-Caveat Lector-
~~for educational purposes only~~
Microsoft and liberty
by Walter Williams
Think about the government's case against
Microsoft and, just as importantly, it's
implications for our liberty.
Let's ask a general question just to get
started. If there's an act we all agree is
immoral and unacceptable when done by an
individual, does that act become moral and
acceptable when done collectively, namely
by government?
You say, "Williams, that's a bit too esoteric;
would you break it down?"
OK, here's a for-instance. If we deem rape
as immoral and unacceptable when done by an
individual, does rape become moral and
acceptable when done collectively? What if
we vote to rape someone. Does that make rape
morally acceptable? I'm hoping that all of my
fellow Americans will answer: Neither a majority
consensus nor collective action necessarily
establishes what's moral or immoral.
Let's cut through the Justice Department's
legalese and get down to moral basics and
what should be the standard for judging Microsoft's
actions: Did Microsoft engage in peaceable,
voluntary exchange -- and on non-fraudulent
terms -- with its customers, or did it engage in
fraud, violence or threats of violence?
You say, "Come on, Williams; the relevant question
is whether Microsoft violated the law." Nonsense.
Laws do not necessarily establish morality. For
example, the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act provided
fines and imprisonment for assisting runaway
slaves. If I were on a jury, whether a defendant
violated the Fugitive Slave Act would have been
immaterial to me. I would have deemed slavery
and any law that protected it immoral. As such,
people have no moral duty to obey immoral laws.
If we're really concerned about monopolistic practices
injurious to consumers, we'd call for Justice
Department actions against the U.S. Postal Service.
Microsoft has never done the kind of despicable acts
done by the Postal Service. Suppose you and I agree
that I will deliver first class mail to your house. What
happens? I will be arrested for competing with Postal
Service. In fact, by law I cannot even put anything in the
mailbox belonging to you. It's worse than that. The
Postal Service has come after people, with fines, for
using Federal Express services for mail that it deems
"non-urgent."
If you think it would be wrong for Microsoft to use
violence and the threat of violence to maintain its
monopoly position, why in the world is it acceptable
for the government's Postal Service to do the same?
The Justice Department's claim that Microsoft's actions
harm consumers is a sham. The overall pattern of the
high-tech industry has been a precipitous fall in prices
and rise in quality over time. We needn't mention the
pattern of the prices and quality of postal services.
There's another and more important monopoly target for
the Justice Department, and that's the public
(government) education monopoly. That is a monopoly
that's eating away at the soul of our nation. It's charging
customers (citizens) higher and higher prices (taxes),
while their product quality is getting worse and worse.
It has the power to commit despicable acts beyond any
monopolistic dreams Microsoft may have.
For example, what would you think if Microsoft had the
power to tell you: "I don't care if you don't like my
operating system and want to use somebody else's. But
if you do use someone else's, you still have to pay for
mine even if you don't use it." That's precisely what the
education monopoly tells parents who want to take their
children out of rotten government schools and put them
in private schools.
If Clinton's Justice Department really wants to go after
harmful monopolistic practices, I can give them
hundreds of targets.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
