Wojtek writes:
> I may also add that I like the Hobbesian concept of
Leviathan for a different reason - namely its
universalism.
But how do you prevent the state from universalizing Others out of existence. Wasn't the 20th century prosecution exhibit #1 for limiting the state's ability to universalize?
> It stresses the rule of the Leviathan/State over
everyone else, thus precluding capturing it by any
particular interest group
Except that interest group that controls the levers of power of the state.
> My ideal is the centrally planned state (with limited
market niches circumscribed by careful planning)
Will your state determine/plan who can fuck whom, and what the proper girth of dildoes can be and what will be their maximum rate of vibration?
Seriously, you want to trust the state after all the abuses states have brought down upon people?
> the whose officers are appointed rather than elected
in foolish popularity contests
If they are foolish why have them?
> the appointing/removing bodies being the
aforementioned political parties, professional/labor
associations and interest groups.
So an interest group of queers will be able to remove duly elected homophobic officials?
> Of course I understand that such a concept is an
anathema to Homo Americanus
I think it is anathema to anyone who ever got hit over the head with a billy club; who ever got arrested and thrown in jail; who is not white, straight and male (and many of them would probably dissent as well).
> who has no concept of the collective and the public
good
I have a notion of the collective good, and that good is not fostered by the all-intrusive state in my opinion.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister