From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 04:17:21 +0800
To: Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: TCM goes to city council
In-Reply-To: <v03102804b014e9f5d0b9@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <199708121951.MAA00280@netcom12.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



TCM

>I attended a City Council meeting and spoke up on this point. I asked that
>if the "Food Not Bombs" folks were being arrested for distributing food
>without a license, that the cops also make arrests of the various groups at
>church picnics, Boy Scout outings, family picnics, etc., who also prepare
>and distribute food to groups. (Cooked under the same conditions, and
>distributed the same way.)
>
>The Council showed no reaction to my point, not that I expected to have any
>effect (dozens of others made similar points, that this was selective
>enforcement). The cops were told to keep busting people for distributing
>food, but no orders were given against church and social groups.

TCM attending a government sponsored meeting? participating in 
participatory government? voting with his voice in a democracy?

SCANDALOUS!!

whatever happened to the "f*** them all philosophy"?

hehehehehe

or maybe you will be using this little anecdote ad nauseam to
show the failure of democracy to individual wishes, and the 
tyranny of the majority?

seriously, if cypherpunks think government is so crappy, let see
them invent a better alternative than that which exists. note that
"anarchy" evades the problem completely. it's like saying, "I hate
my web browser" and someone saying, "oh, just get rid of it, the
alternative is far better".  an 8 year old would understand this
logic, but alas it eludes the cpunks after many moons on this list.

>"Some food distributors are more equal than others." Selective enforcement
>is the real power of the State.

agreed, the food policy you cite is strangely orwellian. however one
can somewhat sympathize with states which are in a bind here, in such a way
that you fail to mention the obvious ramifications. 

the more empathetic governments 
are toward the homeless, the more the state becomes a hangout
for them. would you like to see the homeless multiply in your
own jurisdiction? word gets around fast in these circles where the
best place to get a free lunch is, and they travel around the 
country to that place. 

you have a very rabid opinion on welfare as a redistribution of
income to those that don't deserve it. how is this food redistribution
program different? the fact that you don't pay for it? so you
aren't really objecting to leeching, just leeching off of your
money? and BTW, I believe "leeching" is a word that you have used
in your own posts on the subject, and is not something I'm inventing
here.