Re: damn commie hypocrite leech! (was Re: Re: Re: why worry?)

[Missouri FreeNet Administration]

(J.A. Terranson donned his extra heavy asbestos underwear, then appended
his thoughts thusly...)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Jim Burnes wrote:
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:> 
:> 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.
:
:Well, OK...thats a null statement.  Most people have no idea what conditions
:are in other nations.  Why should they care? (unless they dont like where
:they are living and want to move).

(1) I would argue that there has yet to *be* an actual *Communist* state
by which we could gauge the Communist existense. 

(2) I have a *big* problem with Americans not caring what conditions are
like in the rest of the world: it allows us to continue to both tolerate
and perpetrate such crimes as we have been committing in Iraq over the
last 10 years or so.  And then of course there are the shenanigans in
Honduras, Columbia, and let's not forget our dear "friends" the
Sandinistas...  American apathy for all things not *directly* (we don't,
as a people, seem to understand the concept of indirect events) affecting
America^h^h^h^h^h^H The "United" States is our greatest (IMNSHO) fault.

(3) As for the statement (which I choose to take as a "stand alone", e.g.,
not requiring the support of McG's other positions) that most Americans
are oblivious to the conditions they themselves live in: I believe it is
true only in the sense that we as a people very much *choose* to *fein*
this lack of insight.  I don't really understand the reasoning behind it,
but many (I hesitate to say most, although that really is the word which
came to mind) of the people I have had "talks" with (where such "talks"
required this type of knowledge) seem to be somehow "proud" of this "lack
of insight".  It's like we----- I don't *know* what's it's like: I'm
reaching for straws - but it's both very frightening, and sickening at the
same time.

:> Americans condemn Communism usually without even having read the Communist
:> Manifesto; and if they HAVE read the Manifesto, they say something good
:
:Talk about your broad brushes.  I know a lot of Americans who have read
:the "Manifesto" long enough to be revolted by it.    But Joe Sixpack
:also lives by its tenets without realizing that what they are.

Reinforcing point (1) above, albeit tangentially.

:Many 
:strictures by which Americans now live were originally tenets of the
:US Communist platform including progessive income taxation.  Most Americans
:are so dependent, so hopelessly inurred with the current lifestyle that
:they wouldn't recognize communism if it bit them in the ass.

Hmmmm.  "Inurred with the current lifestyle."   Very interesting choice of
words.  "Dependent", also an interesting choice.  I submit that both of
these statements are rooted in the "lifestyle" of high per capita income
to low exertion for these wages.  (Yes, I am having a hard time choosing
words that don't make me sound, ahhh...,er..., "thick"?).  I think that
many (if not most to almost all) of these "inurred" and "dependent" people
(a position with which I agree BTW) would state categorically and
emphatically that they are in fact quite (totally?) *independent*, and
that this is *because* of their wages.  How many would see the dependency
these wages bring?  

Is there a point to this commentary: not that I can readily identify,
other than it "feels necessary" to expound upon it...

:> 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.

You are sounding a lot like the "average" person you are condemning
here...  Additionally, again I  refer to point 1: Stalinism/Maoism is not
necessarily Communism.  Rather, they are the conditions which we
*associate* with Communism.  If you *really  * want to look at Communism
in  a more purified incarnation, maybe you should examine the Oneida
communities of New York (which fell apart only in the last 2-3 years of
its existence).

:Lets be real up front here.  Unless you have been out to lunch recently
:Communism is an experiment that failed so miserably it exterminated
:almost 100 million human beings last century.  If that were a disease
:we would have government funded programs to wipe it out.  Actively
:trying to infect people with it would land you in jail.

Unfortunately, the "Communism" Jim  is referring to  here is actually
Stalinism, and in many (*not* all - please don't try to impale me on that
particular stake :-) ways , the US is  travelling down a similar  road
politically.

:I would love to see a Memetic analysis of Communism.  I would expect
:that it would be substantially similar to the barbaric crusades of
:early and middle Christianity.  Killing en masse to loot, pillage
:and convert the heathens for the greater glory of god^h^h^hstate.

Substitute Stalinism,  and I agree  100 percent.

:> 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;

I disagree.   Strongly.  Emphatically.  *Beligerently*  :)
Sam steals your coin because Sam needs it to pay his bills, and I am *not*
talking about the [doemestic]  social programs here.  By specifically
requiring that persons be required to crave power before being imbued with
it, we have placed ourselves at the mercy of the worst our society has to
offer.  How would Jack Politico earn a living if he didn't have your coin
to use as a persuasive tool (read "bribe")?  How would he force his
personal opinions on other nation states if you didn't finance it?  How
would he be able to persecute you for doing things that hurt nobody
(except maybe you) if he doesn't have a way to feed the support system
that such actions require?

And, of course, (before Mr. Burnes beats me to it!),  here we have the
"inurred" statement rearing it's head again...  As long as "the people"
remain "pacified" [inurred, sedated, pick your adjective], Sam gets to go
about business as usual.

Interesting side story here(to prove my assertion that these high-wage,
low  physical effort jobs are in fact *forced* on much of the population
as a sort of opiate):  Recently (last 6 weeks or so) I have been making
the job rounds (boredom has *definitely * set in).  Just for the *fun* of
it, I applied to about a dozen "shitbox" jobs: Jack-in-the-box, MickyD,
etc.  One of them went so far as to "permit"  me to take their applicant
"test" (How many burritos do you need for an order with 2 burritos? <g>).
Not a single one of them called me back.  I was *serious* about taking
these jobs: the money was unimportant, but not a single one of these
places could be convinced of that.  On the other hand, when I finally gave
up and went back to applying for jobs more "in my field <g>", I managed 4
immediate offers (of which only 2 look interesting).

No matter how you slice it, we are forced into the peter principle in this
country.  Is this a bad thing? I'm not really sure, although I *am* a
little bit bitter that I won't get to wear a red baseball cap with pins
all over it and ask if you would like that Super-Sized ;-)  

Oh yeah, I realize I'm in for a *torching* on this...

:Wow.  People making choices and seeing what happens.  If you don't think
:that basket weaving is a good profession, do something else so that you
:can make more money.  Else don't complain.

Sometimes the money doesn't matter though.  Then what?  What about art for
art's sake (assuming no complaining about $$)?

:> since we all know that companies will work your ass 39 hours a week to
:> keep you from getting benefits, while maximizing their efficiency.

That's the JOB of a corporate entity: it *exists* to make money.  The
union is no better.  Sam is the same...  You need to rely *on yourself*.
If a company isn't offering what you need, *DON'T SETTLE*, look elsewhere.
If everyone did that, the "shitbox job[s]" would come up to the minimum
standard which the worker required.

:Buy your own goddamn benefits.  Last time I checked they were $3000/year
:for a nominal family of 3.  Benefits are not free.  That are not free to
:provide.

Granted.  And except  in very exceptional circumstances, I don't think the
state should be providing them either: *but*, those exceptions *do* exist,
and the state does *not* usually provide (and when it does, it rarely in a
timely manner).

:> 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.

Read any Ayn Rand lately?  A little bit of enlighted self-interest would
go a LONG way towards equalizzing the playing fields...  WITHOUT theft
(whether by Sam or Mega-Conglomerate Inc.).

:And communism can give the working poor a decent wage?

I've never been convinced of this, even assuming a "utopian" Communist
system such as existed at Oneida.  Remember, under "the real thing", a
wage should be equal to it's value, not to the existence of the person
"working" for it.  Restated, even Communism acknowledges that a wage
should not accrete to a worker who does not provide value.

:Of course the
:downside to your fantasy is that you would have to live in China or
:the old Soviet Union.  No thanks. 

Amen.

:I've seen desparately poor people
:in Anguilla and they seemed happy enough.

I've seen them right here in the US.  And I do mean *desperately* poor.

:At least their government
:doesn't kill one in four. 

This *implies* that ours doesn't, right?  But we are often just as
culpable, as we provide the means, support, and planning for these
massacre-oriented "governments".  I cringe every time we "offer foreign
aid" because of this.

:> 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."
:
:These people need low wage jobs because without them you have capital
:flight to China (home of your beloved socialists)

Woah!  Socialists and Communists are *not* the same thing you know!

:where the average
:worker makes a hell of a lot less.  Of course thats because they are
:virtual slaves to the "People's Army".  And that is the system you
:would prefer?

I'm not sure that's the actual reason for the low wage, although it may be
the reason for the lack of action(s) to otherwise raise the standard of
living "enjoyed" by these peoples.

:> Michael J. Graffam ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
:> "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
:> "Who watches the watchmen?"   - Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347
:
:Indeed.  You need to take a course in formal logic (propositional calculus)
:as you don't see the implications of your own quotes.
:
:Juvenal is saying "who watches the elites?".  In any communist system "those
:who know best" must be watched.   Of course as soon as you watch them you
:start your vacation in beautiful sunny Siberia.  And that is a one-way
:ticket.

We have that here as well you know.  We just aren't quite as open about
it.

Yours, 
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and 
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others.  Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...
--------------------------------------------------------------------