> >>> If a group of people want to create a State, then they vote on it's
> set up.
> >>> 30% vote for, 70% vote against (simplified, obviously). No problem,
> those 70% can fuck
> >>> off and make their own State, and the remaining 30% set up the one
> that they
> >>> want!
> >>
> >> Why don't the 30% fuck off and the 70% stay? Tyranny of the minority
> >> again?
> >
> >Whatever, either way, the 30% set up the state they want, and the other
> 70% set up
> >another.
>
> Great theory, but you fail the practical. Ever heard of Northern Ireland?
> If only communities were capable of acknowledging their differences and
> agreeing to divide territory accordingly...
Oh yes, I've heard of Northern Ireland. But unfortunately that's not entirely
relevant. When talking political theory, we're talking about ideals - which is
a pity, because it makes some otherwise splendid ideas unimplementable. the Social
Contract of which I have spoken is designed to set up a state from a state of nature,
ie Anarchy, when mankind discovers that he cannot be successful on his own.
It is a pity that people cannot divide territory in disputes, but it's the
selfishness (meme?) that I believe can motivate, which causes the trouble.
Drakir
----------------
Richard Jones
jonesr@gatwick.geco-prakla.alb.com
----------------
"We are the New Breed,
We are the Future."
----------------
>
>
>
> =====
> Andy Cheyne {acheyne@madge.com}
> Principal Information Technologist, Service Division
>
> Madge Europe
> Direct: +44 1628 858560
> =====
>