To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10467
10466  |  10468
Subject: 
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 14 May 2001 07:38:26 GMT
Viewed: 
3001 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> 
> >  You've precisely identified my objection; we (as a society) can't seem to
> > agree that the Libertopian idea is the way to implement the changes we've
> > discussed.  Further, given that the problems that exist now would continue to
> > exist in the new system, the realities of a rough transition period, coupled
> > with the uncertainty of attempting an unprecedented societal structure, many
> > people are simply unwilling to risk it all for the sake of a minority's
> > economic theories. I'm not saying I have a better solution, of course, but
> > until something concrete, reliable, and widely-accepted can be put forth, few
> > people are going to support such drastic change.
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> Libertopia, though, is  more of a thought experiment to examine ways to make
> changes than a thoroughly serious proposal for (relatively) instantaneous
> change. Certainly having it happen (all at once) to as large a nation as the
> US isn't particularly likely.
> 
> But nations can, and do, move in libertarian directions. We have seen this.
> It's not a monontonic function, there are fits and starts. But freedom and
> markets ARE on the ascendancy.

You say this like the two are related? Sure you be more free to work longer
hours to pay for basics. But think about the lives of those across the
developing world on which the West’s "freedoms" are reliant.

> Or so it seems to me, anyway.
> 
> Further, I would like to see conditions change to the extent that a new
> nation could be tried, if the participants were willing. Unfortunately that
> can't currently happen here on Earth, since there seems to be a (defacto)
> cartel in place preventing new entrants. Talk about your ultimate barrier to
> entry into the marketplace (of governments).

If you read around a bit. You'll find that libertarians did try to set up
their own nation (in the 70's I think). I think it was called the Minerva
Project(?).

> 
> But there are other places than Earth. We need to repeal or abrogate the UN
> treaties saying that all of the possible territory, resources, power, etc in
> the entire rest of the universe are held in common trust.

It would need a big rocket to get a bunch of white middle-aged males into
space :-)

Scott A

> 
> ++Lar



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) Minerva is but one of many failed attempts. They go to prove Larry's claim that there is an impermiable barrier to entry. Unfortunate. Chris (25 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
 
(...) Fair enough. Libertopia, though, is more of a thought experiment to examine ways to make changes than a thoroughly serious proposal for (relatively) instantaneous change. Certainly having it happen (all at once) to as large a nation as the US (...) (25 years ago, 14-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

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
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR