Responding to msg by jdd@aiki.demon.co.uk (Jim Dixon) on Thu, 18 Aug 4:46 PM Jim (and other respondents), These discussions are pretty invigorating and I look forward to reading them. Just want to say to Jim that the following remarks of yours made about someone's earnest thoughts:
Personally, I find these statements very disturbing, because they are so empty.
Might be applied to your own later comments:
You won't tear down the government without replacing it. And I would argue that the more violent the means used to tear down the government, the more repressive its successor. Governments exist in part because we are such dangerous animals.
This rhetorical ploy comes across as an apology for the status quo and seems to offer counter-revolutionary cant instead of your best arguments for making rational, evolutional improvements to our inheritance. My preference is for hard-wrought and hard-fought prickly specifics to easy, dreamy generalizations. Even though both enrich the brew. If this topic does not get blown off this list I would like to offer some specifics responses to your good stuff. What say, c'punks, is this topic okay here? Tim? Anybody? TLAs? John