Not At All

Post #56,867 by deSitter 10/15/02 12:38:45 AM Reply	Not At All Socialism is the simplest sense is just what it just what it just what it just what it just what it just what it just what it just what it just what it - BORK! - just what it sounds like - a principle of government that recognizes that people have rights, but also needs - the need to be fed, housed, employed, and healthy. We have socialism here, only the needs met are of the already needless - that is, corporate welfare. The key point is freedom - in a socialist state people can be free - it's likely that Scandinavians have more freedom than we do, in fact. Certainly the French do. -drl
Post #56,908 by CRConrad 10/15/02 9:00:44 AM Reply	But then, neither France nor Scandinavia is "socialist"... ...at least in any sense of the word that Frenchmen or Scandinavians would recognize. They're all free-market (="Capitalist") countries, where there just happens to be a broad consensus that society's responsibility for the welfare of its inhabitants (="Welfare State") should go a bit (quite a bit) further than in a free-for-all laissez-faire "Nightwatchman" state, and which SOMETIMES -- depending on how the latest general elections went -- are ruled by social-DEMOCRAT parties[], which are a perfectly ordinary phenomenon in the pluralistic political environment(s) of Western Europe. That's not "socialist" by a long shot. You know* you Merkins have fucked up not only the English language in general, but especially its political terminology, don't you? []: Like Britain's Labour Party -- the one under Dubya's best friend Tony, you know? -- used to be, at least until they started trying to out-Thatcher the Conservatives with this "New Labour" thingy. (Yeah, Ross, this turned out ot be a reply to MikeM almost as much as to you...) Christian R. Conrad* Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #56,925 by deSitter 10/15/02 10:01:58 AM Reply	Re: But then, neither France nor Scandinavia is "socialist" Well, by socialist I certainly don't mean a Robin Hood society, rather a social democracy as you described it. For example, I believe business is as much a social institution as church or school, in that the executives and owners of the business have a moral if not legal responsibility to their workers. This was tacitly understood by the best US businesses in the past (IBM, Anheuser Busch come to mind - I mention the latter because old Gussie Busch always took a personal interest even in the lowest barrel-roller). Now it is common practice to see people as expendable "resources", like paper, steel, etc. - to be purchased at the lowest possible price and discarded when the bottom line is threatened. -drl
Post #57,082 by mmoffitt 10/15/02 9:11:01 PM Reply	Good post. And I've said before this is the only ultra-conservative position I have. Yes, I know, when contrasted w/my other opinions/convictions it looks like a brain tumor is causing me to malfunction on this issue. You know why socialism can never be achieved in the States? Because for far too many Muricans "It doesn't matter how much I have, I want more." We do not know how to be self-less.

Welcome to IWETHEY!