I worked for quite a while in Scandinavia. Even there (as "socialist" as it gets) no one has any truck with freeloading bums. In the old Soviet Empire (which was supposed to be lots of little soviets) there was little opportunity to do sod all and a lot of forced labour. Great hardship followed the democratisation, and the poor generally still feel they are worse off. All the Soviet Block had the "Zil Chill" factor - voices going to a whisper as one was seen - the Scandinavians just cold weather. We need to re-examine what Sino- Soviet communism was. It was certainly state capitalist and to a considerable extent driven by madmen. How might we evaluate it against Pakistani tribalism? Are the Russians laughing now we are stuck with their war in Afghanistan? Crucially, we need to see what has been done to ourselves through obvious and less obvious rhetorics. There are, amazingly, still some "golden Stalinist age" idiots about, but there are far more who soaked up the idiot messages of "capitalism" as dumbly as any docile body in the East.
On 22 Jan, 05:58, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why am I talking about food now? I posted your paragraph (to chris) > > with starts out with >>I think the flaw in your reasoning is that you > > assume if something exists everyone is entitled to it. << KC really > > think about what you are saying. Do you really think that if > > something exists, naturally on this planet, that people are Not > > entitled to it? > > That's the point. In the context of my response to Chris, it was > clear that my point was, everyone is not entitled to something just > because it is. And what I was referring to was modern marvels in > medicine. I didn't follow that up with an argument that no one is > entitled to anything. I never made such a broad sweeping argument. > > > The existence of heart transplants is not different from the existence > > of plasma TV's, which neither should fall under the category of > > entitlement. > > Good, then we are in agreement. > > > Go back a million years KC, food existed, why? So that > > people could gather it all up and "Capitalize" in it's "Existence"? I > > don't think so. > > The amount of food that existed back then wouldn't have been > sufficient to sustain the population we have now. High capacity > production of food is not essential for our survival. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
