Subject:
|
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 May 2001 15:38:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
673 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> > Who would fund such an organization,
>
> Whomever wished to..?
Ahhhh, spin control. Phillip Morris' wet-dream scenario! :-)
>
> > and how can it make any credible claims of independence?
>
> Independant of what?
Listen to advertising: "An independent research firm confirms our product is
the best..." They don't tell you who paid for the research to be done,
which is often the entity paying for the ad. Such "independent" firms
aren't really independent - they invariably produce results pleasing to the
company footing the bill.
>
> > I don't deny the value, in theory, of the
> > organization, but I don't believe that we can trust it to be any more
> > impartial than existing watchdog organizations.
>
> I'm pretty happy with the private consumer advocacy that I sponsor.
It would seem the rest of society isn't. In part, the rest of society is
clueless about Libertarianism, but I think a significant portion is leery of
the proposition that no one watches the watchmen (yes, I know, that happens
as it stands all too often).
>
> > For that matter, to whom
> > would such an organization be accountable? The watchmen?
>
> The shareholders?
Well, yes. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they have any crediblity,
which is what I think he meant.
> > And it would have the benefit of not having to be in place for very long,
> > since I'm confident we'd be quickly attacked and beaten, without a formal
> > and organized national defense framework.
>
> Who? Europe? Or did you mean our neighbors, Canada and Mexico? Maybe China.
> But the stuff that I've read suggests that they're not really a threat.
Well put - but that kinda limits Libertarianism to America. And the private
armies that companies would employ wouldn't be exactly reassuring.
The logistics of a conventional invadion of the U.S. are quite beyond
virtually any nation. Paranoia scenarios like "Red Dawn" always amuse me.
Bruce
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
