RE: [DMCA_Discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss] "Consumer Benefits" of DRMsolutionsoversight hearing - witness list

["Dean Sanchez" <DSanchez(at)fcci-group.com>]

Steve,

I was actually using the unrealistic 'ideal'.  I'm can't provide an example from history of a true democracy or even a true representative republic (the USA include).

That said, the reason I presented the statement was it most approximates an economy that would fit with the 'ideal' republic.  A key concept associated with a republic or democracy is individual freedom and responsibility.  Any planned society must limit one's choices (what kind of work one can do, how much food one can grow, who one can sell to, etc).

One of the key reasons for the fall of the Soviet Union was not just its political structure ( however flawed that may have been), but the idea that any central body can manage with any degree of accuracy a modern society.  Once a society's population gets above a certain number and level of specialization of its individual members (I don't know what that number is), trying to make a comprehensive plan is an exercise doomed to failure (5 year plans, anyone?).  It is a chaotic system; as such, one is unable to predict it even with today's technology.

The split in the distribution of wealth is not a result of capitalism in a democracy, but in general a function of flawed democratic processes.  Take for example a corporation.  It has many of the same rights as an individual without the reciprocal responsibilities.  It provides a means to subvert democratic ideals by sheltering the individuals  running it from personal responsibility.  This requires the government then create new rules and regulations to protect the citizens from the corporations.

I am definitely a Jefferson admirer (even with all of the character flaws that modern society judges him for) and could spout off for pages and pages my opinions that were influenced by his writings as well as that of some of the other founders, but will refrain to prevent boring every one on the list.

To the list - Sorry, this has definitely strayed way off topic. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Stearns [mailto:sterno@bigbrother.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 5:19 PM
To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: [DMCA_Discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss] "Consumer Benefits" of
DRMsolutionsoversight hearing - witness list


On Thu, 2002-06-06 at 15:43, Dean Sanchez wrote:
> There is no inherent requirement that a capitalist society also be a 
> democratic one; however, a democratic or republic one almost by definition 
> requires a capitalist economy.  

While I think that a democratic society does lend itself well to a
capitalist system it by no means requires it.  There are substantial
amounts of socialism built into numerous economies of democratic
countries.  There's no clear reason, that I'm aware of, why a democratic
society couldn't simply vote in a centrally planned socialist economy.  

Really it seems that what works best is some sort of middle ground with
some socialist and some capitalist institutions.  A capitalist system
tends to cause a tremendous split in the distribution of wealth over the
long term.  A socialist system tends to maintain equity but at the
expense of wealth growth.  A blend of these two systems allows for a
hybrid system that provides greater long term stability and growth.

Now I've strewn way off topic so I'll just leave it at that...

---Steve