The nature of anarchism (Lefty Despair etc.)

[Justin Schwartz]

>Justin Schwartz:
> > You misunderstand. The point is not that the post office has to be
> > amonopoly maintained by force, but that it's a public good which won't
> > exist at all without a public authority. And if the choice is a state 
>with
> > all it's problem, including the risk of abuse and oppression by state
> > authorities, and no public goods--no roads, passenger trains, no 
>universal
> > education, no post office and telephone service, etc., I jnow how 99.99% 
>of
> > humanity will choose.
>
>I understand the theory that coercion is more efficient than
>freedom, but you haven't answered the objections I make to
>that theory (right above).  The fact that a large majority
>do not agree with me is hardly an argument at all and I
>don't know why you've introduced it.
>

In a democrcatic context, the fact taht an absolutely overwhelming number of 
people, all but a statistically insignificant minority, would prefer the 
ourported loss of freedom involvedin having a democratic state to the 
sacrifice of all public goods that that state alone can provide--something 
you don't dispute--is a conclusive refutation of the idea that the costs in 
terms of freedom outweightthe benefits in terms of welfare. Sorry, Cholly. 
You can't impose barbarism and poverty on humanity in the name--so 
called--of freedom.

jks

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com