Subject: Re: Who gets stuck with advocacy?
From: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 05:03:26 -0400

Justin Wells <jread@fever.semiotek.com>:
> As a "libertarian anarchist", how could you possible claim to want to be
> the representative of others in order to do good? 

Easily.  My own goals are served best by changing the world I live in to
be a freer, richer, happier place.
 
> Can a good student of objectivism ever act altruistically, in order
> to benefit the lot of starving hackers? Can a self-respecting
> anarchist claim to be the public representative of a conforming
> majority?

I'm not an objectivist.  And yes he can, if there is evidence that they
have delegated him the role.

> The libertarian-anarchist position would more likely be a self-interested
> effort to increase one's own reputation, without regard to what anyone
> else thinks. In other words, the reputation game.

Hello?  Anyone who plays the reputation game *must* have regard for
what others think, by definition.  You're confused.

Only *stupid* selfishness ignores the desires and feelings of others.
-- 
		<a href="Eric">http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr">Eric S. Raymond</a>

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give
orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem,
pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently,
die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
	-- Robert A. Heinlein Time Enough for Love