While I disagree with the phrase "revenge only becomes justice if carried out by the State" and I certainly don't agree with everything ever written in a Crypto-Gram, I must disagree with your evaluation of Mr. Schneier's editorial. Specifically, the phrase "why the state can NOT be just"... Please tell me why... or better yet, how do you define "just"? perhaps, I am living in a dream world, but, if you live in the United States, then we DO still have control over what the State does... bring on the naysayers, and the people who cry about corruption and conspiracy... but the fact still remains, that what the people want, the people can have... if they want it bad enough... the problem is that the people don't want it bad enough anymore.. the apathy is sickening... who's fault is that? I am so tired of hearing people cry about government corruption and what is wrong with this country and society when only 50% or less of the people actually vote... People say that they don't vote because they don't like the options presented to them... well, then change them... as for the State having "NO motivation to be fair"... please support this... our system is, by no means, perfect... but, it is a system where if you want to make things different, then make them different... instead of getting on your soapbox to bitch and moan about how unfair things are, why not start makings things fair...
shawn On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 04:12, Marcel Popescu wrote: > Are you for real??? > > I'm reading with horror the editorial of your latest crypto-gram. Phrases > like "revenge only becomes justice if carried out by the State" or "the > State has more motivation to be fair" sound like right out of 1984. What > happened to you? This is so utterly ridiculous that I'd laugh if you > wouldn't have so much influence on so many people. I got over your idea that > arming pilots and people on planes is bad, while armed marshals are good > (because they get 3 balls while on duty, presumably), I got over your > ignorance of the solution to the public good dilemma - which is NOT state > control, but private property and enforcement of property rights - but this > is nuts. > > Do I have to explain to you why the state can NOT be just? Why it has NO > motivation to be fair, if it can get away with it? Why the incentives are > all wrong - and why, even if we found saints and put them to govern, their > *signals* would be all wrong, because they wouldn't put *their* lives and > properties on the line? Do you even read the articles whose URLs you present > to support your ideas - because the first one, > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,64688,00.html , is definitely not > friendly to the state's "justice"? > > I would have thought that someone whose name is well known among cypherpunks > has at least some familiarity with these ideas. At the very least, it would > have required you to explain why you believe the state is good for justice - > something which is definitely alien for most of us! > > Mark -- email: pakkit at codepiranha dot org cell: mobile-pakkit at codepiranha dot org web: http://codepiranha.org/~pakkit pgp key: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: 8988 6FB6 3CFE FE6D 548E 98FB CCE9 6CA9 98FC 665A having problems reading email from me? http://codepiranha.org/~pakkit/pgp-trouble.html [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
