On Fri, 25 Feb 2000, Sunder wrote:
> Anonymous Sender wrote:
> > It's amusing how the brainwashing shows its ugly face when the appropriate
> > stimulus is applied. For most US subjects it is the "communism" thingie.
>
> Oh puhleeze. Research before you speak. I was born in a satelite of Red
> Russia. It was a commie state. I remember it all too well. Joe Sixpack might
> not give a shit about how much it sucks elsewhere. I do, I was there.
Irrelevent. No one is arguing that existence under communist rule is
a holiday -- or even better than existence in the U.S. The statement is
simply that the average american knows dick about the conditions that
exist in other nations, and as an aside, is oblivious to the conditions
he himself lives in.
Americans condemn Communism usually without even having read the Communist
Manifesto; and if they HAVE read the Manifesto, they say something good
and stupid like "sounds great on paper, but doesn't work in the real
world." Americans condemn Communism without knowing shit about Marxist
tenents, and without knowing (or even reading about) the realities of
life under a Stalinist/Maoist rule.
It is _precisely_ because of this ignorance that makes Anonymous' point
so relevent.
No matter how (insert adjective) X is, denouncing it before
you know what X actually is, and is not, is rubbish at best .. insanity
at worst.
> I'm not arguing that Uncle Sam gets a big chunk of what I own. The arguement
> is communism vs capitalism. In this regard, Uncle Sam is like communism. But
> it's certainly not the corporations that rape my money.
I'd take issue with that, in a round-about way. Uncle Sam steals your coin
because there are a shit-load of Americans out there with less-than-dick
for resources. These unfortunate souls might have taken up, say, basket
weaving as a hobby rather than computer programming (unlike the majority
of people who are likely to read this list) and as such (since hand-made
baskets aren't in particularly high demand these days) are doomed to
taking shitbox minimum wage jobs, probably part-time with no benefits;
since we all know that companies will work your ass 39 hours a week to
keep you from getting benefits, while maximizing their efficiency.
Capitalism, with its emphasis on the profit margin can't always afford
to give the working poor a decent wage, therefore we need social programs
to help the honest, working poor. And, our caring Uncle Sammy takes our
money to see that this is the case. Fine by me (I'd rather live here
and let Sam have some of my coin than live in say, that Red satellite you
were talking about).
The name escapes me at the moment, but some Capitalist asshole/theorist
once said something along the lines of:
"The answer to our question (what do we do about the poor) is simple:
nothing. We need an impoverished working class to supply cheap labor to
our corporations. They must, after all, turn a profit."
With some consideration, it seems obvious to me that in any socio-economic
system that places such high importance on money it is mere causality
that pure economic entities, like corporations, will become powerful
controlling forces; and that power and control shall be exerted upon their
closest subjects: the laborers .. aka, the people.
I don't know what socio-economic system would work best; but I DO know
that I will never like that which places shackles on the souls of men.
Michael J. Graffam ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
"Who watches the watchmen?" - Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347
