From: Alexander Sheppard (alexandersheppard@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 29 2002 - 09:58:18 MST
In a message dated 10/28/2002 5:04:38 PM Central Standard Time,
alexandersheppard@hotmail.com writes: Well, I say that the USSR was not
socialistic, or the PRC, or Cuba, or North Korea, or North Vietnam, or any
of these places. Why? You say I am trying to define away the evils of
socialism.
Yes, you are doing exactly that. Not only does socialism have a long
tradition of allowing brutal thugs to get in charge but they also have a
long tradition of initially having a large group "useful fools" (Lenin's
phrase) providing the theoretical basis to form a state that is easy for a
thug to take over.
Well, if that is socialism, then I'm not a socialist, but I don't see how
this can have much to do with socialism, at least if you define the word in
a self consistent way (many didn't). I think socialism should be defined as
workers' control of the means of production, not brutal tyrants running
around subjugating. This all depends on definitions ; you say I am trying to
define away the evils of socialism, but I could say, if there was evidence,
that you are the one who is trying to define away the benefits of socialism,
no? And I think there is evidence, I think there is a long line of socialist
tradition and proto-socialist ideas which demonstrates that socialism, apart
from a fringe element, was always about workers control, and the state only
entered in as a means to that end, if at all (remember, anarchists
considered themselves socialists at Marx's Internationale, before they were
kicked out). Rather it has been the vested interests of our society, who
have sought to redefine socialism along their own lines, to pursuade people
that liberty and happiness are undesirable, that one must submit to the
state capitalist system (or, as Orwell said, "freedom is slavery"). And it
has been in other countries that dictators and malevolents would define
tyranny as socialism for their own propaganda purposes, to entice people who
favor socialism into supporting them (more Orwell). Thus the word socialism
was twisted into what may be described as simple doublespeak or
ill-consistent definitions.
I have read in Hayek that most of the terms you use are nonsensical
and incapable of accurate definition -- that is why I refuse to try to
define socialism. If you cannot define it after 200 years, and this
exchange of email, and still are incapable of defining your own system then
why expect an outsider like me to do so?
Well, he is somewhat right, I think--because the word socialism has been
twisted by various interests over the years to support power, here and
abroad. I mean, sure, you can define socialism as "enslaved freedom", but I
don't think that makes sense, I don't think that "socialism" is the word you
should choose to describe that. "Tyranny" might be a better choice, in this
context.
Alexander, you can't even bring your system down to Earth enough to
accept your past mistakes, which we have enumerated, or to tell us how you
intend to avoid those same mistakes in the future.
Again, I don't support these systems, so I'm not sure why I should apologize
for them. Nazism is totally antithetical to socialism, as was Stalinism. The
workers didn't control their own conditions at all in such countries ; on
the contrary, they were monstrous cavities of authoritarianism, with the
workers completely subjugating to a violent and tyrannical State.
Friend, IMHO, it is time to put not only this thread to rest but also
the entire subject of socialism both online and in the real world. Give it
up, it is a bad job. You are wasting the time you spend on socialism just
as the workers under socialism and those poor souls in the concentration
camps or the gulags are having their lives wasted.
Did the workers control their gulags? Did they control their own
concentration camps? Is it justifiable to label this as socialism?
_________________________________________________________________
Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:51 MST