-Caveat Lector-
>socialism (so“she-līz“em) noun
> 1. a. A social system in which the means of producing and
> distributing goods are owned collectively and
> political power is exercised by the whole community.
> b. The theory or practice of those who support such a
> social system.
> 2. The building of the material base for communism under
> the dictatorship of the proletariat in Marxist-Leninist
> theory.
personally, i'd go for 1
someone once said during the first world war that if it was up to the
people, the war would be over in a week. kinda unrelated, but there you go.
i believe that the system should be run by the people, when you fail to
trust the people, then you start the gradual decline form democracy into
dictatorship.
failing to trust the people is that mistake people like Castro and the
Soviets made. look what happened there.
>capitalism (kąp“ī-tl-īz“em) noun
> An economic system in which the means of production and
> distribution are privately or corporately owned and
> development is proportionate to the accumulation and
> reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.
it's rather difficult to define something like capitalism, it's been with
us for thousands of years in so many different forms. socialism is kinda new.
>As such Capitalism requires a separation of the State and
>business in much the SAME capacity as Church-State separation.
but i think that government should get involved, because factory owners are
accountable to no-one but the shareholders. they have power over people's
lives without ever having been democratically elected. true (very important
word if you want to understand my argument) socialism and democracy are
inseperable. if control of the industry is centralised under an
undemocratic regime, then things get much, much worse. as it was in the USSR.
>*My* definition of Statist (socialist, nazi-ist, fascist,
>communist) would be anything other than providing ALL
>individuals with a RIGHT to their own life.
as i say, socialism and capitalism are outside of these particular systems,
the nazis called themselves the national socialists, yet naziism (or
state-led racism of any kind) can exist in any monetary system. the
government always controls the police and army after all.
socialism as i believe in it (very loosely mind, my opinions are constantly
changing) is for the destruction of _social_ power, not personal power.
social power is defined as the power to control society, or a number of
members of society, which is in capitalist society, owned by corporations,
government, and the like. social power is most often used to take away
personal power.
personal power is defined as the right for the individual to control his or
her own life, and no-one elses. personal power is in control of no-one
elses personal power and therefore is a threat only to those who would seek
to control society, or certain members of society (did anyone mention the
government?)
socialism is not a perfect system, for it to truly work requires an immense
amount of hard-work and cleverness by a large number of extremely unselfish
people, and it often fails to live up to expectations. but capitalism is
riddled with problems as well, such as the abuse of the poor by the rich
(something which i believe the founders of america wanted to end.). Think
on this fact: america was populated mainly by the oppressed, the poor,
those escaping religious bigotry and the like (this is something i know
about, a massive number of the population of scotland and ireland left for
america after the irish famine and the highland clearances), america was
'concieved in liberty' (and it was). i don't know my american history too
well, but it seems to me that you originally tried to mix the best bits of
capitalism (economic freedom) with the best parts of socialism (protection
of personal rights, i'm sure you'll disagree with me on that.).
it seems to me not that socialism is taking over america, but that rather
something else, which is neither socialism or capitalism, but a mix of the
worst of both systems, the government AND industry seem to tread on and
abuse the poor,
from all reliable info, i personally would not like to live in america (no
offence to americans, i just don't like the american system of government).
you seem to live in an increasingly violent society (i've heard many tales
of kids shooting kids in high school in america, the sort of thing that
when it happened here prompted a widely supported drive to ban handguns).
violence seems to be an integral part of your society, people do not feel
safe in america, they feel as if they are under constant attack, why else
do people carry guns? someone who is assured of his safety doesn't go and
buy a gun. i'm not advocating gun-control here, because that doesn't solve
anything, it just pisses off the people who want to keep guns. if the
policy makers were to attack the disease rather than the sympoms of the
disease, then it'd be ok. if you work against the american protect-yourself
culture and force the police to DO THEIR JOB (ie. protecting the public,
not the government) then gun ownership would go down as a result. when
people live in a relaxed, non-violent society, they feel no need to carry
guns. i just wish the pro-gun lobby would point this out. the only people
that carry guns around here are farmers who use them to shoot foxes, and
the occasional moronic toff who thinks that shooting animals makes a great
hobby. i've never even seen a real gun, apart from a vintage WW1 rifle in
the army surplus store in town.
i think that if the US had had it's very ground ripped to pieces and turned
into a battlefield TWICE in this century, then you'd probably understand
that xenophobia leeds to war. look at us in europe, the french and germans
(who have suffered the most from the last two wars) actively support open
borders.
i feel this has to be said, because i've been noticing a very isolationist
viewpoint on this channel, especially from the anti-NATO, NWO folks here.
why the fuck do you think you're under attack? can't you see that america
runs the fucking show? i don't know, if anyone should be anti-nato, it
should be us, not you.
oh well
>The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism.
>But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every
>fragment of the socialist program, until one day America
>will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.
> -- Norman Thomas, U.S. Socialist Presidential candidate
if there's one thing i can't stand it's someone that actively tries to make
people paranoid and scared of him when he's trying to get elected, what an
idiot.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substancenot 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
