Hi Squonk and Elliot!
SQUONK:
However, if media were open and not dependent upon friends, like if the US
had a sophisticated BBS then there would be freer debate and transparency of
motive?
(And less need for government or private campaign funds?)
You are not recognising that government funding attempts to provide a poor
solution to a dreadful problem. But its something closer to supporting
intellectual patterns over social ones.
ROG:
You ignored my questions. I have no problemo with the government's campaign
support, I just thought your support for it was odd considering the call for
less involvement. Now your additional advocacy of government-sponsored media
really has me intrigued.
If you ever get a chance, please do read the Federalist Papers some time if
you want to see the contradictory argument that Madison gave against your
view in writing the most successful national constitution in existence.
ELLIOT:
Socialsm is not defined by
governemnt control as rog thinks it is. Rather, they'd like a world without
government, but in imposing this system unnaturally government control has
become tied to the idea of socialism in the minds of many. Or rather, and
more appropriately, let us say their are two modes of goods distribution
(market and communal) and either of these can have much gov't intervention
or none:
ROG:
I am familiar with the hundreds upon hundreds of small socialized communal
experiments and their relative lack of success. Are you really suggesting
this model be considered for a nation state? (which was the subject of the
original quote) What would this be, some kind of nation of Kibutzim?
Intrigued.
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