At 1:27 PM -0500 10/5/00, Sean Roach wrote:
That second quote about sacrificing for the herd was closer to the mark. Substitute "could" for "should", "stupid" for "moral", and "popular" for "right".
And you have to admit, if tomorrow I gave all my worldly goods to the community at large, they would hail me a "good man" for at least the evening...while they snickered behind my back.
The issue is not what others claim is moral, the issue is that some (you, in my view, based on your 'beautiful sentiment" comment) think it _is_ moral. My point was to disabuse you of the notion that socialism is somehow "beautiful, but impractical." There are many reasons--economic, psychological, cultural--why socialism is deeply flawed and not at all "beautiful." Look, we've discussed this many times over the years with people who show up here and repeat the blither about how socialism is a wonderful idea if only it can be made to work. It just ain't so. Read the archives for past arguments. Review the early history of the Jamestown Colony and what "to each according to his needs" did to them, practically and psychologically. Think deeply about the game-theoretic implications of having socialized reward systems. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.