<html>
<body>
At 02:31 AM 7/10/2005, Antonwrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Perry E. Metzger wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">It is sad to see people who once
wrote eloquently about libertarian<br>
approaches to the world giving even lip service to words like
"global regulatory framework".</blockquote></blockquote><br>
Natasha Vita-More wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">. . . why would you hang your
future so tightly to any one political<br>
theory when no one political theory is substantially adequate to
intelligently address the rate of change and the effects of change and
how the world can function in order to protect individuality and<br>
freedom.</blockquote><br>
Every political regulation is prevention of some kind of
individuality,<br>
denial of some kind of freedom. That is the core competence of
the<br>
political process; thus we agree that each political system is<br>
inadequate to preserving freedom and nurturing
individuality.</blockquote><br>
Yes, we agree.<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Perry and I therefore prefer to
rely on *non*political approaches.<br>
They require more imagination sometimes, but on the other hand they<br>
cause fewer deaths. So we are disappointed to see Max now
apparently<br>
willing to resort to the "easy" road of control by threat of
violence.</blockquote><br>
Are you stating that libertarianism is "non" political?
<br><br>
Please be careful not to make assumption about what Max does and does not
think without speaking directly to him. Perhaps this is a good time
to clear the decks and one on one with Max rather than forming
assumptions amongst yourselves. Assumptions can be beneficial when
surveying the temperature, but are most often inadequate.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Fyi & imho: libertarianism
is more an ethical theory than a political<br>
theory; there are libertarian anarchists, libertarian democrats and<br>
libertarian monarchists. Everyone agrees that government can
exist<br>
and function only by doing things that would be wrong if a private<br>
party did them. Libertarians hold that classifying such acts
as<br>
"political" does not make them less wrong. (Not all are
anarchists<br>
because not all believe that the evils inevitably tolerated in anarchy
are less than those necessarily created by the state.)</blockquote><br>
Yes, I would like to see libertarianism as an ethical theory rather than
a political theory, but unfortunately it is most widely known as a
political stance or position. Like most political position it falls
short because it is dogmatized in a stance that is unwilling to
negotiate. Resolving conflicts and developing procedures for
creating workable solutions is about negotiation. <br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">If you are referring to
Max [...]<br>
then you would find that his eloquence has evolved, not
declined.</blockquote><br>
That's not what bothers us.</blockquote><br>
Then come forward and talk with Max.<br><br>
Best,<br>
Natasha<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">-- <br>
Anton Sherwood,
<a href="http://www.ogre.nu/" eudora="autourl">http://www.ogre.nu/</a><br>
"If only he'd used his genius for niceness instead of evil."
--Agent 86</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<dl>
<dd><font size=2><a href="http://www.natasha.cc/">Natasha
</a><a href="http://www.natasha.cc/">Vita-More</a>
<dd>Cultural Strategist, Designer
<dd>Studies of the Future, University of Houston <br><br>
</font>
<dd><font face="Times New Roman, Times"><i>Knowledge is the most
democratic source of power.</i> Alvin Toffler
<dd><i>Random acts of kindness... </i>Anne Herbet<br><br></font>
</dl></body>
</html>