Where is the individual in todays politics???????

Dec 14 21:39 UTC 1994

It seems that it is impossible to find the delineation between CLinton,
democrats, and republicans. Where are the perty lines these days? Clintno
obviously moving to the center is now endorsing things like schoool prayer, a
position that the democrat never take a poisiotn of. I think that one thing is
clear. In this era of big government, we must stand to protect the rights of
the indvidual and stop impoing taxes and laws that violate the indivdual's
capability of making up his/her own mind.

response 2 of 36:

Dec 14 22:17 UTC 1994

   I can't quite agree with that.  Any party that denies the right of
public property to exist doesn't quite make it with me.  Other thoughts
of the Libertarians do make sense, and perhaps they'll propagate back to
the big two parties as Libertarians gain more percentage of each election.

response 4 of 36:

Dec 15 00:34 UTC 1994

I beleive that Marcus, Steve and I can all can find a middle ground among us.
The word "libertarian" is thrown out and everybody becomes worried. There are
different shades or degrees of libertarianism. Most people begin ot fear it
because people hear these statemnts and are unsure of them. Waht is important
is not that we all joing the libertarian party, but we all recognize  the
values of individual rights and convey that message to our electeds reps.

response 6 of 36:

Dec 15 05:46 UTC 1994

   There is common ground, I hope.  I want to see less government wherever
possible, but there are still areas where government will probably work
best.  Unforunately, one of the more important aspects of this over the
next several decades is going to be pollution control, chief among them
the various radio-active waste dumps and manufacturing sites that made
the weaponary that 'kept America strong' during the Cold War.
   So we get to still have a lot of government.  I'd like to see it be
rather different that what we have today.  Hearing my farmer friends
talk about the Dept. of Agraculture makes me believe their statements
that they'd all be better off without them, and take the few good parts
and graft them onto something else.  Entities like the ICC (Interstate
Commerce Commission) need to simply be phased out.  Others, like the FCC
desperately need to be enlarged to enfore and define new technical
standards such that electromagnetic interference problems can be dealt
with.
   Unforunately, I don't see *any* party having anything close to a
coherent platform.  We quibble over issues like school prayer yet
ignore the large issues.
   I do however believe that overall the Democrats care about people
considerably more than the Republicans, which is one of the main reasons
I still consider myself a Democrat (with strong libertarian-like tendencies).

response 8 of 36:

Dec 16 18:02 UTC 1994

I think the big party folks have less control than ever before over who
gets elected, even from within their own self-appointed ranks.  As an
extreme example I'd point out that Senators used to be appointed
(essentially) rather than chosen in general elections.  And there are
already plenty of frightening individuals (from whatever perspective)
floating around Congress, without adding more to the mix just for the sake
of shaking things up. If you like the Liberterians, I'd say vote Lib. 
Like every political party, they start with a broad ideal that is very
appealing.  I happen to think that fear of what would follow in their wake
is more than a mild fear of the unknown.  I think it is pretty easy to
guess what kind of unchecked quasi-governmental institutions would fill the
void created by their de-govermentation of the U.S.A. leaving a most
extreme unlibertarian situation.

response 10 of 36:

Dec 16 23:17 UTC 1994

There are some other parties that I wished I knew more about.  There is
the "green party"; which seems to be an extension of something that is
quite big in europe.  They seem very much in favour of protecting the
environment, which I believe in just as much; but the greens also seem
to have a fear of science/technology, which I don't agree with.

There is also something called the "new party" which seems an extremely
non-descript name.  The few things I heard sound promising, but don't
seem to be very complete: I can't figure out if it's just I haven't run
across the right sources yet, they're trying to hide something I'd like
that might scare other people, or they're trying to hide something that
would scare me.

response 12 of 36:

Dec 17 06:21 UTC 1994

   The Greens here in the US are doomed if they follow the ideas of the
Greens in Europe.  I remember Petra, and while she had good ideas, they
reminded me of euro-hippes, taking US type hippie values from the 60's
with european flair.  I happened to blunder into a Greens demonstration
in Utrecht once, and even found a willing Dutch Green person to give me
a live translation to English for me so I could get the message too!  But
they definately had a fear of technology, and that doesn't work.
   After recently reading a Green newspaper here, where they were
all joyous about the recent mishap at Fermi, I lost all interest in them.

   Don't think the Citizen's Party exists any more.

response 14 of 36:

Dec 18 06:09 UTC 1994

   As far as I can see, they aren't "whacky".  They just have some
extreme views (like the sell-the-parks idea).

response 16 of 36:

Dec 18 11:28 UTC 1994

Probably the mall 2.  No doubt the gov't would end up renting some 2-bit
ratty back stairs offices owned by some slum lord down on the potomac.

response 18 of 36:

Dec 18 15:57 UTC 1994

Here *here*!

response 20 of 36:

Dec 18 18:03 UTC 1994

Orwell, try hitting return when you get out to column 75 or so, because we
don't have line wrap on Grex, and it makes you post hard to read.

Your post is right on, though. Libertarians are much less likely to get
elected than they are to influence others. 

response 22 of 36:

Dec 19 02:43 UTC 1994

Marcus, the purpose of liberty is to gn the capability of living life
on your own terms. The "rich" getting "richer" is not a persuasive argument 
for me. In fact it only feeds my assumptions. The only alternative to liberty
is justice. The state of pure liberty necessariliy provides its own system
 
internal checks agianst tyranny. If a rich corporation can get richer,
can it nor afford to expand and thus hire more workers, thus providing
more for the common good? I agree with you on the level that politicians
do not seem to listen to what the true meaning of the libertarian intent,
but it is up to us (society) to tell the politicans that what we want/. 
Polticians dont listen to libertarians, people do. 

response 24 of 36:

Dec 19 03:20 UTC 1994

They will force the poor to endure every other chapter containing nothing but
imagery without any plot development?

I'd think the early industrial era does provide ample evidence to that
effect, of course.  Or have Libertarians decided maybe the government
does have business in not allowing an eight year old to work twelve
hours a day in a factory for fifty cents an hour, even if all parties
involved are consenting?