Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu alt.conspiracy:21811 alt.activism:42822 talk.politics.guns:54312 soc.culture.jewish:63098
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,talk.politics.guns,soc.culture.jewish
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!purdue!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!pop.stat.purdue.edu!hrubin
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Subject: Re: Gritz/JBS/Liberty Lobby/LaRouche/Christic Insitute/Libertarian/....
Message-ID: <C5sFnz.Fo1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: news@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (USENET News)
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
References: <1ql3r1$o2t@genesis.MCS.COM> <KCKLUGE.93Apr16155756@krusty.eecs.umich.edu> <1993Apr17.082102.4155@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 15:14:22 GMT
Lines: 49

In article <1993Apr17.082102.4155@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>In article <KCKLUGE.93Apr16155756@krusty.eecs.umich.edu>, kckluge@eecs.umich.edu (Karl Kluge) writes:

>> 
>> ...and I'm sure that people who were big fans of fuedalism pissed and
>> moaned about the emergence of the modern nation-state. Imagine, the King
>> allowing serfs their freedom if they could live in the city for a year!
>> Times change, technology changes, viable forms of social organization
>> change. While concerns about preserving Western notions of civil liberties
>> in the face of cultures with very different values is a valid one, it's
>> a waste of effort to try to turn back the tide. It's much smarter to focus
>> on trying to make sure that the emerging forms of social organization are

>
>	Your response is yet another sign of the trend towards One World
>Government.  Many people such as yourself, who are otherwise probably
>likeable and intelligent, show every sign of having been successfully
>brainwashed.  You don't recognize that your "inevitable tide" is rolling
>into chaos and in no way represents an advance for civilization.  Some
>of us do indeed "lament the passing of old forms", such as the Bill of
>Rights, which are indeed inalienable rights of man that cannot be
>changed, transferred or surrendered...rights of man that far transcend

>
>	Yes, Napoleon wanted a Grand New Order.  Hitler wanted a
>Thousand Year Reich.  Lenin knew that Bolshevism would give us the
>Universal New Man.  The New World Order is just so much of the same
>old tired garbage.  The pathetic part is that so many Americans seem

"Put not your trust in princes" is the Biblical proverb.  The modern
analog is governments.  At the time of the founding of the US, the
idea that citizens had rights above those of the government was not
that common, but was explicit in the writings of the founders.  To a
considerable extent, Englishmen also had those rights.

Yes, times change, and technology changes.  The possibility of 
a few governments enserfing all of mankind was not possible until
quite recently.  In the feudal system, the lord was almost as
restricted as the serfs, so having the people enserf themselves
does not make anything better; most feudal lords, and even most
slaveowners, did not mistreat those under them.

Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are under real attack NOW.

-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
