From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 04 2003 - 09:15:47 GMT
Hi John,
> I wouldn't call your post on going to war the veiws of a conservative
either, seems pretty radical to me.
Perhaps I shouldn't be accepting other people's (DMB's) descriptions of me
then :o)
Unlike almost all conservatives I've ever met, I do quite like reading
Chomsky, for example, even when I disagree with his ultimate conclusions. I
think authority can be justified more often than the 'rarely' in the
quotation below - but I do agree that authority needs to be justified.
That's the transition accomplished by, first and foremost, John Locke. Where
my perspective differs from some others (eg Chomsky or DMB) is that I don't
think 'reason' or 'intellect' is, by itself, an adequate guide - that there
is a higher authority than that. But that's a whole other thread...
Sam
"Anarchism is not a fixed set of ideas; it's a tendency in human thought
that is trying to identify kinds of authority and domination and, if they
can't justify themselves which they rarely can, to work to overcome them.
that means overcoming state authority. It also means overcoming the
autocracy of capitalist enterprise, which is simply another form of
hierarchy and domination. It means overcoming sexist repression. Whatever
you find. Sometimes authority can be justified. So, for example, you stop a
three-year old kid from running across the street into traffic. That's
authority, but I think you can give a justification for it. However, the
burden of proof is always on those with the authority. They have to
demonstrate that their authority and control is legitimate and that
justification can very rarely be given." (Chomsky)
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 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 04 2003 - 10:15:57 GMT