From: Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Mon Jan 06 2003 - 08:17:24 MST
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Osborn [mailto:philosborn2001@yahoo.com]
Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Thu Jan 02 2003 - 11:17:38 MST wrote:
>... I ask you, what moral claim does a country have
to
exist? Can a country based on oppression rightfully
make ANY moral claim to
existence? Does it have a 'right' to exist? Since it
does not respect
rights of individuals, it clearly can make no claims
to rights. It is a
nation built on oppression, threats, pain, and
murder.>
"And???? Like is there another kind of nation state?"
This is a difficult question to answer. Is there ANY form of state that is
moral? Obviously most libertarians or anarchocapatialists would answer
'no!' I am still attempting to create an informed opinion on this, but
tentatively I would say that a government that exists only to protect
individual civil liberties, protect against foreign threats, and ensures
property rights while not regulating the economy, science, or any moral
actions beyond those which threaten or assault person or property could be
consider, by me at least, moral. It would need be a constitutional republic
as well, with severe limitations on what the majority can vote into law.
Given that though, I certainly do believe that some states can be LESS
IMMORAL than other states. A democratic constitional republic with some
socialist policies (like the US) is definitely less immoral than any garden
variety corrupt despotic theocratic regime. To not acknowledge that some
variations of statehood are better than others, while still not being
*perfect* robs the people of the chance to create better states.
Such was the case in Vietnam, North Vietnam was clearly a corrupt despotic
state, it subjugated oppressed and killed its people and was bent on doing
the same to South Vietnam, with the industrial support of the Soviet Union,
a similiarly morally invalid state, and South Vietnam was a democratic state
that did not want to live under such a rule. While South Vietnam was not
perfect, it was orders of magnitude less imperfect than the north, and
regardless of who signed what, no document can make what north vietnam did
moral.
Michael
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:35:50 MST