From: Bill Lucy 

In article ,
rgparker{at}west.net says...

> I think there are degrees of freedom. There are plenty of people in this
> country who'd like to restrict freedom in various situations in order to
> achieve other goals that they seek. They've been partially successful in
> this. Yet still the degree of freedom we have here is so much greater
> than in, say, Cuba that we are enormously more free than they are.

Toni Morrison says that freedom is allowing someone else to be free. A bit
simplistic, but that describes what those "plenty of people" may
think.

I still don't believe there's a huge gap between freedom in Cuba and
freedom here. I have no doubt that I could do something fairly innocuous
here that would curtail many of my rights. I've seen the inside of too many
correctional centers to believe that they would be a good place to be.


> I agree with Rand that without property rights no other rights are
> possible. A Russian friend who has never read Rand recently sent me a
> message that I an excerpting here. We were discussing the intellectual
> appeal of communism:

I actually find little appeal in communism. One of my kids was talking
about how great it was as a system (when he was in high school). It was a
long road to get him to understand why it wasn't.

> By the extent to which they can confuse the issue they can make headway.
> They've been only partially successful so far.
>
> > 
>
>
> V and C? Sorry, I'm being slow today.

Vast State Supported School Conspiracy.

One last thought. Context *always* changes. That means connotation and thus
meaning changes. There isn't any difference in the "training"
being done today in schools and that being taught in the 17th century at
Oxford. Someone gets "enlightened". The monoarchy doesn't
satisfy, so we change the definition of the monarch's duties and
responsibilities. It takes a couple hundred years, but the head of England
no longer gives too many orders.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5