From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Wed May 04 2005 - 21:34:03 BST
Hi Anthony,
> Ant McWatt comments:
> Not too sure that I’d give up on Platt that easily. For a start, I
> certainly think something of intellectual value can be elicited from
> Platt’s posts on politics. Though I largely disagree with his political
> views and there is the occasional “yah boo” element I find them useful – in
> the occasional dose – as they represent the views of a sizable minority on
> this planet.
Thanks Ant. Always nice to know you find my views useful. As you know,
I've always found your views extremely useful, even if we have occasional
disagreements.
> I’ve come to the conclusion that the fundamental error that Platt makes as
> regards his political assumptions is that he overlooks that the MOQ – being
> a universal system - takes into account the freedom and interests of EVERY
> rational, autonomous end chooser in the world (as regards free economic
> markets) while in right-wing ideology, only the freedom and interests of
> certain minorities (sometimes only one’s self!) are taken into account.
I agree, except I don't see how you can take "into account the freedom and
interests of EVERY rational, autonomous end chooser in the world" by
precluding the autonomous individual. This "minority of one" is the
usually the most vulnerable to loss of freedom.
> This is the essential difference that Platt overlooks and where problems
> start to arise. For instance, the markets that North Americans and
> Europeans bring into play are – in practice - protected trade areas and are
> only free markets in name. As Sam Popkin, professor of political science
> at the University of California, San Diego noted recently:
>
> “The greatest crime committed against Third World nations is barriers to
> trade, in particular agricultural subsidies in rich countries. It is a big
> issue for both the US and the EU. (quoted in the “Times Higher Education
> Supplement”, April 29th 2005, p.17, issue 1689)
I've never advocated trade barriers, so when you say "I've overlooked"
the problems they create, you attribute a position to me which I do not
hold.
> In the long run I’m sure Platt being the rational person he is will take
> this point on board and support the ideal of genuine, unfettered, free
> markets that take into account the freedom and interests of all rational,
> autonomous end choosers. As I noted before, in reference to Alan Gewirth
> and his 1978 text “Reason & Morality”, it is irrational not to. In this
> text, Gewirth introduces a moral principle (the Principle of Generic
> Consistency or “PGC”), according to which all agents have inalienable
> rights to the capacities and facilities they need in order to be able to
> act successfully i.e. “Agents must act in accord with the generic rights of
> others to (the values of) freedom & well-being as well as their own.” As I
> mentioned previously, his defense of this principle is that it is
> impossible to deny the principle without contradicting yourself (echoing
> Descartes’ idea that one cannot deny one’s existence because this very
> denial implies one’s existence).
Indeed I do support the ideal of genuine, unfettered free markets. To that
end I call for the elimination of all government subsidies, i.e., welfare
payments of all types.
I'm sure you Ant, being a rational person, will concur. :-)
Best,
Platt
P.S. I see where MSH has just chimed in. I agree with all his proposals to
stop government from meddling in the affairs of business. That's a genuine
progressive agenda!
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 04 2005 - 21:31:36 BST