In a message dated 6/18/03 2:03:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>But does not the practice of the subordination of the individual to the
>collective go back to ancient times, indeed to pre-historical tribal
>practice and belief?
>Fred Foldvar
in the ancient world we clearly have a good deal o
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You seem to confuse the concept of subordinating the individual to
> a greater human collective to subordinating the individual to the will of
> the tyrant.
But does not the practice of the subordination of the individual to the
collective go back to ancient times, i
"Socialism" is a historical term whose use has evolved over time. I believe
it first appeared in an Owenite periodical, the London Cooperative Journal,
in 1829 or 1830.
The beginning of the classical socialist movement was the Ricardian
socialist movement. They were inspired by two
In a message dated 6/17/03 11:05:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 07:41:45PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Socialism developed in the early and mid-19th century as a rejection
>of
>
>> classical liberalism,
>
>Wrong. You seem to co
I agree that it's more effective to avoid loaded phrases like "capitalism"
and "socialism."
"Socialism" has become to the Right of our generation what "laissez-faire"
became to the left of the 1930s--just a swear-word--and thus generates much mo
> So what label would you use?
> Fabio
I would avoid using the labels "capitalism" and "socialism".
Substitutes for capitalism:
1) private enterprise
2) free market; free enterprise; pure market
3) market economy
4) interventionism
5) mixed economy
Substitutes
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 07:41:45PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Socialism developed in the early and mid-19th century as a rejection of
> classical liberalism,
Wrong. You seem to confuse the concept of socialism with the word socialism.
Just like classical liberalism can be traced b
Socialism developed in the early and mid-19th century as a rejection of
classical liberalism, especially but not exclusively as a German nationalistic
rejection of French liberalism (or French militaristic fanatacism in the name of
liberalism). Socialism actually embodies a number or loosely
politial parties in the US have played football with balanced
budget. Perot also made a big deal about. So what label would you use?
Fabio
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Fred Foldvary wrote:
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > government money, as it predates socialism, probably doesn't rightly
&g
ocialized money -- but now I'm not certain this is what you mean.
There are three meanings of "socialism":
1) the ownership of non-labor factors by workers.
2) the ownership or control of some of the economy by government.
3) an egalitarian redistribution of wealth.
I mean #2.
Fred Foldvary
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> government money, as it predates socialism, probably doesn't rightly
fall under the category of socialism. <
Does the meaning of socialism include a time frame, so that a policy that
is socialist after that time is not socialist before that tim
11 matches
Mail list logo
