfect world they wouldn't need it. In a perfect world nobody would
get cavities, much less AIDS or cancer.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: chris@keris.demon.co.uk (Chris Croughton)
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge? (was: NatCom Endorses Facelift 
Distribution: world
Organization: Keristor Systems
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:45:51 +0000

Could someone please explain the American usages of the terms
'conservative' and 'liberal' that are being bandied about?  I do know
that they aren't the same as the British Conservative and Liberal
parties.

***********************************************************************
*  chris@keris.demon.co.uk      *                                     *
*  chriscr@cix.compulink.co.uk  *  FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life)  *
*  100014.3217@compuserve.com   *                                     *
***********************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack B. Nimble)
Subject: Re: The big difference
Date: 27 Jan 93 13:55:04 PST

In article <1k6li0INN57m@armory.centerline.com>, on 27 Jan 1993 18:50:40 GMT,
mrh@centerline.com (Mike Huben) writes:

>
>Do you deny that societies have created all rights?  If so, I'd like to know
>how you know that, and how those other rights have come about.
>
Of course I deny that societies create rights! Would you claim that the
Jews sent to the death camps in Nazi Germany had no right to live
because the society approved of their extermination, or would you say
that their right to live had been violated in those societies?

Which is it?

    =Jack=
---

Jack B. Newsbaum             You have rights antecedent to all earthly
Library Information Systems  governments; rights that cannot be
University Research Library  repealed or restrained by human law.
ecl4jn2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu               - John Adams
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: parvin1@husc11.harvard.edu (Douglas Parvin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Detroit's Latest, Greatest Fiasco
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:52:14 GMT

Well, those wonderful executives at the Big Three American automakers have
taken the low road lower than it has ever been travelled.  According to
today's New York Times, they are filing a huge action claiming that all
Japanese cars (save mini-vans and utility vehicles; they're holding out
for even worse things with those) should be hit with thousands more dollars
in punitive taxes per car.

Why?  Because the Japanese sell their cars for less in America than they do
in Japan.

FOR SHAME!

Of course, it is perfectly standard practice for all international companies
to scale prices to local market conditions.  Coca-cola sells its product for
a lot less in Mexico, and a lot more in Denmark.  This is, of course, quite
reasonable and standard.

Note that the Japanese are not even being accused of "dumping" their cars
on the market (a dubious evil itself);  rather, they are being attacked for
not making "enough" profit.  Of course, no one seems to care that Ford
sold its Taurus below cost for several months to beat out the Honda Accord
(except, perhaps, those lucky folk who purchased one of those bargains).

This brash move is intended to "test" Clinton's resolve to aid American 
business.  Let's hope he fails this test.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas Parvin                  
parvin1@husc.harvard.edu              
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack B. Nimble)
Subject: Re: Taxing & Spending
Date: 27 Jan 93 14:18:05 PST

In article <1k6nu2INN58f@armory.centerline.com>, on 27 Jan 1993 19:31:14 GMT,
mrh@centerline.com (Mike Huben) writes:

>
>In article <1993Jan23.061426.3629@zip.eecs.umich.edu> positron@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jonathan Haas) writes:
>>In article <1jf5nbINNpsv@armory.centerline.com>, mrh@centerline.com (Mike Huben) writes:
>>
>>> I love the way libertarians are so inconsistant with each other
>>> and even themselves.
>>
>>This assertion, I want to talk about. I find it ludicrous.
>>
>>One of the BIG differences between the Libertarian party and the other
>>two major parties is that Libertarians are consistent... almost to a
>>fault. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Libertarian party planks follows logically
>>from our one fundamental belief... that initiation of force, for whatever
>>reason, is wrong. How can you get more consistant than that?
>
>Hahahaha!  That's why one Libertarian party plank was to hold a gun to
>taxpayers' heads to finance school vouchers, right?  That's why recently in this
>
Excuse me? Although I do not support school vouchers, I don't
see how a proposal which says that if X saves the public schools an
amount y by not sending a child to school, then X shall receive a sum
not greater than y in return "holds a gun to the taxpayers' heads'."
Besides, nobody's planning a coup. Are you implying that when taxes are
imposed, no coercion is involved, but when they're rescinded or abated
by due process, the taxpayers have been coerced? Ridiculous!

>That's why recentl                                                     y in this
>newsgroup several people can't agree on whether or not the pledge should be
>taken, and whether or not the party would benefit from including people of
>various opinions.
>
And what has this to do with coercion? The LP is a voluntary organiza-
tion and its founders are entitled to adopt rules and procedures which
govern its operation. People who disapprove of these rules and are
unwilling to abide by them are not compelled to join or remain members.

>I don't think you could have said something that sounded more stupid if you
>had tried.
>
You're the one who seems to have a knack for saying stupid stuff
effortlessly.

    =Jack=
---

Jack B. Newsbaum             You have rights antecedent to all earthly
Library Information Systems  governments; rights that cannot be
University Research Library  repealed or restrained by human law.
ecl4jn2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu               - John Adams
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: camzen5@caa.mrs.umn.edu
Subject: History
Organization: University of Minnesota, Morris
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 02:17:14 GMT

	Hi, I'm hoping that someone out there can answer a question for me - 
is and/or was there a Libertarian Senator or Representive in the past couple 
years? And can anyone give me a brief history of Libertarians in the House 
and Senate?
			Thanks, Cilicia
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge?  (was: NatCom Endorses Facelift...)
Date: 27 Jan 1993 21:40:44 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com


Has anyone besides me noticed the irony here?


In article <1k6h6jINNa00@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu 
(Brandon D. Ray) writes:

> So you want me to give you money, to give you my physical labor and skills,
> to vote for your candidates...but you want to deny me any voice in choosing
> those candidates, writing the platform they will run on or managing the
> party structure.
 
> In a previous article, starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) says:

> >If you want to support liberty, welcome.  If you want
> >to support tyranny, the incumbent parties are the experts.

But it appears the Libertarians are well along the learning curve, if
the rest of them are all as elitist as you profess to be.
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: grant@bluemoon.use.com (Grant DeLorean)
Subject: Re: National Committee endorses facelift for LP
Organization: Blue Moon
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 17:48:36 GMT

Chris Struble <mece3d@uh.jetson.edu> writes:

>Is it time to do away with our current "We favor the abolition of damn
>near everything" platform, and put practical proposals in it. Would this
>compromise our principles by "hiding" our long-term goals? 

 Some will say it is hiding the long term goals... It will make the LP
more closely resemble the Demos and Repubs that way...  Maybe it ought
to be done such that "we favor the abolition of damn near everything,
but these need to go first" is the flavor...  Nearly the same change
without the hiding of long term objectives.

>Has having principles done us much good?

 Yes, the LP doesn't closely resemble the major theives guilds, ehr
politcal parties I mean...

-- 
\   Grant DeLorean  - IHMSA & NRA Life Member -  (grant@bluemoon.use.com)   /

        Good leaders being scarce, following yourself is allowed.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: goldm@rpi.edu (Mitchell E. Gold)
Subject: Re: Taxing & Spending
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
	<SLAGLE.93Jan27154711@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>
	<1k7ds9INN5e8@armory.centerline.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:54:21 GMT

In article <1k7ds9INN5e8@armory.centerline.com> mrh@centerline.com (Mike Huben) writes:
   >> Hahahaha!  That's why one Libertarian party plank was to hold a
   >> gun to taxpayers' heads to finance school vouchers, right?
   >
   >Liar.  The LP Platform says no such thing.

   If Marrou did not endorse vouchers during his presidential campaign,
   then I apologize and admit a blunder.
--

Marrou may have supported such an idea as a gradual down-sizing of the
taxes being spent. Lord was definitely against vouchers. I don't expect
Democrats or Republicans to strictly follow the party line, so why should
I expect Libertarians to do that either? 
--
Mitch Gold, sundance@rpi.edu
From: parvin1@husc11.harvard.edu (Douglas Parvin)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: National Committee endorses facelift for LP
Date: 21 Jan 93 19:22:41 GMT

The sooner they do away with that "loyalty oath", the better.  A good
number of utilitarian-minded small government folk are turned away by such 
a categorical denunciation of all kinds of force.  Beggars shouldn't be
choosers, and the LP shouldn't continue to snub a large number of possible
members who agree with many LP goals, but operate from different premises.
-- 
===========================================================================
Douglas Parvin
parvin1@husc.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Linksvayer)
Subject: Re: Objections to the Pledge?
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 07:10:53 GMT

In article <C1H1yx.2Br@wrs.com> gak@wrs.com writes:
>I'm ambivalent toward The Pledge.  (I signed, by the way.)

Me too.

>On the one hand, it's not required for LP membership.  You can join the
>Party and not sign The Pledge.

This is not true.
--
Mike Linksvayer   mlinksva@nyx.cs.du.edu   "I just trust the oppression"
From: s0499528@let.rug.nl (R. Dijkhuis)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Nolan Chart
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:36:52 GMT
Organization: Faculteit der Letteren, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL

In article <1k1i0aINNae4@srvr1.engin.umich.edu> jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe) writes:
>From: jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe)
>Subject: Re: Do Pragmatic Libertarians Belong in LP or RLC? (was Re: Party line)
>Date: 25 Jan 1993 20:19:22 GMT
>In article <YAMAUCHI.93Jan25134701@yuggoth.ces.cwru.edu>, yamauchi@ces.cwru.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes:


[discussion about pragmatic libertarians, Republican Liberty Caucus and LP 
deleted]

  
>I suppose this depends on whether the LP represents the libertarian
>quadrant, or simply a libertarian point (100/100 on the Nolan chart).
>At the present time, the LP seems to represent the views of those who
>are at or near the 100/100 point.  They don't seem to care about those
>who fall in the rest of the quadrant.  I personally would like to
>see the LP 'moderate' its views so that it encompasses more of those
>in the libertarian quadrant. 

Is this Nolan chart the lithmus test of Libertarianism? If so, could anyone 
please e-mail it to me, or post it for other's benefit. After reading this 
newsgroup for some time, and doing some background reading, I'd like to 
see objectively the extent to which I have been influenced.

Reinder
s0499528@let.rug.nl
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian