Theft, Capital and Ms Bush

[hasn@midway.uchicago.edu]

In article <1992Nov14.064852.3321@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (andrew david simchik) writes:
> 
> In <1992Nov13.215749.24667@midway.uchicago.edu> hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain) writes:
> 
> 
> >Capitalism and the concept of "accumulation of capital"  has had many
> >victims.  Theft is merely an opposite:  It does not have to be done by 
> >a poor starving soul to be classified as a reaction/strike against the 
> >system, anyone can do it.  But remember that striking back at the 
> >system has risks.  I believe that if someone is prepared to accept those
> >risks, fine.


> You're not solving anything by victimizing other people.  Theft is not the
> opposite of capitalism; it's merely the acquisition of property by breaking
> the rules. 

Andrew, you've endorsed my point:  Yes, theft is the acquisition of property
by "breaking the rules."  The rules of the market, money, and the invisible
hand.  Therefore it is a  force challenging capitalism.  Yes as in any other
revolt/revolution, individuals are hurt.

>You're victimizing people as much as capitalists are when you
> steal from them.  "Striking back at the system" indeed.  How much difference
> is there between the common thief and the money-grubbing corporation?

One is put in prison for an endless number of years for publicizing
the success of his/her endevours where as the other gets awards
and a place in Fortune for its success. (I suppose I could have
phrased it better but you get the point)

>  It's
> a truly sick idea to fantasize that thievery is some sort of radical
> protest.  

I'd call it radical and crazy (Ooooo...the thrill and the hurting), not sick.


>Intrinsically sacred property is not.  But ethics and morals are
> part of people, not part of things.  When you commit a theft, you're not
> wronging the property, you're wronging the person.  NOT the system...the
> system will carry on regardless of how many people steal MY CD player or
> wallet.  

Will it go on regardless of the occurance of crime? If say for example,
7 out of 10 Americans/US residents commit an act of theft a day or
 every couple days.
What will the government do?  Lock 'em all up?  All 200 million 
"criminals"?  So what will become of the system if anyone can 
walk into any place and take anything with (close to ) impunity?  
Collapse?  About 5 of every 10 Americans live below, at or
close to the poverty line (which in itself is much too low: $13,000
for a family of 4!)

>Copyright (spelled correctly)

I thought Kate Bush fans would be a bit more "giving" in terms
of errors or typos.  Since English is my 3rd language, I tend
to be pretty self forgiving about such menial mistakes!

> nothing--it costs money to make the
> album.  You won't enjoy anything if the artist can't put money into making
> it.  I don't think copyrighting is governed by racists, sexists, and
> homophobes

Yes but the systems is, which inturn governs copyrighting laws.
The system governs who has "access" to luxury items (like
the Kate Bush Box set).  If you disagree with me on 
the system being sexist/racist/homophobic, thats a different
issue (even though I dont think you disagree with that)
Coming from a place where copyrighting (happy?) laws
are only token, even a relatively poor person can rent a movie
(since about a zillion copies are made per master!), buy a tape
(a  new album costs about $1 recorded on a good tape), or
a book (you pay for the photocopying costs plus binding!).
My point is this:  What makes ideas ones property?  The fact
that "I thought of it before you"?  Sure they should get credit
for their ideas but should not "bar" the use of them by 
others...you dont "own" something if you thought of it first.
But lets not get into the copyrighting question.

 
> And I would hope that any civilized person would take your comments as a
> personal affront.  

Whoa!  "Civilized"?  What do you mean by that?  Someone who has been so
incredibly socialized(brainwashed is a better word) within our sick society that 
he/she has forgotten how to think for him/herself?  And why are you 
encouraging a person to take a pretty reasonable argument personally??  
Relax.  Listen to The Dreaming or whatever your favourite Bush 
CD is.