L, (or should I try "D"?) Going off topic for a brief introduction seems a necessity among a group so more or less condemned to each other as is our little Arachnian society with a couple of people and a half (my other mailbox) which just may or may not have to do anything with politics. Also some light on the difference between pure communism and just communism is to be shed in order to prevent misunderstandings, however. Communism, not unlike liberty, or religion, is mainly a dream. And like the liberty and the other dream is this dream used to give large masses of people a target. The means to spread a dream like this have been centralised through mass media, and have since only been scratched by this here, the democratic internet. Much more there isn't to it: Those who control the dream are those who can communicate it. Theoretically, the rest gets to choose those, and fortunately, they turn out not completly evil, nor totally innocent, but trying to explain themselves somehow, because a dream is good merchandise but practise also demands some sacrifices. Yet all dream the dream and everything is done for it. Calling all the rest socialism, is a bit of a definition problem. Not only won't "all the rest" accept socialism as a label, also has the word socialism been claimed, given and thrown around to often to put it to use describing "all the rest". In fact, I don't think another word for "rest" is needed. After skipping prejudice from labels, they can be put to their proper use to communicate a certain more or less defined group of people. In terms of language, I'd say it's time to stop handing out words like they're some disposable utility. I'm not sure of English in this regard, but in Dutch it's becoming a habit for to invent new (or use foreign) words to describe a (mostly traditionally impopular) group of people after an even more impopular group added the previous word to their list of insults. A good example is the use of the word "foreigner" in politics. After replacing it with "migrants" in the 1970's (which is of course even worse, because it could give the impression that migrating is a habit for this group), someone came up with "allochtoon", having the advance that it had no connotation whatsoever, and allows the use of its opposite "autochtoon" for the indiginous majority (I think these words are greek based, but I don't know if they're making sense in english). These in official communication, are in fact culturally based definitions. One is "allochtoon" until the "autochtoon" can't tell him apart any more in terms of language, public behaviour, and of course appearance. The difference this makes for colored people is obvious, and of course these words are also just too official for private use. The other disadvantage of this language excersise is that it's too obvious that there's something hidden. Cultural integration of autochtonen was a key item in last years election campaign. I was really reliefed to see the resulting three-party right wing government coalition fall as a result of foreseeable internal conflicts. In the 87 days this government lasted, such drastic solutions were choosen that a variety of more specialised official slang like "asylum seeker" can be heard in public, and with the official consequence of being subject to a load of limitations. Next opportunity for the autochtonen to change this will be next weeks election, so I hope you understand I'm a bit busy at this time. Anyway, "LD", I'm not going to try to list what's best for anyone because it's all mainly about effectively preventing things that should happen to no one (not referring to lost mailboxes). For communications that means I'll just be as direct as I can, so even the worst GW would understand that I don't mean to say that American citizens are internationally recognised by their ignorance, arrogance, and then dollars.
Bart Buitinga At 17:06 12-1-03 -0400, you wrote: >Bart, > >Before you accuse others of applying labels to you, and particularly >before you apply your own labels, it would help if you knew what they >meant. > >The only purely communist society to have survived was started here in >the USA. Communism has little to do with politics and everything to do >with ownership and responsibility -- all property, all assets except the >minimal personal stuff like underwear or photos of your girl, is held in >COMMON with all other members of the group. The group determines what >is best for the survival of the group. No nation can be communistic >because size alone prevents it; what have been incorrectly reffered to >over the decades as "communistic governments" are by default not >communist because having a government negates the power & rights of the >"common man." > >Socialism is everywhere around us. Socialism is where the "state" makes >the decisions and accepts the responsibilities of caring for all persons >in, and aspects of, the state. Universal health care is socialistic. >Creating jobs to make the innept, or otherwise unemployable, "self- >sustaining" is socialistic. "To Protect The Children" is socialistic. >"We are here to help" -- and allowing idiotic things like rebuilding the >same family home four times in ten years on the proceeds of government >financed "insurance," despite the fact the home is being built each time >on the same proven flood plain, is socialistic [and stupid]. Any >government which believes it can possibly know what is best for each >citizen/resident of the country, and for the country itself, at all >times under all circumstances is also socialistic and ALSO STUPID!! [Are >you listening, GW??] > >What we all should consider doing is dumping labels and simply declaring >what we believe in enough to fight for it. If we don't believe in >anything that strongly, we should find a hole and someone to "protect" >us and stay out of the way. > >IMNSHO > >==== >On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 11:42:30 +0100, Bart Buitinga wrote: > >> How much difference one man can make in American politics has been >> wonderfully demonstrated by gov Ryan, who is first to break the myth that >> the American justice system would be infallible. I sure hope this will >> reach Tx, too. And before a next war starts, because quite similar to the >> undeserved faith of many Americans in the deterrant effect of capital >> punishment, their call for the "war on terrorism" is of the same category, >> ill-based categorical measures with doubtful effect and a high level of >> cruelty. >> You may call me a communist if you like (although I prefer "socialist"), >> but surely this last day decision in Illinois is just a first step back >> from the point where civilisation ends and vengeance takes over mass >> sentiments, leaving America itself in the role of murderous oppressor of >> those going any other than the American way. (Don't get me wrong, just >> picture the USA as a Microsoft amongst nations, and then try independence >> for an attitude. Even the North Coreans start making sense if you do.) > >> B >-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ > > >
