Subject:
|
Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Feb 2000 21:44:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
898 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Frank raises some good points. But if I am careful I will find myself
> disagreeing with him...
Well, for what it's worth, I don't disagree with any of what you say
below, though I suspect that in a Libertopia, we might find ourselves
supporting some different causes. That's fine with me, I don't expect
everyone to have the same interests as I do.
> But, and I ask this question innocently, is there an obligation for us
> to atone for the wrongs of our ancestors, across the board, without some
> proof of direct culpability? I don't think that in general, that's the
> case. (if my father robbed you personally, and I benefited from the
> spoils even though it happened before I was born, it's legit to come
> after me for redress, since I inherited everything when he died... but
> don't ask me, a latecomer to this country, to make up for the 24 dollars
> worth of beads deal that got Manhattan for the dutch, if you see what
> I'm saying)
I'm curious as to what we might do to address the situation of the
Native Americans who we repeatedly broke treaties with, and ignored our
own Supreme Court rulings to shove into the most undesireable corners in
the country (and then moved them again when suddenly gold or oil was
discovered on the land we "gave" to them). I have to admit that I'm at a
loss as to how to do something within the bounds of Libertarianism. It
seems to me something is due, but I can't see how to do it without
either opening up a boundless can of worms, or forcing people like your
family who arrived in this country after most of the damage was done, to
pay for it. Perhaps we could give them the National Parks or something.
Obviously the main thing would be to depend on individuals to decide
their on their own if they have some responsibility, and to donate money
to the cause.
*snip*
> Will that be enough? I believe so, but I might be wrong. Certainly what
> we have now seems to be fostering a permanent underclass. We have lost
> the Great Society War on Poverty, just as we have lost the War on Drugs.
Of course we will never eliminate the underclass. I do not believe ANY
society which can be remotely successeful will generate the same income
for everyone, and thus there will always be an underclass. There will
probably even always be a percentage of people who can never escape that
underclass. What I hope we can eventually achieve though is that that
underclass (with the exception of a small number of true slackers) will
be able to have a sufficiently good life that they don't become
criminals because they have so much more to gain than they have to
loose.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| (...) Agreed. I expect Libertopia to be a GREAT place to start a commune, for example. No pesky laws about how many unmarried people can live in the same place to get in the way (although you may have to find a property not already encumbered with (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| Frank raises some good points. But if I am careful I will find myself disagreeing with him... I think it would be naiive in the extreme to say that past history has not seen injustice suffered by some groups at the hands of others. Name an (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
