[Peace-discuss] Right to wealth

[C. G. Estabrook]

Of course you're right that "military, militia, or law enforcement will
always be necessary" to protect the unjustifiable wealth of the few
against the demands of the many -- domestically and world-wide -- but I'm
surprised to hear you admit it. As the late Mayor Daley of Chicago put it,
"The policeman is not there to create disorder, the policeman is there to
preserve disorder."

Happy Thanksgiving, Carl

 
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 Dlind49 at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/27/03 9:39:14 AM Central Standard Time, 
> galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu writes:
> 
> << This would be true only if the owners of wealth came by it honestly and
>  had a right to it.  >>
> 
> Carl: This is where we disagree and I find your ideas very dangerous.
> You want to decide what are rights or state a political position that
> individuals do not possess a right to wealth unless awarded by
> specific groups who have their own agenda.  Most success comes from
> hard work and always has. Injustice has and will always exist but that
> does not mean anyone has the right to forcefully take property from
> someone else and to distribute it to others. IIl gotten gains in
> violation of law can be taken from convicted offenders, such as
> illicit drug money, under court jurisdiction. If you do not like the
> existing laws or the capabilities inder these laws then work to pass
> new laws but make sure they are still "constitutional". However to
> advocate taking $$ from one segment of the population just because
> they possess it is "wrong". What you advocate is one reason why a
> legimate military, militia, or law enforcement will always be
> necessary.
> 
> doug   
>