[NOISE] Re: Dr. Vulis

[Bryce <bryce@digicash.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

 A million monkeys operating under the pseudonuym "Hallam-Baker
 <hallam@ai.mit.edu>" typed:
>
> Of course John was right to give Vilus the boot. Cypherpunks is a club
> and like many private clubs occasionaly finds it necessary to give some
> oik the boot.


Yeah!  That was GREAT!  Now let's ban Dr. Hallam-Baker!  He's
always pissing off the libertarianpunks and causing
flamewars...


> And of course this is not an action that can be strictly justified in
> terms of absolute rights which many are fond of prating on about.  
> Rights are limited, as Mills observes they are a product of law. Society 
> finds it necessary to enact laws to protect rights. Dmitri's posts were
> affecting other people's right to speak. There is thus the traditional
> liberal conflict, that of having to infringe rights to protect them.


Dear Sir:  I humbly put it to you that the above reflects a 
misunderstanding about the libertarian conception of "absolute
rights".  I personally do _not_ subscribe to said theory, but 
I try to understand a thing correctly before criticizing it in 
public.


> If libertarians would read "on Liberty" rather than using it like
> a magic charm they would know that the main theory it advances is of
> the *balance* between the rights of communities and the rights of
> individuals. 


I have read (parts of) _On_Liberty_, and as I recall it was
adamant in an ("unbalanced") defense of absolute rights of
individuals.  The only exception I remember is an unexplored
comment on rights-violations of ommission counting as well as
rights-violations of commission.  (E.g. if you see a drowning
man and you fail to save him you are violating his rights.)  
Perhaps that is what you see as "balance between the rights of
communities and the rights of individuals"?  Or perhaps the
book goes into detail on that subject in a part that I didn't 
read.  Again I ask not because I have a particular ideological
axe to grind here, but because I seek accuracy in public
dialogue.


Regards,

Bryce



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2i
Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.1b2

iQB1AwUBMn8EXkjbHy8sKZitAQGWJQL+JzzPf0NOovQ3hZpEsim6wzz9OIWetfX4
ZQM7SYZkvNMQOX7QkShj0PXE+xtD+Vw513ENJwrzw5Y9hqRYr2P53dk10h7ovWth
egHhGYGB5YhZ4H2BQrA0FB+7y1F/9RDG
=wjM8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----