Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 20:10:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4729 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes:
> I think if government does pay for it, it can be censored, etc. It has
> happened before. If we truly want freedom of Speech, I think we should
> be clear: The government will take advantage of whatever power we give
> to them: If artists truly want to do whatever they want, they should
> realize that the government might crack down on them because they will
> have to answer to taxpayers.
I've been avoiding this debate, since there seem to be a lot of personal stuff
flying about, but The above is one of the principle things that I can't quite
fathom about libertarian thinking.
Why is it that "government will take advantage of whatever power we give to
them" is a valid view, when at the same time, 'corporations will take
advantage of whatever power we give to them' is not?
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) Minority as in a small part. Sorry, I thought you were saying minority as in African American, etc. My mistake. (...) Interesting, but I disagree with it, simply because the government enforces it. (...) That would contradict the entire world (...) (27 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 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
|
|
|
|
