Subject:
|
Re: RFC: An Alternative..
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 21:18:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
467 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes:
> What I read in your first post sounded a lot like how it is now, but that
> you wanted all the "problems" to go away.
The shift of power from top-down to bottom-up is a major difference straight
off. The Social Groupings that I named will sound familiar, as we do have a
structure already in place for community and society.. I could have used
different terms but that would have obscured the meaning.
Maybe I should be flattered that I've explained it in a way which doesn't jump
out at peoples throats?
> In this second post, I found some
> faults. I hate to jump in pointing out problems from the get go, but the
> problem I see is so obvious to me that I think you should give it some
> consideration.
Nonono.. the more problems the better - I made it pretty clear that there would
be holes in there, your help in finding and fixing them is valuable.
> Lets say, for the sake of argument, there are two kind of
> people: working people and lazy people. Now, if all the lazy people decide
> to move to a region that is Marxist, what is going to keep the working
> people living there? Their love for the land, their community, their
> ancestry? I think once you get to the point where one person is working to
> provide for say 5 (or maybe 10, 20?) other people, he might get a little fed
> up, and even with the ties, decide to pick up and move somewhere where he
> doesn't have to support all the others. At that point, who is going to
> support the lazy? Just something to consider.
If they are too lazy to do anything to survive - plant food etc.. then they'll
die - their choice.
I would envision that before this happened the level above (lets say the Town
Council) would be monitoring the situation to make sure that no rights were
being violated - it might take children away before they starved for example.
Remember that the level above cannot intervene except to make sure that rights
aren't being violated, in fact that's part of its State Responsibility.
If a community wanted to evict people who were not contributing to minimal tax
then that's their decision.
> That makes it sound even more like the status quo than your first post.
It still sounds quite different from where I live.. but fair enough!
> All that said, I think the basic idea is fine. I just don't think there
> will be very many successful communities other than Libertarian communities,
> if any true Libertarian communities exist.
Well, what will happen is that you'll have a vast petrii dish of communities
and political systems, some will thrive, others fade.. but it will be
harnessing evolutionary forces to the benefit of society. As oppossed to not
harnessing this power which is stagnation.
Who knows, we may evolve something better :)
Richard
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: RFC: An Alternative..
|
| Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) that (...) extra (...) Marxist-inspired (...) workers (...) who (...) choose (...) in (...) there (...) part, (...) when (...) As (...) feared (...) makes (...) When (...) that (...) social (...) What I read (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
