consumption

[Peter Dorman <dormanp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I guess I'm more and less libertarian than Jim.  On the one hand, I think any
decent society would have an enforceable meta-rule (like a constitutional
guarantee) carving out a private space for personal choice in consumption, use
of one's body etc. beyond the purview of even the most democratic of
majorities.  On the other, the world faces an impending crisis of
over-consumption: the pattern of consumption now dominant in the "developed"
world cannot be generalized to all 6 billion of us.  What do we do if all the
nice post-revolutionary stuff still leaves too many people gobbling too many
resources?  Price 'em out of it with draconian green taxes?

Peter

Jim Devine wrote:

> Ian wrote:
> >Is it forbidden to forbid?
>
> it's okay to forbid (smoking, drinking, whatever) as long as the process is
> consistent with democratic sovereignty. Obviously, in practice such
> sovereignty has been totally distorted and suppressed by the rule of
> capital, patriarchy, and racism. Come socialism, it's hard to tell what the
> vote would be about cigarettes. Hopefully, people would decide that there
> are many activities (like Doug's eating of lard) which are okay for
> individuals to engage in, since people will value their own freedom from
> collective control.
>
> Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine