Re: SAY WHAT? [Hallam-Baker demands more repudiations or he'll write!]

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

Simon Spero wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, attila wrote:
> > NO, I will not outright reject Jim Bell's "Assassination Politics."

> Assasination politics is  impossible to defend from a classical
> Liberal/Libertarian position. Bell advocates arbitrary applications of
> violence and coercion without restriction. There is no way to justify 
> the initiation of force without abandoning any pretence of being a
> Libertarian (which, to be fair, Bell doesn't claim to be).

I understood the intent of AP was to take powers the government is 
already exercising (unconstitutionally), and merely transfer some of 
them to the people, as it were.

Isn't this true democracy (if a rather perverse kind)?

Maybe you should consider that, in the final analysis, Mr. Bell may not 
so much want all of us to have responsibility for killing as he does 
want to remove the govt's "arbitrary applications of violence and 
coercion without restriction", and AP is just your wake-up call.

Maybe, instead of having to face the (alleged) horror of AP, you could 
join with other like-minded citizens and stop these atrocities from the 
top down, if you have the nerve to go toe-to-toe with "the real 
killers", government-style.