From: Brian D Williams (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jan 15 2002 - 12:04:52 MST
>From: James Hughes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Second, you suggest that the value on individual liberty in the
>liberal democratic tradition, and thereby - you argue - inside the
>>Hist definition, would suggest a global order tolerating a wide
>variety of social orders and in which any individual can leave
>a nation for a nation more to their liking. Although I generally
>agree with this principle, another principle of liberal democracy
>is solidarity - the obligation to protect the human rights of
>other and uplift the downtrodden. In terms of global order I think
>this requires evolution towards a stronger global government which
>can, for instance, make sure that the Declaration of Human Rights
>are enforced in every country. These solidaristic obligations are
>paired with social contractual responsibilities to support the
>institutions that enable them. In other words, I think being
>subject to law and taxation can be argued from basic liberal
>democratic principles so long as one acknowledges more libdem
>principles (i.e. equality and solidarity) than liberty. Even
>starting from liberty, as Amartya Sen has effectively argued, one
>can still arrive at the need for a social democratic state.
I find nothing even remotely democratic in what you are proposing.
In fact your definition of "Liberal Democracy" translates as
Socialism. Why not just admit it and save everyone the confusion.
Thanks for reminding me why I refer to myself as an Extropian and
not a transhumanist.
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
SBC/Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:34 MST