Re: virus: Re: Virus: Sociological Change (Anarchy)

Martz (
Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:32:43 +0000

On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, wrote:

>> >A moral structure would have to be in place, to
>> >prevent violation of individuals in a way which would adversely affect them,
>> >and thus trigger retribution.
>> I don't think so. It would make life easier but I don't think it's
>> necessary.
>I was hoping to tidy this up a little, as I can see a state (and in this case
>I'm talking about a situation) of total chaos and violence, culminating in
>lots of mini wars, because people are killing off those who get on their
>nerves, and family and friends are reaping retribution for that and ....
>vicious circle, until everyone'd dead.

Which is exactly why most people wouldn't bother starting the fight in
the first place and why, if started, most people would want to see it
ended as quickly and peacefully as possible. It's simply too damn messy
and expensive to do otherwise.

>> Unless you consider MAD to be a moral structure.
>Weren't they the bad guys in Inspector Gadget?

Mutually Assured Destruction. Cold war. Nobody fires the first shot
because they stand to lose more than they gain.

>Right, and you don't run any armed forces. You contract out.

And keep a personal arsenal.

>But the way I understood, you wouldn't need self-defence, as you've got all;
>these heavies defending you anyway.

But if I can take care of the little things myself then my protection
policy is cheaper.

>The power that you have by hiring out a protection company to stop people
>bothering you. If you prevent them from doing what they will, by blocking
>their actions on the grounds that it affects you, then you have exercised
>power over someone.

Yes, but abuse of that power would IMO be along the lines of exerting
force in order to impose my will on someone who's not bothering me at
all. My protection agency would want one hell of a lot of money from me
before they'd risk involving themselves in the war that would probably

>> It's extremely basic.
>And was intended to be. I could go into huge ammounts of detail, but that
>would involve some serious collaboration and work between us, and apart
>from anything else, I havn't the time.

Ditto. Plus I couldn't be bothered. 8)


For my public key, <> with 'Send public key' as subject an automated reply will follow.

No more random quotes.