NODE 0281e701Re: Political Cleanup program
"James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>Mon, 18 Dec 1995 17:03:33 +0800
At 11:04 AM 12/17/95 -0800, jim bell wrote:
> It occurs to me that it would be a major advance if a system could be set up
> that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could
> be satisfied that his donation gets to the candidate or cause, but the
> candidate couldn't know who actually paid the money
To make this work, the government would need to prohibit individuals
from campaigning for politicians, taking out ads with political
consequences, and so on and so forth. A short step from
totalitarianism
A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where
politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians,
and thus the incentive to buy favors from them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
and our property, because of the kind |
of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald
derives from this right, not from the |
arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
NODE 5f3517f3Re: Political Cleanup program
Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>Tue, 19 Dec 1995 03:10:31 +0800
On Sun, 17 Dec 1995, James A. Donald wrote:
> At 11:04 AM 12/17/95 -0800, jim bell wrote:
> > It occurs to me that it would be a major advance if a system could be set up
> > that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could
> > be satisfied that his donation gets to the candidate or cause, but the
> > candidate couldn't know who actually paid the money
>
See my earlier post.
> To make this work, the government would need to prohibit individuals
> from campaigning for politicians, taking out ads with political
> consequences, and so on and so forth. A short step from
> totalitarianism
Not to mention the death of the First Amendment. Which, under your
scenario, would probably mean the death (or curtailment) of Cypherpunks.
> A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where
> politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians,
> and thus the incentive to buy favors from them.
I'm not sure what you mean here: are politicians to be prohibited from
campaigning (which cost money)? And if politicians, who generally take
the form of human beings, can't get at $$$, how can you or I?
> of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald
> arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
>
>
EBD