Anonymous remailer wrote:
> OTOH, your message with its whining about how US multinational
> corporations are enslaving workers in banana republics clearly
> implied a call for government to fix the problem.
I think you need to learn how to read, oh dyslexic one. What is causing
the problem is what US gov is doing with it's money at present -- propping up
fascist regimes in the 3rdworld. What I said was that they should stop doing that
-- or, if they had to do something, then giving those guns to joe citizen would be
a better plan.
> By his commiepunk
> comment, Tim basically just labeled that position as socialist.
> I'm not sure that follows directly, but in the context of your other
> comments on this list which constantly seem to be calling for
> government fixes for what you believe to be social injustices, I'd say
> Tim's right on target.
>
You most definitely are confusing me with someone else, but that's not
surprising since you clearly can't read well. "Constantly"??? I hardly ever post,
for one thing. Perhaps you could help my failing memory by enumerating these
"constant" calls for government fixes.
>
> > My understanding of libertarianism is "fiscally conservative and
> > socially liberal" -- at least that's how the Libertarian Party calls it.
>
> Not sure where you saw that. I rather doubt you actually got such a
> simplistic view from the LP.
I'm sure it was, straight from the party mailings. You might recall their
neat little "test card" and whatnot? OTOH, I heard the comment on a radio show
the other night that libertarians were just republicans who didn't believe in god,
which may well be the case for most.
> It would be more accurate to say that
> libertarians are "fiscally non-confiscatory and socially agnostic".
> Libertarians do not believe in mandatory taxation. And they don't
> believe in regulating peaceful voluntary social interactions at all.
>
snip
>
> > The peasantry of Latin America has been driven into the
> > cities by the "anti-guerilla" actions of the local military (which wouldn't
> > be possible without US support), have had their ancestral lands stolen by the
> > large corporate agri-business, timber companies, etc., and turned into
> > wage-slaves for corporate profit.
>
> This is not and should not be a problem for our government.
>
Once again, you prove your inability to read -- "our" -- yours, not mine
-- government causes the problem, in fact, institgated the whole fucking thing
from the getgo, and without US money it would never have occured.
>
snip
> uns" steal money from those who ARE able to make a "decent living wage"
> and give it to those who can't or wont? And somehow robbing one person
> at gunpoint to give to another person makes both of them "free"?
> (Let's not even visit your use of the word "justice" here.)
>
>
Steal? Rob? Once again, purely dyslexic thought process. How does being
armed, even well-armed, translate into becoming an armed robber? Gasp! Have we
uncovered a closet gun-grabber here? Have you ever considered that joe citizen in
some countries might -- if armed -- then be empowered to do simple labor
organization? Labor? Gasp! No doubt you consider voluntary labor unions and
community organizations to be commies, right?
> > and supplying massive amounts of small arms and rocket
> > launchers to the peasants, and let them sort it out.
>
> ...let the peasants also buy their own damn arms.
>
Again, back to the orginal premise -- who is the US gov supplying arms to
right now? And has been for the last 50 years, at least. Seems to me they ought to
stop -- or, at least even the odds.
Gee -- so I'm a commie, huh? Hmm -- I guess I never knew that before. How
enlightening - maybe I should go get in touch with my inner commie and see what
it's all about. Actually I do want to be a komi, but that's a bit different.
God -- what a fucking pack of morons.
--
Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian
Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN
(218) 741-3840 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us
