<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Dan TheBookMan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:danust2012@gmail.com" target="_blank">danust2012@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span></span></div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail-"><span>​> The British ​​though otherwise. If Washington has lost the war he<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div></span>would have been hanged. ​</span></blockquote><span class="gmail-"><span></span><br></span><span>You're conflating being a traitor with being a radical.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><font size="4">​A traitor ​is a radical who lost, a patriot is a radical who won.</font></div></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span class="gmail-"><span></span><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>Had history been slightly different -- for those who actually read history -- Washington might have simply ended up as an officer in the British military.</span></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​<font size="4">Before the Revolution Washington ​WAS a </font></div><font size="4">officer in the British military<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ and fought for them in the ​</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">French and Indian ​War.</div> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​Then the British behavior radicalized him. ​</div></font></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span></span><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>Being of an aristocratic bent, too, isn't at all keeping with wanting to leave office -- to retire to his estates.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​<font size="4">Well then let's have three cheers for ​</font></div><font size="4"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">​aristocrats​</font><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">, maybe he wasn't a radical after all, most radicals who gain power ​never want to give it up.</span></font></div><div> </div></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>​><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​>>​</div> ​Also, libertarianism as a form of radical politics isn't<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div></span>about seizing power.</blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><span></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail-">​<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​>> ​</div><font size="4">Then ​libertarianism​ is a trivial movement that should be of<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div></font><font size="4">no interest to a serious minded individual. </font></span></blockquote></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span class="gmail-"><span></span><br></span><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>See? </span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">​No.​</font></div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​>​</div>You said you were a libertarian,</span></div></div></blockquote><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​Yes.​</div> </font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>sometimes even claim you are one </span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">​Yes.</font></div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>but you believe, in your heart of hearts, that seizing power if the important thing.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">​Yes.​</font></div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>Well, the important political thing from a libertarian perspective is that everyone be free</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​Yes.​</div> </font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>not that any movement have power over everyone else.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​</div><font size="4">Dan, in my younger days I may have been somewhat naive in my libertarian ideas, but I was never THAT naive. It may come as a shock to you but not everyone agrees<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​</div> with you that abolishing every nation state on the face of the earth would be a good idea<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​;​</div> so if you're going to accomplish th<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​at​</div> grand goal you're going to have to push them. And elementary physics will tell you that you can't push something over the finish line without power. Will the powerful people who implement this radical change in how civilization is organized be themselves <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>corrupted by that power? Very likely. That's one reason radical political change seldom makes people happier.      </font><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span class="gmail-"><blockquote type="cite"><span></span></blockquote></span><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>Well, we can agree to disagree on the permanence of the state. The state certainly has staying power,</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​Six thousand years and counting.​</div> </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>but right up until slavery was abolished, there were quite brilliant people arguing that it was a permanent institution.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​I was once all enthusiastic about Privately Produced Law and Private Protection Agencies, and if we were starting from scratch I still think that would be the way to go, but we are 6000 years from scratch. And there is another problem, the countime clock to the singularity. Things are advancing on the AI front faster than I expected, I no longer think there is a snowball's chance in hell of making gargantuan changes in the social structure (like abolishing the nation state) before the singularity without wrecking civilization.   </div></font></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><span class="gmail-"><span></span></span><span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>Who argued anything about starting from scratch?</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​<font size="4">Well, one of us is arguing that nearly every social contract in existence ​should be immediately torn up and one of us is not. So you tell me which one is arguing in favor of starting from scratch and which one is not. </font></div></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">​ John K Clark​</font></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>