At 11:18 PM -0400 01/11/2000, Peter Horton wrote:
>Actually, equating Socialism with dictatorship is faulty reasoning.
Thank you!!!
>There
>are plenty of countries that have socialist and capitalist programs that
>coexist.
And moreover, there are states in which capitalism (of some sort) coexists
with dictatorship. Capitalism neither requires nor necessarily prefers
democracy.
> What is the price of our so
>called "free market"? Economic and political tyranny in small, undeveloped
>nations. But since it is not in our backyard, we don't have to look at it,
>so it doesn't bother us, right?
Well, I have serious problems with Peter Singer's philosophy in some areas,
but he once made a wonderful rebuttal to the Lifeboat Ethics argument of
Garrett Hardin; he argued that if a person was drowning in a pool visible
from the road where one was walking, and we could help that person without
giving up a greater moral good in doing so -- and thus regardless of
attendant conveniences lost, as they are lesser moral goods than the value
of a human life -- one morally ought to help that person.
Then he pointed out that in our day and age, just about the whole world is
essentially both visible and accessible from where we are, and that the
moral priorities ought to still hold. Problems I have with the man, and the
argument is simple while implementation is difficult, but difficult is nto
an excuse for a dismissal of the responsibility. There's gotta be some
priorities beyond pure consumerist satiety, right?
Or is that all that matters anymore? Interesting, the distinction between
consumers and citizens.
