[ExI] Libertarianism wins again...

[Stefano Vaj]

2011/7/21 Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com>

> If you're going to define "criminal" with reference only to what the state
> dictates is criminal, then none of this really matters. Calling, e.g.,
> private individuals or even other non-state groups criminal via this method
> ends up only telling us the state has labeled them so -- and there's no
> reason to accept this as more than merely an expression of the preferences
> of the state or of the ruling class.
>

Yes. States happen to have established a monopoly on legislation, at least
in the west, so if a crime is what is prohibited and punished not by morals
or aesthetics, but by the law, the positive law is essentially what has been
legally enacted in the State concerned. This is an expression of the
preference of the ruling class (or, ideally, of the specific Volksgeist and
Zeitgeist concerned)? What else is new?

Sure, you can try and take over the state concerned and change the law.

 If the state or if all states outlawed life extension and any research
> having to deal with Extropianism or transhumanism, would any of you say,
> "Well, we're criminals now -- just like Al Capone or Ted Bundy."?
>

I live in a country where reproductive human cloning is *already* a crime,
and land you a sentence similar to that provided for manslaughter. I devote
a significant part of my energies to changing and/or fighting such laws, but
if I am operating a cloning clinic, I am technically into professional
crime, exactly as a drug cartel lord.

I may not care and take my chances, one may have very good reasons to
infringe the law in many circumstances after all, but I am under no delusion
that victimless crimes have already been abolished in my country.


>  This is via some form of law that transcends and is even presumed by
> state law. I think the natural law approach does this and is a means to
> judge even the actions of states.
>

Yes, this is a judeo-christian tenet: the only law is the divine law, and
human legislators are allowed at best to notarise and write down its
universal and eternal content. I happen to have written a book on the
subject, *Indagine sui diritti dell'uomo. Genealogia di una morale* which is
available online at http://www.dirittidelluomo.org.

Personally, I am instead on the side of self-determination, diversity and
change. And also maintain that those are the best bets for the future of
transhumanism. Lest somebody comes up with the natural law forbidding
abortion, biotechnologies, etc.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110722/70c5cf8b/attachment.html>