From: Samael (Samael@dial.pipex.com)
Date: Thu Dec 10 1998 - 02:34:22 MST
I'm forwarding this to a fiew friends as well for opinions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Donaghe <tdonaghe@yahoo.com>
>Amen! I would love to see a rational defense of socialism by some of
>our collectivist associates. I posit that it can't be done
>(rationally).
>
>Any takers?
Any defense of socialism I would mount would have to take into account three
basic assumptions:
1) Human nature is such that all people try to benifit themselves (and to a
lesser extent their friends/relatives) as much as possible.
2) 'Property' does not actually exist and is merely a way of saying 'I deny
you access to this'.
3) Sufficient social/monetary inequality leads to social disruption.
Communists tend to forget point (1) and focus on point (2).
Capitalists tend to forget point (2) and focus on point (1)
(3) tends to cause problems in capitalist societies on an internal basis (in
the UK, under more capitalist policies the percentage difference between the
rich and the poor went up by about 7% over the 10 years the conservative
party was in power. This caused large amounts of social unrest,
demonstrations and the biggest landslide in living history for their
opposition party).
(3) tends to cause problems for communist societies on an external basis
(When the Soviet Republics realised how much better of Western Europe was
they revolted.)
A fourth point is sometimes useful to remember.
(4) Homo Sapiens is a pack animal that naturally speaking has a heirarchy.
People are most comfortable with a chain of command. They like to feel that
the chain of command listens to them and considers their feelings and that
it is looking out for them. It is a mistake to indulge this too much, but
it is worth bearing in mind.
Having shown that both Communist and Capitalist societies tend to forget
about one of (1) or (2) thus causing (3), I would say that it makes sense to
mix them sluightly, taking into account of both (1) and (2) which gives...
socialism.
My preferred method of socialism would be to provide free Gealth Care (of a
standard necessary to get people back to work) and enough of a handout to
allow people to survive. This handout should _not_ be means tested (if it
drops as they start earning here is less incentive to start earning). Free
Education will also be provided (education leads to raised output and higher
GNP's as well as lowering reproduction), but not in the current form - as
has been pointed out most current education sucks.
I look forward to hearing objections.
Samael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:56 MST