From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:46:12 -0800 (PST)
To: hallam@ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199701282214.OAA04788@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199701290603.AAA02837@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Phill wrote:
> I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have
> "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of
> property you do.
> 
> Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the

    BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming
that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs
to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is
created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that
work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those 
shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved.

> controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property"
> from the previous rulers.

     They "won" it in combat. The people of china obviously prefered new 
government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover. 

> I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is
> a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model
> you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every
> philosopher since Locke.

     Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education
at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same 
way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough 
aren't going to insult it overmuch.