1994-09-02 - Re: Alt.Gvmt.Bad.Bad.Bad

Header Data

From: Michael Conlen <meconlen@IntNet.net>
To: blancw@pylon.com
Message Hash: 48bd9982163055ff57f9c5e4a3d7b2b3f61c8486f727abb8aae9edf3e415028d
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9409020814.A17519-0100000@zeus>
Reply To: <199409012015.NAA08437@deepthought.pylon.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-09-02 13:03:23 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 2 Sep 94 06:03:23 PDT

Raw message

From: Michael  Conlen <meconlen@IntNet.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 94 06:03:23 PDT
To: blancw@pylon.com
Subject: Re: Alt.Gvmt.Bad.Bad.Bad
In-Reply-To: <199409012015.NAA08437@deepthought.pylon.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9409020814.A17519-0100000@zeus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 1 Sep 1994 blancw@pylon.com wrote:
> What should really be said is that theft does not happen of its 
> own accord;  someone must decide to accomplish the so-called 
> criminal act.  To describe theft as the result of another's 
> inaction is to imply that human action of any kind is mostly 
> automatic, that there is a pull like gravity which will cause 
> action upon intelligence the way gravity affects inanimate 
> objects, and that nothing better could be or should be expected 
> from it.  

Some belive that human action is automatic, while semming to be by 
choice, that the past of this persones life defines how they will react 
to a certin situation. I do however agree that someone does decide on 
there own that they will commit a criminal act, however if people 
protected themselves would they be acted apon? If you use PGP does 
someone else read your E-Mail? If not what happens? (assumming that you 
are writing something that someone else will want to intercept, ect.)

> It is also to imply that the possession of 
> intelligence is negligible because any opportunity for taking 
> advantage of another's vulnerability will be irresistible to 
> humans, as if they were basically scavengers looking for the 
> spoils of other people's negligence.

I have known many people to be this way. They will and DO take every 
advantage of any situation they can. 

> In which case, rather than speaking of bad government, the 
> subject should be a question on the existence of intelligence & 
> the possibility for morality.  I don't know who would be 
> qualified to discuss it, though, without the possession of the 
> one and an appreciation of the other.

The United States is made up of ignorant people who know what they need 
to get by in life, and do not want to take the time to do what it takes 
to improve themselves, ie. vote. As for morality, I feel it is somthing 
that we all wish to be but find it hard to be. I know I find it hard to 
be moral.


Groove on Dude
Michael Conlen





Thread