X-Message-Number: 4360 Date: 06 May 95 13:25:18 EDT From: Jim Davidson <> Subject: Government-owned hospitals, etc. Robin Helweg-Larsen posts optimistically about the role of government, especially in a land as diversely populated with striations of government as the US. His post arrives succinctly at one of the key points in favor of limited political discussions on Cryonet. Like it or not, the government has decided that cryonics is a subject for its involvement. Because our interest area deals with a) death, b) euthanasia, c) sovereignty over ones body, d) preference to avoid autopsy, e) a non-mainstream "religious" belief in the possibility of post-life resurrection, and (at least) f) the practice of non-traditional medicine regardless of government sanction for such treatments, we stand four-square in the midst of the argument about what constitutes good government, what constitutes sufficient government, and what is the appropriate response to surplus order. Make no mistake, I did not start life as a politicized, polarized, anti-government propagandist. _If_ I have become one, it is only because my natural tendency toward liberty has met with direct government oppression. I've been arrested for offering Americans a trip into space on a Soviet rocket. And I've met many who have been arrested, even indicted, for practicing cryonics or offering alternative medicines. It is not my choice that the government oppose our efforts, but it seems clear that at various levels the governments of the several states and the Federal government are prepared to battle us. Helweg-Larsen suggests that a pro-cryonics government is a consummation devoutly to be wished. I agree. As I've stated in my book _The Atlantis Papers_, I believe the development of sea-based city states on artificial islands may be one of the most awesome opportunities for cryonics. A constitution written for a proposed sea-city, Oceania, includes language deliberately favorable to cryonics, not only as it is practiced in the US, but as it would better be practiced in a nation where an individual could choose to be frozen without having that act interpreted as suicide. If we are to succeed at developing extended life spans for ourselves and our posterity, we must recognize that what we are doing _is_ a political act. As well, we should understand the history of the struggle against invasive government in the US. In 1848, Henry David Thoreau wrote his brilliant essay, "Civil Disobedience." In it, he said words which I echo, "But to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but _at once_ a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it." Helweg-Larsen also says, "Governments are (almost always) interested in providing good health care..." but fails to notice that they do not. Health care is not provided by governments. It is provided by doctors, pharmacists, chiropractors, acupuncturists, vitamin vendors, fitness service providers, and individuals who seek such services. Again, Thoreau speaks brilliantly to this point: "This American government -- what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself uimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves; and, if ever they should use it in earnest as a real one against each other, it will surely split. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow; yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. _It_ does not keep the country free. _It_ does not settle the West. _It_ does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of India rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions, and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads." So, if we are to have cryonics, if we are to extend our lives indefinitely, the government will chiefly help by the extent to which it gets out of our way. The behavior of the FDA, the behavior of the Riverside County coroner, and the behavior of sundry other branches of government do not suggest that will happen all by itself. Therefore, it is essential that those of us who seek to extend our lives through cryonics and other means, "take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them." We must be the agents of change in our world, and to do that we must evaluate precisely what we want in terms of government. It is therefore entirely appropriate to discuss politics on cryonet, especially as they apply to the freedom to practice cryonics. Since that freedom is inextricably tied to a variety of civil rights, any situation which directly affects civil liberties is appropriate for discussion here. If we do not evaluate what sort of government would command our respect, we have not taken Thoreau's first step. If we do not also discuss what mechanisms we are willing to utilize to implement superior government, we are remiss in our duty to make cryonics a reality. Such discussions, if they are not to take place here, on Cryonet, have no home at all. That would be indeed unfortunate. So, while I wish the solution to our problems were entirely in the realm of science and engineering, I fear that we must understand the lessons of history and agree that it is not. Martin R. Olah says he is waiting for objections to my highly political messages of recent vintage. While it doesn't seem to have been posted for general viewing, I received the following message from Paul Wakfer on 3 May 1995: >It's a great letter, I agree with it completely, I know that its important, >and that you may not even regard it as a political issue. But it *is* a >political issue. It is at the very core of liberal, socialist, collectivist >social philosophy and as such it should *not* have been sent to CryoNet. >There is more than enough philisophical debate, with little relation to >cryonics, taking place there, let's, at least try to keep political >discussions out. Perhaps what he says is correct, and the other objections to my posts are reasonable. Certainly, I will admit that my motivation in posting my response to the Quayle jokes and my short essay was more practical than anything else. I had initially made a list of those to whom I would send each post, and when I realized that most of them were Cryonet readers, it seemed expedient to post here. However, it seems clear to me that cryonics is an activity that is only meaningful if it takes place in the real world. Theoretical discussions of cryonics, uploading, the mathematics of the mind, Goedel's and Turing's theories, the engineering of large cryostats, the preferred rate of temperature decrease, the physical chemistry of cryoprotectants, and the possibilities of nanotechnology for revival are all obviously appropriate for this list service. Practical discussions, too, are appropriate. These include the financial implications of signing up, the finances of membership organizations, the size and demographics of cryonics groups, the response of the media to cryonics, and the political aspects of the situation. If we choose not to discuss the political environment in which cryonics must operate, then we, by default, accept the political situation which is given. That is not acceptable to me. The political situation today is not favorable for anyone seeking a long, long life. Ultimately, the preference not to discuss any aspect of life is inappropriate. Socrates summed it up well. "An unexamined life is not worth living." Jim Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4360