[SGVLUG] Help spread the word

[Sean O'Donnell]

Dustin Laurence wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:33:20PM -0700, Sean O'Donnell wrote:
> 
>>>> Dustin Laurence <dustin at laurences.net> writes:
>>> Sorry, while we probably agree on many specifics of personal freedom, I
>>> do *not* share your theory of government.  In fact, I'm not permitted to
>>> should I wish to, which I don't.
>>>
>> There are 3 types of participants: Willing, Unwilling, and Unwitting.
>>
>> So, you're either a willing or (obviously not) an unwitting inmate, if
>> you're unwilling to disassociate (or 'escape') from the control of, in
>> this case, the political asylum.
> 
> Rather than try to consider where/whether I fit into your scheme, let me
> just say that the concept that an individual can opt out is entirely
> unworkable, and is no different in practice than having no government.
> That was my point--the idea of individuals opting out is not even
> tempting, because I know better.  I consider it neither ethical nor
> legal to try such a thing; but it is certainly incumbent on every
> citizen to attempt to affect their government for the better, to oppose
> unethical laws or even disobey them if they conflict with fundamental
> principles of morality, and even to resort to the final court of appeal
> and revolt.  But even the last can only be to replace an unjust
> government with a just one, not to eliminate governments.
> 
> No government is an impossible fantasy and always has been.  Nature
> abhors a vacuum, and every attempt to not have a government simply
> creates a very bad one.  The true result of anarchy is to create a
> tyranny of the strongest, and as groups are always stronger than the
> strongest individual the end is a government of whichever gang leader
> had the most effective and ruthless gang.  The only thing that ever
> works is to acknowledge that there will be a civil authority and try to
> do a good job of it.  The default government is the warlord, not no
> government, and the goal of political theory is to create a better
> government than that of the warlord and not slip back there later.
> 
> That's why it's unethical to try to opt out individually--you are
> helping to go back to the rule of the warlords.
> 
> Dustin
> 

I have no confidence in a political or legal system that is based upon
lobbyism.

I don't know what this political system would be like without lobbyism,
but I imagine (or would prefer to see) that it would actually allow (We)
the people to make decisions on laws being passed, rather than
corporations financially influencing these political-hacks to make these
decisions, for them.

You have to realize, most, if not all, of these corrupt
laws/bills/politicians, all, in one way or another, stem from lobbyism.

It's unfortunate that that will not change, thus preventing many other
positive changes, as I see it. =(

-- 
Sean O'Donnell
South Pasadena, CA

sean at seanodonnell.com
http://seanodonnell.com

PGP Public Key ID: 0xF57FB9E5
PGP Public Key Server: http://pgp.mit.edu

*The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own
reason for existing.*