Re: The Education Function

Samael (
Fri, 11 Dec 1998 09:21:42 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Lorrey <>
>Samael wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Terry Donaghe <>
>> To: <>
>> Date: 10 December 1998 14:40
>> Subject: Re: The Education Function
>> >
>> >I'm working on a more comprehensive rebuttal, but first, I want to say
>> >that the entire premise of socialism is based on violence directed at
>> >the individual. When a government steals money earned by a worker, it
>> >is practicing a form of violence.
>> I dispute that the money is yours in the first place.
>> There are three quotes that I find very useful:
>> 1) Property is freedom.
>> Capitalist view - Having property means you can support yourself.
>> 2) Property is theft.
>> Communist view - owning anything means you are stealing from everyone -
>> in a natural state nothing is owned by anyone.
>> 3) Property is impossible.
>> Scientific view: 'Property' is just a term applied to objects that you do
>> not wish anyone else to take away from you. It doesn't have an intinsic
>> meaning.
>Hardly. Property is a means of storing work.

Amongst other things yes. If it was a perfect method of storing work, diamonds would be worth almost nothing, you wouldn't be able to steal it and some people wouldn't be mind-numbingly rich just because they accidentally settled above an oil field.

If you find it morally wrong to
>enslave me, then you must recognise that my work belongs to me (as a
>you must recognise that labor should control the means of production).

I don't beleive that at all. As I have pointed out numerous times, I believe in a 10% socialist 90% capitalist model of society. If people believed slightly less in extremes and realised that any model of society breaks down at extremes, we might just get onb a little better.

>I can
>exchange my labor for resources. Those resources now belong to me, they are

Unless of course they were stolen resources that you exchanged your work for. In which case they still belong to the original owner, yes?

>Property exists and has meaning.
Please state why, using scientific terms.