From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 94 12:41:56 PDT
To: David L Womack <dwomack@runner.jpl.utsa.edu>
Subject: Re: Unicorn vs....
In-Reply-To: <9405261716.AA28738@runner.utsa.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9405261233.A1625-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


C'punks,

On Thu, 26 May 1994, David L Womack wrote:

> I have to support Black Unicorn's use of the courts.
> Really, what choices were available?
> . . .
> e)  Sue the guy.  It's legal, it's easy, and it get's people's
>     attention.  
> 
> So, I, for one, think Black Unicorn took the best and most
> reasonable approach.  I'd be very interested in which course
> (or some other undefined course I didn't think of) that
> the anarchists feel would be reasonable...
> . . .

Well, I'm an anarchist and I would have no *philosophical* problem with 
pursuing redress in the king's court.  It is because I am an anarchist 
that I don't impute any special status to "government."  "Government" is 
just the term we use for one particular form of collective force.  I 
would use it in the same way I would use an oncoming truck; if someone 
were trying to mug me, I would consider pushing them in front of the 
truck.  It would just be a handy tool to be employed for self-defense.  
So to the government often is useful as a handy blunt instrument to keep 
other forms of muggers at bay.

Now in actuality, I have grave *practical* reservations about using the 
government in this way.  It is hard not to get entangled once one begins 
to dance with the devil.

Now ask me if I would have any philosophical objection to taking welfare.


 S a n d y