War on humanity

[R. Steve Walz]

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

On Tue, 04 May 2004 14:59:00 -0400, Chuck Harris <cfharris@erols.com> wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:

You say that a ditch digger's hours are as valuable as an engineering
designer's. But you are wrong. When a ditch digger finishes digging
his ditch, a ditch is dug. When an engineer finishes a good design,
his labor puts vast numbers of people to work, and society is enrichened
by a new product or service. The two efforts are not even close to
equal.

Na, when the ditch digger can't dig, the engineer can't shit (if the dig
was for a sewer for example), and make no products.
No roads no transport no sales...
The ditch digger should get all the money ;-)

The engineer can always become a ditch digger. All it takes is a shovel
and a pick. Can the ditch digger become an engineer if you give him a
calculator?

http://jim.com/cat/capital.htm

In Catalonia, while the libertarian socialists had power,
the entertainment industry was socialized, but for some time the
collectives were left with substantial real power over their individual
theaters, so that in practice this was closer to collectivization than
socialization, which meant that at first there was a free market in
entertainment -- at first the people went to see what they wanted
to see, rather than what their masters decided would be good for
them to see. Naturally they wanted to see certain singers and not
others. The theater industry democratically and freely voted that
everyone would have the same wage: 15 pesetas, long holidays, and
lots of benefits. Blood of Spain, page 222:

As a demonstration of the efforts being made, let it be realized
that the greatest of opera singers, like Hipolito Lazaro, and the
most humble of workers are going to get the same daily wage.

Blood of Spain, page 224 then quotes Hipolito Lazaro as saying to
the Tivoli theater collective:

We are all equal now, and to prove it we all get the same
wage. Fine, since we are equal, today I am going to collect the
tickets at the door, and one of you can come up here and sing.

After a spot of haggling, his pay went up to 750 pesetas. Someone
else got 500 pesetas, and everyone else got the short end of the
stick. So if you have liberty, you will not have equality. He was
able to get 750 pesetas because he was free to leave or to refuse to
work as directed, same reason as I get rather good pay today.

If the workers are free to organize as they choose and use capital as
they choose, they will use it for profit, and you will have a free
market system that will turn back into capitalism in two or three
years -- indeed it only took two or three months for alarmingly
powerful signs of capitalism to reappear in Catalonia.

If this problem is solved by "coordination" that forcibly prevents
them from acting in the way most profitable to each particular person
or small group, then you have a single all powerful monopoly state,
and it is back to the killing fields, as also happened in Catalonia.
----------------

Nonsense, you simply have art as hobby AND as vocation, just like now!

If ever the free institutions of America are destroyed, that event may
be attributed to the omnipotence of the majority, which may at some
future time urge the minorities to desperation and oblige them to have
recourse to physical force. Anarchy will then be the result, but it will
have been brought about by despotism.
- Alexis De Toqueville
-------------------------------------------

Anarchy brought about by despotism?? Nonsense. Why would a despot
want anarchy??

De Toqueville was a Rich Rightist. He hated the People and the
end of wealth and privilege, and agitated against it, he did
NOT speak for freedom, he spoke for RICH LICENSE!

In My Society the People get to authorize full wage for such
performers to work for them as they appreciate. Others can
perform for free until they become sufficiently appreciated
by the Majority.

The difference between that and this society is that they don't
become vastly and unfairly wealthy from being appreciated, they
simply get to work at what they enjoy.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Jeffrey C. Dege]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 04:46:45 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

If you can't sell it, you don't own it.
----------------
No, if you SELL it, THEN you don't own it, and might as well never!!

If you aren't allowed to sell it, then you don't own it. Whoever it is
that is preventing you from selling it owns it.

--
Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist,
fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire.
- Robert Heinlein

 

[Jeffrey C. Dege]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 04:52:49 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

And if the majority votes that R. Steve Walz is an Enemy of the
People, and his property should be siezed, and he imprisoned, for the
encouragement of the others?
--------------------------------
Then it won't be the final evolution of the Majority Democracy.

So it's only the final evolution of the Majority Democracy if it deifies
R. Steve Walz?

--
Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist,
fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire.
- Robert Heinlein

 

[Jeffrey C. Dege]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 05:03:55 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

----------------------------
There is no need to reward quality, that's what quality control and
worker peer group authority to fire are for. There is only the need
to reward hours of labor.

If I'm to be rewarded the same, regardless of my labor, I'm going to
fold paper airplanes.

--
Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist,
fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire.
- Robert Heinlein

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Chuck Harris wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Land then will no longer be salable, only tradable for the same
amount of residential land and home. All other land is governed
for social use by the Local Majority.


How are you going to convince someone who has a piece of land that
happens to be in a popularily desirable location to swap with you
who has land that is on the wrong side of the railroad tracks, or
downwind of the People's Rehabilatory Crematorium?
--------------------------------

Who would want to live there? They'd request to move and the Local
Committee would agree. But not everyone can live in Hawaii. Preventing
them from trying to can be unfairly done by wealth and housing prices,
or fairly done by housing-trade.

By virtue of human desires, some residences will be more equal
than others. That inequality will make some people more wealthy
than others. Do you propose a complete reshuffeling every few
months (it would keep state movers occupied in their misery)?

-Chuck
------------------------------------

Nope, people get to stay where they dwell unless they wish to move.
Same as now.

Equality is a matter of opinion. They can build any kind of home
they wish for themselves.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Richard Henry wrote:

"Chuck Harris" <cfharris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:4097985d$0$3054$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
R. Steve Walz wrote:

Land then will no longer be salable, only tradable for the same
amount of residential land and home. All other land is governed
for social use by the Local Majority.


How are you going to convince someone who has a piece of land that
happens to be in a popularily desirable location to swap with you
who has land that is on the wrong side of the railroad tracks, or
downwind of the People's Rehabilatory Crematorium?

In the past, RSW has proposed to kill all those who don't go along with his
agenda.
--------------------------------

Nope. Not merely "my" agenda.
I merely predict it in the future and promote it as desirable.

He has also called others "tyrants".
---------------------

Some.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Roger Gt wrote:

X-No-Archive: yes
"Chuck Harris" wrote
: R. Steve Walz wrote
:
: >>There is too often a propaganda mistake made by the US, but
perhaps
: >>it is necessary: Democracy (in the literal sense) is
tyrannical, and
: >>should be avoided.
: > ---------------
: > Nonsense.
: > Majorities who vote rights for one vote those same rights for
: > themselves. No Majority votes to enslave a minority, because
: > each wonders if he might be next!! The Majority only votes
: > to oppose criminality.
:
: You are apparently unaware of the majority that ruled in the
: antebellum period of the US. That majority frequently ruled
: to end the rights of the minority. They did it by whipping,
burning
: and hanging. They were just plain folks, they called themselves
: the KKK.
snip

BS - The KKK has never been a majority! It was a religious based
group formed originally for self defense, in the Vacuum left when
the Confederacy was defeated and the Union failed to provide law
enforcement. Without oversight and regulation their goals shifted
and Racism became the primary interest of the group. Too much
power with too little restraint is always a recipe for excess and
extreme behavior. Look at Labor Unions and their political
agendas!
----------------------------

Nope, too little power people SHOULD have, causes violence.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Bob Myers wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message
news:409705F8.65B5@armory.com...

Sigh. Steve, it's exactly these sorts of endless diatribes that
forced me to killfile you a while back.
Bob M.
-----------

Gee, I guess you didn't really, did ya?

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Jeffrey C. Dege]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 05:18:01 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

If the workers are free to organize as they choose and use capital as
they choose, they will use it for profit, and you will have a free
market system that will turn back into capitalism in two or three
years -- indeed it only took two or three months for alarmingly
powerful signs of capitalism to reappear in Catalonia.

If this problem is solved by "coordination" that forcibly prevents
them from acting in the way most profitable to each particular person
or small group, then you have a single all powerful monopoly state,
and it is back to the killing fields, as also happened in Catalonia.
----------------
Nonsense, you simply have art as hobby AND as vocation, just like now!

I'm sorry, I don't understand.

I'm an engineer. It's lucrative, but takes a great deal of effort and
energy, as well having taken as a significant investment in education
and training.

Currently, I find it worth the effort.

But if I'm to be paid the same as a washroom attendent, it wouldn't be.
Being a washroom attendent is a far less stressful job.

So if I'm to be rewarded the same, regardless of what I do, I'll choose
the job that takes the least effort.

--
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give
orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem,
pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently,
die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
- R. A. Heinlein

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 May 2004 02:41:51 GMT) it happened "R. Steve Walz"
rstevew@armory.com> wrote in <409703B6.54EA@armory.com>:

KR Williams wrote:

In article <4095C0FA.72F7@armory.com>, rstevew@armory.com says...
KR Williams wrote:

In article <40958496.3866@armory.com>, rstevew@armory.com says...
KR Williams wrote:

In article <409490BE.7782@armory.com>, rstevew@armory.com says...
KR Williams wrote:

In article <40944063.1BD3@armory.com>, rstevew@armory.com says...
Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sat, 01 May 2004 21:55:07 GMT) it happened "R. Steve Walz"
rstevew@armory.com> wrote in <40941D7A.3AE0@armory.com>:


To even understand my response, you need to know my situation:

I'm a confirmed, died-in-the wool Communist.

But do you have a picture of Lenin on the wall?
Or is it Mao?
----------------
Do you actually imagine this sort of comment makes you look bright?

Neither, I'm not a Marxist or Maoist.

I'm a Communist.

I think we all understand that you're a communist (note the small
"c")

Mao wasn't, and Lenin didn't get to.

Neither Soviet Russia or Red China were communist.

...but they're fantastic examples of why communism cannot work.
-------------
Since those didn't implement any "communism", that's nothing but
a shitty little lie the Rich told the US people in the 1930's
when they were getting too Wobbly and scared them.

They sure thought they were trying to, which shows that communism
is perverse and will always be perverted. You're no different.

There is no such thing as altruism on a grand scale.
--------------
Nor is any such required, only obedience to the Law is required.

Now you're back to Mao and Stalin. You will obey or die! That's
"communism" as it will always be.
-------------------
Nonsense, that's as much Genghis Khan and Machiavelli, it has no
political persuasion, it is simply what all governments must do,
unflichingly enforce their laws.

No, that's Walz. ...and you *know* it. You might as well admit
that even you admit here that you'll have to "sacrifice" those
who don't agree with you. Your record is googled.
-------------------------
It wouldn't be me, it would be the Majority.
And if they can't keep it to themselves, sure.

Bottom line:

That's why we all laugh at you. You're the lone wolf thrown out
by mommy and can't find a female who wants the bother with a
communist dog.

--
Keith
--------------------------
Haha! If you only REALLY knew!

It's amazing how many unadorned 40-50-something women want just an
intelligent lick/suck/fuck-friend who DOESN'T want to move in with
them and run their life for them!

You mean .... WORKING.... women I presume?
-----------------------

I don't pay them or compensate them otherwise. YOU figure it out.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Jeffrey C. Dege]

On Wed, 05 May 2004 05:22:21 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

Chuck Harris wrote:

How are you going to convince someone who has a piece of land that
happens to be in a popularily desirable location to swap with you
who has land that is on the wrong side of the railroad tracks, or
downwind of the People's Rehabilatory Crematorium?
--------------------------------
Who would want to live there? They'd request to move and the Local
Committee would agree.

So now you have the State determining who can live where?

You're advocating feudalism - turning everyone into serfs, bound to the
land, and forbidden to leave without permission.

--
Conservatives never seem to fully appreciate the fact that the issues are
never the issue where liberals are concerned. For liberals the issue is
power. Whatever serves their need for power is right; whatever frustrates
it is wrong.
- David Horowitz

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 May 2004 03:37:31 GMT) it happened "R. Steve Walz"
rstevew@armory.com> wrote in <409710C0.196A@armory.com>:

Example: How do you steal money when purchasing power is registered
to each person in State computers as labor hours and can only be
spent by them specifically by submitting an order and waiting for
the goods??
Hacking?
-----------------------

Execution. Computers not public. Armed watchers, we do it now in
banks.

They chop off hands and make beggars, I botox their legs and make
cripples who must use their hands to work legally and buy food.

Makes no difference Steve, you can have someone without hands pull
something with a harness.
Some people can paint with the feet.
Both cases is about mutilating someone, because that someone had other
ideas then you.
-----------------------------

Nope, because they were a criminal. They can keep their ideas to
themselves all they want.

Greater is he who can change the others mind, not by force from the outside,
but by letting the forces inside him / her work.
---------------------

Maybe, but no one is obligated to do that instead of simple self-defense
against crime.

But 100% for sure the result will not be conforms you ideas.
But it will be real.
--------------------

Your assertions without reason are irrelevant.

See (as to your previous point I snipped here), Good and Bad, as defined by
you, is not the same good and bad as defined by the heart.
------------------------

You're a liar.

A criminal (one in your view) can be right, a comrade (as in your system)
can be wrong, right and wrong is an internal experience.
----------------------

It is that, but it is also actually right or wrong.

Legal and not legal is societies verdict, NOTHING to do with right and wrong.
--------------------

Of course it does, we don't just find fact, we impose penalties.

You are right as you now state there IS a 'basic human awareness about right
and wrong' (sort of quoting what I thought you did write), but it is NOT
possible to put that in a set of pre-defined rules, as for example your
system.
----------------------

Of course it is. All human legal systems have done that.

Because the right and wrong in the essence, in the heart, is a different
domain from the right and wrong in the 'reasoning' part of the MIND.
------------------------------

Nope. We all understand each other when we explain things to each
other, we know who's lying and who isn't.

One aspect that comes from that power in the heart is compassion, missing
in your system, respect for others experiencing it (missing in your system),
and this inflexibility will make your system break.
--------------------------------

You're unfit to assert such a ridiculous untruth.

You would have to kill your own children, as, if you make a society of 5
legged dogs, by killing all 4 legged, you may succeed perhaps, but the
children would perhaps be born with 4 again, and revolt.
Why do you think Pol Pots ideology is no more, Maos ideas are left, Stalins
ideas are left, and many other figures of the past.
------------------------------------

Because they differ quite substantially from mine.

The new generation came, had an open mind, and a good laugh at the system,
and then took over.
JP
----------------------------

Like me.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 03 May 2004 02:35:10 GMT) it happened "R. Steve Walz"
rstevew@armory.com> wrote in <4095B0A4.9D4@armory.com>:

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

On Sun, 02 May 2004 22:12:33 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:

The right of property has to meet the needs of the vast Majority for
EQUAL property, or it will fail!

Not only is there not a need for equal property, there's a fundamental
need for unequal property in order for an economy to function.
-----------------
Nope, that's unfairness and it's inherently dishonest and criminally
abusive of others who do work we all benefit from. It amounts to
enslaving others to authorize them to do work we all need done, and
would have to otherwise do ourselves, without paying them equally as
ourselves!

But what about man-women.
Women have tits, and men dont't.
Men have something women don't.
Given your interest in sex, can we conclude that as soon as your society
is advanced enough, women and man will be genetically modified, so they are
the same, and then all will be clones of you, so everyone has the same idea,
and no more problems and expensive jails or executions?
That IS a logical concequence of your line of thinking, or am I extrapolating
too far ;-)?
JP
------------------

Ignorant.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

John Fields wrote:

On Tue, 04 May 2004 17:58:30 GMT, Jan Panteltje
pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Tue, 04 May 2004 03:38:51 GMT) it happened "R. Steve Walz"
rstevew@armory.com> wrote in <40971112.2CE3@armory.com>:

Saint wrote:

I urge you to stop playing Doom for a while, and go read a book. It's
also of importance to open your window and look outside to see how the
real world is going.
--------------
I've NEVER played "Doom" and I've read FAR more than YOU have!
Believe it!
Believe? But you are against religion!

---
You're an ass.

An assertion which can be easily tested requires no dogma except that
the outcome of the test be considered valid if the premise is true.

In this instance, a simple reading list would suffice to determine the
truth of the premise, so take your supercilious opinion and stuff it
back up your ass where it belongs.

What the hell is it with you losers, anyway?

You seem to think that just because you have some half-baked idea
about how everything should be and you've been given the means whereby
you can express yourselves that your idiotic prattle is important.

Think again.

Before you can rise up out of the noise you need to know something
about where on the spectrum you belong, and from what I've seen so
far, you seem to think that you're broadband enough, and the best
thing to come along since sliced bread, that you're fit to render
decisions about just about everything.

You're not.

You're basically just an opinionated clueless fuck who will spend the
rest of his life wishing for things to happen which will prove him
right.

--
John Fields
-------------

Attributions!: Who are you responding to??

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Rich Grise wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message
news:409703B6.54EA@armory.com...
--------------------------
Haha! If you only REALLY knew!

It's amazing how many unadorned 40-50-something women want just an
intelligent lick/suck/fuck-friend who DOESN'T want to move in with
them and run their life for them!

Yeah, the fat old snaggle-tooth has-been spinsters are easy, aren't
they?

Cheers!
Rich
-------------

You obviously hate women.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Rich Grise wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message
news:409705F8.65B5@armory.com...

The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old
parchments or musty records. They are written as with a sunbeam in the
whole volume of human nature by the hand of Divinity itself, and can
never be erased or obscured by mortal power.
- Alexander Hamilton
-------------------
And when they are established, humanity will at last flourish!!

Odd that you make such an assertion when, by your words, you indicate
that you've dedicated every fiber of your being to the opposite.

Rich
-------------------

No, I simply turn it to mine own meaning, as I do indeed see it
that way. I know True Human Nature.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

On Wed, 05 May 2004 04:17:45 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:
-------------------------------
The majority sets up and operates the courts, they can do it directly
or indirectly. No such distinction as you make exists. Your "mob"
notion about direct democracy is merely disingenuous.

The issue isn't who sets up the courts, but whether they operate under
rules that are determined in advance, or at the whim of the judge.
------------------------------------

Why would a Majority Democracy want to set some random judge loose
without instructing them what it wanted done??

The Rule of Law was consciously evolved only during the liberal age
and is one if its greatest achievements, not only as a safeguard but as
the legal embodiment of freedom.
-----------------------------------

It's important, that goes without saying, but that is merely a
modern mode, it isn't limited to any one kind of system, and can
be as easily mis-used as used.

As Immanuel Kant put it (and Voltaire
expressed it before him in very much the same terms), "Man is free if
he needs to obey no person but solely the laws."
----------------------------------

And I agree with that. That is what equal rights are all about.
Laws are made to apply to anyone, regardless who they are.

As a vague ideal it
has, however, existed at least since Roman times, and during the last
few centuries it as never been so seriously threatened as it is today.
---------------

Sure. Goes back to Hammurabi.

The idea that there is no limit to the powers of the legislator is in
part a result of popular sovereignty and democratic government.
----------------------------

There is no limit, but law is a thing that must be applied to all.
And then the content of law is guaranteed to be fair, because unfair
law would not be popular, perhaps being next applied to YOU!

It has
been strengthened by the belief that, so long as all actions of the state
are duly authorized by legislation, the Rule of Law will be preserved.
But this is completely to misconceive the meaning of the Rule of Law.
This rule has little to do with the question whether all action of
government are legal in the juridical sense. They may well be and yet
not conform to the Rule of Law. The fact that someone has full legal
authority to act in the way he does gives no answer to the question
whether the law gives him power to act arbitrarily of whether the law
prescribes unequivocally how he has to act. It may well be that Hitler
has obtained his unlimited powers in a strictly constitutional manner
and that whatever he does is therefore legal in the juridical sense.
But who would suggest for that reason that the Rule of Law still prevails
in Germany?
---------------

No Majority Democracy authorizes anyone with powers beyond voted law.

To say that in a planned society the Rule of Law cannot hold is,
therefore, not to say that the actions of the government will not be legal
or that such a society will necessarily be lawless.
----------------

I never said such a thing.

It means only that
the use of the government's coercive powers will no longer be limited and
determined by pre-established rules.
------------------

Of course it will be, it will just be different rules.

The law can, and to make a central
direction of economic possible must, legalize to what all intents and
purposes remains arbitrary action. If the law says that such a board or
authority may do what it pleases, anything that board or authority does
is legal - but its actions are certainly not subject to the Rule of Law.
--------------------

Nonsense, we have smaller divisions of local government that award
variances from statute to meet valid needs where the nature of the
circumstance was not foreseen by the intent of the law. And voted
law grants them that subordinated power subject to review.

By giving the government unlimited powers, the most arbitrary rule can
be made legal; and in this way a democracy may set up the most complete
despotism imaginable.
- F. A. Hayek, "The Road to Serfdom"
----------------------

The govt has unlimited powers to make laws, but any Majority
Democracy only wishes to make laws that apply to everyone,
quite rationally.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Tim Auton wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:
[snip]
Nonsense. Minorities canot be allowed to violate the principles of
the Majority. Illiterate religious nutcakes can NEVER, repreat,
NEVER adapt to a decent secular Majority Democracy.

You sound just like a religious nutcase.

Tim
----------------------

If you think so you are missing fit discernment.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

On Wed, 05 May 2004 04:46:45 GMT, R. Steve Walz <rstevew@armory.com> wrote:
Jeffrey C. Dege wrote:

If you can't sell it, you don't own it.
----------------
No, if you SELL it, THEN you don't own it, and might as well never!!

If you aren't allowed to sell it, then you don't own it.
--------------

You already said that, but it doesn't actually make sense, you've
simply heard it for so long that you believe it without examination.

Whoever it is
that is preventing you from selling it owns it.
----------------

Not if THEY can't use it.

Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist,
fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria.
The human race divides politically into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire.
- Robert Heinlein
------------------

Heinlein was never very bright politically.
He was a political adolescent.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public