>>>1.  Governments will no longer be "necessary," if they ever were.
>>2.  Protection will no longer depend on having a "government."
>>>3.  Anonymous networking technology will protect our rights, to the extent
>>>they can be protected.
>>>4.  Your statement, "...anarchy is a massive step backward..." is absolutely
>>>incorrect.
>
>>That's fine that you believe the things, but for acceptance by others you
>>will have to provide support for your position.  I, personally, would like
>>to see your premises so that I may evualuate your claims.  You may indeed
>>be correct in your assessment.
>
>Well, here's  my "Assassination Politics" essay.
>

You all should have a copy of this, so I won't waste bandwidth posting it
again.  If you didn't read it, I encourage you do to so, no matter what
your initial reaction is.  It is a facinating proposal and it brings to
mind a multitude of questions about privacy, anonymity, ethics and the
nature of human beings in general.

Now, in respose to Mr. Bell.  As I stated above, I found your proposal
absolutely facinating, to say the least.  As with many others, I'm sure, it
struck an initial chord in me that tempted me to disregard it out of hand.
However, I was determined to read it through thoroughly and without bias.
I have done so and I have the following thoughts about it.

The plan it self is feasable, and with more thought, all the wrinkles could
be ironed out.  I am impressed with the detail of it.  I would be curious
to see what an open minded laywer would say about it's legality under close
scrutiny.

However, I must point out, and I'm sure you realize this, that it would not
be adopted by the public at large for some time to come, or more likely
never.  There are too many people who believe that it is wrong to take a
life for any reason and that no action justifies death.  I count myself
among these people.  The barganing power of death is indeed great, but some
would still realize that a vote would make them responsible, at least in
part, for a murder.  There is an ethical stumbling block here that may
never be overcome.

Further, I don't believe you have enough support for your claim that other
targets would not be sought.  It is one thing to say that enough people
won't vote for someone picked out of the phone book, but what if the
predicted individual is a doctor who performs abortions, or an activist for
gay rights (or *against* gay rights), or Bill Gates ;-).  There are also
the individuals who are trying to bring about change in society that is
unpopular, but is still in the interest of humanity.  Abraham Lincoln
surely would have been killed by this system, for example.  Also, big
corporations would be able to cut down their political enemies such as
envornment activists, fair business practice activists and competetors'
high ranking officers.  Even if only one person in charge of such a
business were to put out a digital contract, he would have no problem
suppling the money for the hit.  People who have tried to make changes for
humanity that went against the social norm at the time are revered today
for their efforts.  In this system, they would likely be assasinated.
Nothing would ever change because people are always afraid of change and
afraid of things they do not understand and the people who fight that
ignorance will likely be killed.  Your statement that Organization B, the
one that collects for any target, is not well supported.  They would still
be doing *plenty* of business, in spite of the higher prices.

Organization B would thrive, make no mistake.  And the people who would be
getting in on all the action are the rich.  All the politicians who oppose
their interests would be hit immediately.  Anyone trying to change the
status quo would be eliminated.  Why do you think we are still using
combustion engines in the last decade of the 20th century?  We could have
had better alternatives 20 years ago, but the oil companies would loose out
so they have either bought out these ideas or had killed the inventors and
bought their patents and are sitting on them.  A capitalist economy does
not always breed competition that brings out the best and most desireable
products because some advancements are bad for all the businesses involved
in that market.   Big business and the rich would benifit the most from the
Assination Politics model.

 But what if OrgB stops taking donations for "predictions" for
"Non-Initiation Of Force Principle" (NIOFP) offenders?  Some other
organization will crop up to take their place AND the people operating OrgB
could be hit for their "ethical" action.  There is simply too much
opportunity offered by OrgB type organizations for people to pass up.  They
will not let the higher prices stop them.

If the answer to that problem is to regulate the lists of "victims", then
the next question is who are these people who are regulating and what
guidelines are they following?  Who decides who gets to be the moderators?
Could there be exceptions to the (NIOFP)-offender standard?  Who would they
be and why?    Could the organizations be anonymous as well?  How would the
money be transmitted to them in that case?  How can we trust or redress
grivances with an organization?  There are still many concerns regarding
the organizations.  If the organizations fail, the whole system fails.

That's all I can think of at the moment.  Like I said before, once one can
get past the bias, it is an endlessly intriguing proposal bristling with
questions and issues concerning our very beings.

This is precisely why I would like to know if I may take a copy of your
proposal to my ethics class.  I think this is a great topic for discussion
and I would like your approval.

Respectfully,
Jeff Conn

lunaslide

On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion
creating the illusion of truth and drama.
                                                Henry Miller

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2

mQBvAzD3EHEAAAEDAMVwZzXozPjX18mCenA5fJsdWZXcrhJCxPR+SoVCmR7d4ZVU
mwITzPTHo/GyLvJrWyk5YdhheczyY2VSawaMrCN/nWA7K9lwAylbKyPxqBhRYJ3C
2wi2uD5LY2wypNOQyQARAQABtB5KZWZmIENvbm4gPGx1bmFzbGlkZUBsb29wLmNv
bT6JAHUDBRAw+1bqS2NsMqTTkMkBAQkTAwCersFbCyk8O0MbGlNcZDAe24CLEWQ0
0C5EHni33W76UsG1bybcLsuMH6HVwLF7IqZivnzc7wkujYPQvCqn8HEYYTld8V9V
Cou4dOvA8kV7rHvAn/LuLx7DRruLFrRoPSk=
=OIT9
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----