From: mark@unicorn.com
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 00:52:52 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT
Message-ID: <878316320.10360.193.133.230.33@unicorn.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




Jim Choate (ravage@ssz.com) wrote:
>No, it doesn't - your definition of democracy is a simplistic if not
>childish view intended to cast democracy in the worst possible light
>imaginable.

I don't need to cast dumbocracy in a bad light; one look at the news
does far more than I ever could to show the evils of government.

>Obviously there is nothing in the definition of a democracy that prevents
>those founding the democracy from stating:
>"Congress shall make no law respecting ..."

Indeed. And such statements are almost totally worthless; the US 
Constitution includes such statements, yet it is rapidly becoming
the world leader in repression and spreading that to other countries
as fast as it can. The best such limits can do is slow the spread of 
government, not stop it. Perhaps you should try a few games of
Hofstadter's 'Nomic', which is based around this problem?

>Grow up.

I have grown up; I come from a strongly socialist family, yet I soon
learnt that my and my family's political beliefs were wrong. Most people 
just continue to parrot the same beliefs all their lives. I could live
with a libertarian minarchy, or even the US Constitution if it were
upheld, but neither society would be as stable as anarchy.

>You've proved nothing except your a priori dislike for democracy because you
>want to convince others you are an angel.

Sorry? I have no desire to govern others, so I don't have to be an
angel. Indeed, the fact that there are no angels is another strong
argument for anarchy over government. If power corrupts, then eliminate
the power.

If self-rule is good, then government is bad. If you believe in both
self-rule and government, you've proven nothing but that your beliefs
are contradictory.

    Mark