PSY:
"Political power, in my opinion, can not be our
ultimate aim. It is one of the means used by men for
their all-around advancement. The power to control
national life through national representatives is
called political power. Representatives will become
unnecessary if the national life becomes so perfect
and self-controlled. It will then be a state of
enlightened anarchy in which each person will become
his own ruler. He will conduct himself in such a way
that his behavior will not hamper the well-being of
his neighbors. In an ideal State there will be no
political institution and therefore no political
power. That is why Thoreau has said in his classic
statement that that government is the best which
governs the least."
ROG:
Sounds to me like an extension of the liberal tradition to use free markets
to replace government intervention wherever possible. Rumor has it that India
is finally starting to come to the same realization after decades of folly
experimenting with socialism.
JB4mt:
I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Socialism has the same premise
-- that it would eventually lead to a benevolent sort of anarchy. I may
be American, but don't think socialism is a dirty word
ROG:
Total state control of the means of production in a society is your idea of
the "least governance"? Odd.
JB4:
However, Socialism's fatal flaw seems to be human nature, or, more
specifically, greed. Ironic, then, that a policy touted by a reknowned
American "anti" socialist -- Ronald Reagan's "trickle-down" theory of
economics -- would suffer from the same flaw.
ROG:
How did Reagan's economics suffer from this flaw?
SQUONK:
...and i hear Nader has won enough votes in recent elections to receive the
same amount of Government funds for campaigning next time around?
If Nader had access to the magnitude of funds Bush's corrupt corporate
buisness chums throw at him i would have thought the political climate in the
US would be on an altogether more intellectual level?
ROG:
Are you alleging that corporations gave money to Bush's campaign? Or just
employees of corporations? Are these employees more or less corrupt than
Nader and Gore's environmentalist, teacher union and trial bar chums?
Most importantly though, how does a request for minimal government lead to
your suggestion that the government subsidize campaign financing? Don't you
see a contradiction?
Rog
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:27 BST