1997-10-31 - democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)) (fwd)

Header Data

From: Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com>
To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Message Hash: 15944e722eb32d2f09e776aa1d7bb7f963505eed2c4d522e7334345af8cc30bd
Message ID: <199710310315.VAA21770@einstein.ssz.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-31 03:23:42 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:23:42 +0800

Raw message

From: Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:23:42 +0800
To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)) (fwd)
Message-ID: <199710310315.VAA21770@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 01:42:37 GMT
> From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
> Subject: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd))
> 
> > If we abandon democracy then we are admitting that ALL social systems are a
> > failure.
> 
> I fail to see the inference there.

If we as individuals can't make our own decisions about what is best for us,
what makes you think some stranger will do any better? By our initial
assumption we are assured that they can't make adequate decisions about
their own life. Every form of government other than democracy assumes a
priori that noble oblige is prima facia. To paraphrase an old questions of
politics, who governs the governors? Or do you feel we have found angels in
the form of kings?

Democracy says, you don't need a governor (in that sense). You ARE held
responsible for your actions AFTER your actions, not for simply thinking
about them or even speaking them.

Juries are supposed to be composed of your peers, not who the prosecution or
defence believe will best support their case. It should be that the first 12
poeple called who don't have a valid excuse to be excused are the jury, the
next 12 are the back-ups. This would guarantee that getting a conviction for
anything other than the most heinous crime with the most explicit and
incontrovertible evidence will be well nigh impossible, as it should be in a
democracy. It should be a mother fucker to put somebody in jail in this
country.

Judges should not be able to tell someone they need permissio to file a
legal complaint. Nor should a judge be able to refuse a juries request to
have testimony transcribed because it costs too much. That isn't justice,
that is systemic expediency and criminal indiference.

Which means we should have the lowest number of incarcerated individuals
instead of the most.

> Democracy doesn't work that well.  Probably no government at all would
> be better.

Doesn't work what way? Consider, other than democracy, that every form of
government has an implicit assumption that there is some base sets of
activities that citizens should be permitted and they will be happy. Those
activities are determined, except in democracies, by those in power who are
NOT elected or otherwise responsible to the people as a whole. In a
democracy the people are given the opportunity to make up their mind what to
do with their lives and property without having to obtain permission from
some authority. Why? Because there isn't such an authority to get permission
from in the first place.

> > No, it is time WE take responsibility back for our actions and control our
> > own lives and quit abrogating it to some asshole who will promise anything
> > to get us to give them money for nothing (ie taxes).
> 
> Same thing applies to most government functions.

In what way?

Paying a government to keep the park clean and mowed and the lights on at
night or my streets well paved and de-iced in winter is not quite the same
thing as having black-suited ninja wann-be's kicking my door in at 2AM
because I choose to smoke a joint or even grow my own weed; or spend six
weeks in jail for possessing vitamins that some cop THINKS is drugs; or
perhaps because I happen to be a doctor and know how to read and might take
exception to being told what I can or can't say; or because I might be of
Jewish decent or a Muslim or a Catholic or Anglo or Negro; or etc. etc.

There is a reason behind the madness of "Congress shall make no law...".


    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    |
   |    The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there   |
   |    be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.       |
   |                                                                    |
   |                                       -Alan Greenspan-             |
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http://www.ssz.com/   |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage@ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|






Thread