Subject: Re: The term "intellectual property" considered useful
From: Thomas Lord <lord@emf.net>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 14:52:06 -0700

David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:
>    
>     I am not sure it matters. I brought up slavery because I presumed
> that it was atleast one context where it was obvious that
>     what was legal, and what was possible were obviously in conflict.
> The problem with slavery is more than just that it is wrong.
>    
>     If others beleive that the real ownership of people is possible just
> because it is legal, irrespective of its morality, I am not going to get
> anywhere with
>     any argument about ideas.
>  
I'm afraid I don't follow you.

Slavery is currently *possible* (and *actual*) because of a complex of
material conditions including, in some ways, the state of the law.

And of course, slavery is wrong.   So the complex of material conditions
has a strongly undesirable property.   It makes moral sense for people
to work to change those conditions so as to eliminate slavery.

Has anyone here said anything otherwise?

I don't know that there is any argument about ideas, really, other than
as hopefully productive group self-criticism.   What are good ideas for
how to change things?   Does economics have any suggestions?  Etc.

-t