On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, James A. Donald wrote:
> I also expect and intend a society that produces law for profit, and has
> competing courts, and competing legal systems, and I most certainly do not
> believe that crime is merely a difference of opinion. Indeed the reason I
> expect that competing legal systems would only lead to minor and infrequent
> violent conflict, is precisely because I believe that crime a fact, not a
> preference, or at least is a fact for any crime we are likely to care
> enough about to start shooting.
See, we have a difference of opinion over what a 'crime' is already. I
contend that a 'crime' in a completely culture-neutral society such as a
C-A-C-L based one can only be a difference of opinion, basic fundamental
religious belief. Not only is reality observer dependent, so is any
society at its base core. This includes such things as rape and murder.
Consider the young gang-bangers who get their points (or whatever they
call it now) for cappin' some total stranger, completely random. Is this
not a question of 'culture'? That fundamentaly, from a cosmological
perspective, killing a person isn't any different than killing a rabbit,
or a roach, or even Foot and Mouth disease. That in base point of
biological fact the Gaian perspective is that one and all, it's just a
very complicated matt of bacteria and viruses in a variety of symbiotic,
dependent, predatory, and emergent relationships. That the 'taboo' value is
in fact a learned behaviour from our social environment. That the basest
justification for 'law' or 'government' isn't that murder is necessarily
right or wrong, I simply have better things to do with my time. I also
recognize that such behaviour tends to cause others to act that way toward
myself as well. Not the most ideal situation for longevity I suspect. When
coupled with current primate research over inter- and inner- group
violence in Chimp's we find that a large percentage of what we see on a
day to day violence level is to be expected from a bunch of hairless apes.
It's just a question of the outlets they learn to use as they grow up.
Intelligence isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Stupid people are
stupid all the time, smart people only do stupid things some of the time.
That makes them un-reliable.
But back to the esteemed (steamed?) Friedman,
I'd like to see him explain how a mass murder might be handled in a
C-A-C-L society? Consider the situation where over the space of a month
six bodies widely seperated across the country are found. Because of
similarities in 'presentation' it would be clear from comparison that a
single individual would be involved. How, in a C-A-C-L society would a
system evolve whereby these sorts of routine comparisons are done, and
executed upon when found to be suitably strong? It would be interested if
particular attention were paid to the expenses incurred with respect to
arbitration and 'management' functions. Especially if they could then be
compared with real-world numbers from existing public systems.
Or, how about basic 911 service? Fire, EMS, Insurance, and Hospital,
admittedly a big problem.
____________________________________________________________________
The solution lies in the heart of humankind.
Chris Lawson
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
