- Capitalism and Alternatives -

and even more from Gee, the man with the endless lunch break

Posted by: Samuel Day Fassbinder ( Citizens for Mustard Greens, USA ) on October 13, 1999 at 16:44:26:

In Reply to: and on and on posted by Gee on October 13, 1999 at 14:24:05:

: : SDF: Why didn't you do that in your above post, especially since you are making such a guessing-game about it? As I said before, "force" in this fantasy universe is only force if it is defined beforehand by an anarchocapitalist.

: then cut the game play and define it, lets see it here....

SDF: You're demanding a definition from me without supplying one yourself?

: : SDF: Force is like violence, it's physical force. Nobody threatened me with physical punishment if I did not choose to go to a private school, nor if I chose to go to a public school, not even my parents. Force requires mass and acceleration, just like Newton said.

: How about if you had chosen not to go to either school? Follow it then. How about if your parents had chosen to forego the taxes for state school because they sent you to a private one? The IRS would have just said 'ok' would they?

SDF: How about if I had chosen to commit suicide or move to Antarctica? It's not your prerogative to put choices into my life-history. Stoller is right, you keep re-inventing falsehood to avoid admitting that you're caught.

: : SDF: This is a nonsequitur. You're changing the subject. We are talking ONLY about "if two libertarians agree." Democracy, therefore, is when people become self-aware of their presence as a SOCIETY, after which they remain individuals, but gain something in the process.

: This doesnt say anything about how decisions are arrived at and how they are enforced in situations where there are parties who disagree with majorities.

SDF: No, what it says is that you want it both ways, and so you've erected a double standard to protect your illogic. Participants in democracy are individuals when you like the way the vote went, and they're an anti-individualist conspiracy when you don't.

: : SDF: Which is a bunch of philosophical blather saying nothing about what goes on in the public schools. The fact that the standards are so vague usually means that the teachers can do any number of things so long as they don't arouse the wrath of the parents, because there's always a plastic justification in the standards. I've taught in the American public schools since 1988. I went to an American private school for six years, I also went to an American public school for six years. Would you like to know what goes on inside them? Or do you think you know already?

: Side stepping the point by attempting to show that vaige standards are purely a guide for teachers and parents to agree on, and have no enforcement from the state seperate from teachers and parents (yes I know, you think a decree from Clinton is 'parents and teachers'). Why should they exist at all given that parents and education facilities should be able to agree without state guidelines, or a multitude of education departments?

SDF: So I guess you don't want to know what really happens in the public schools, because you've chosen instead to criticize trivialities having to do with the definition of the word "school" as cited in Iowa state documents. Or you think you know already. Figures.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup