Forwarded message:

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 12:02:52 +0000 From: "Frank O'Dwyer" <fod@brd.ie> Subject: Re: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the (fwd)

Under an "anarcho-whatever" people are left to their own devices.

And *that* is the primary failure of the entire theory. It's strongest point is sufficient to kill it. No, actualy, it's strongest point demands that it be killed. Very weak argument epistomologicaly, with little more to offer than didactic charms. The implication is that individuals are making societal policies with no checks and balances (failure 1). In effect, the only way an individual will be restrained is by some sort of natural community action (never mind that people don't voluntarily act that way, failure 2). There is no clear mechanism to arbitrate disagreements other than the above mechanism pretty much eschewing any sort of standard of behaviour which further fosters non-compliant behaviour (failure 3). There is no clear mechanism that protects property or civil rights since the very arbitration mechanism changes (and by implication the standards of ethics/morality it's held to) on a case by case basis mediated by the whim of chance on the compatibility of any two individuals personal views (failure 4). The arbitrary use of violence is at no point addressed (failure 5). One of the primary arguments for anarcho- based systems is to address corruption and unfair competition. Yet at no point does it sufficiently address the guidelines as to what those are let alone limits on their solutions (failure 6). So what we are left with is a system whereby people mediate their actions based on the compatibility of their personal philosophies. As I've said before, anarcho- based systems make the same phsychological mistake that every system other than a democracy makes; if it works for one person the answer should be acceptable to another. The very fact that the contrary to this is one of the reasons behind anarcho- support doesn't seem to impinge upon the concioussness. Anarchy is contradictory at the axiomatic level. Another way to see it is: Let people do what they want and they'll naturaly conform to what I want. There is this same axiomatic problem with Hayek's economics and social theories. ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------