Re-read the following posts, if necessary, for perspective. As to the last,
at the moment, "our" State is, from the point of view of most people,
"libertarian", that is, is does little for us (other than collect taxes.)
The fact that the "middle class", i.e., working people, pay the bulk of
taxes should tell us something about "libertarian" government in a world of
mutinational corporations.

----------
> From: Howard Olson <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Maternal care
> Date: Monday, May 05, 1997 12:31 PM
>
> DDeBar wrote:
> >
> > Earlier, Dr. Garelli had written:
> >
> > > > Psychopathologically, self-deception characterizes a mental
> > > > condition known as _psychopathy_ or _sociopathy_, which displays a
> > > > number of sub-syndromes spanning a vast range of external
> > > > manifestations: from crime and murder to manipulating others.
> >
> > > > This is important, to my mind, since politicians and socially
> > > > successful people are almost invariably psychopaths of different
> > > > kinds of severity. Detecting them, penetrating the barrier of
> > > > self-deception is therefore of the utmost importance for a society
> > > > based on mutual cooperation.
> >
> > I, Don DeBar, had written (see earlier post) that he didn't know that
it
> > would be effective or possible to train the next generation of the
elite to
> > be "healthy" leaders. I have since re-read Dr. Garelli's original post,
and
> > realize that even if this is true, there may well be some value in
applying
> > this effort to the rest of society. The reduction of pathology in the
rest
> > of society may well help remove the TV, drug & alcohol addictions many
> > working people suffer from the equation, as well as helping to reduce
the
> > social and political catatonia that oppression can induce. Obviously,
the
> > big problem is one of control of this program under existing
> > conditions...will it be used to help, or further oppress, working
people.
> >
> > DD
>
>         The issues that Dr Garelli is concerned with are very important.
> You are right to be concerned about possible abuse of the problems if it
> escapes the control of the developer or the developer's followers "run
> amuck". But it is also risky to let society be subjected to the tragedy
> induced by statist conditions. We are better off trusting our fellow
> libertarians than accepting the "statist-quo" (sp. intentional).
>
>                         Howard