-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
As the smoke cleared, OrionWorks <[email protected]> mounted the barricade and roared out: > From Grok: > > > As the smoke cleared, OrionWorks <[email protected]> > > mounted the barricade and roared out: > > >> Grok sez to Terry: > >> > >> > On the contrary -- capitalism very much DOES relate to fascism. NOST > >> > directly so. And of COURSE socialism relates to communism! However I > >> > doubt very much if you understand the first thing about that. > >> > >> Ah, I see another informative political lecture is about to ramp up > >> for our viewing pleasure... or perhaps not. > > > > Ya, I doubt it too. However the fact remains that the main stumbling > > block to the advance of society today -- and certainly to OU 'fringe > > science' and tek -- remains the present social order, with its rather > > brutal and short-sighted focus on short-term profit return. > > > > We really require that "vision thing", you know..? > > > > Interesting speculation, Grok. > > FWIW: > > I don't claim to be a Political Science expert. > > Speaking specifically of socialism, and looking through rosy > spectacles, Scandinavian countries come to mind. Teknikally speaking (tho' their bourgeois and other politikal forces would certainly prefer to obscure the distinction) these countries have operated under the control of *social-democrat* governments/parties; not actually _socialist_ ones, per se. And that's actually quite a big distinction. Even many so-called "socialist" parties are in fact anything but. > Most of these European countries tend to tax the hell out of their > citizens. And this is a problem..? > Despite the on-going indignity of having one's wallet continuously > raped, They must sit around at Fox News and the Cato Institute, et al., dreaming this stuff up full-time... Apparently it pays. Well. > I get the impression that most of its citizens do not appear to > be revolting against a tax bracket that is often in excess of 50%. The > only logical conclusion that makes any sense to me is that most must > feel that they are getting what they are paying for. They must feel > they are receiving adequate returns on their investments. While the neo-liberals/neo-con-fascists in these countries have (until recently, anyway) been systematikally attempting to dismantle the social-democratic "welfare state" in each of them according to the World-wide plan of the financial bourgeoisie, it's still generally the case that most citizens in these societies understand the superiority of a system of pooling collective resources for the good of society. Not like in the 'beggar-thy-neighbor' U.S.A. or Britain, et al., where neo-liberal ideologs and their neo-con/fascist running dogs have been savaging the body politik one way or another since well before WWII -- including the ongoing mass brainwashing of the populace to support policies which are completely against their interests. And today the results of these trajectories show more than ever. However, we're in a new situation now, where these arch criminals feel they can use the present crisis to get away with even MORE than before. But the night is still young, eh? > Yet, there remains a constant struggle to define what makes one truly > happy. For example, let's take Sweden in more detail: > > See: > http://www.essortment.com/all/governmentswede_rbfh.htm > > Exerpt: > ----------------------------------------------------------- > It is hard to argue that Sweden's all-encompassing health care hasn't > benefited the average Swede in some ways: infant mortality is low (3.9 > deaths per 1,000 live births) and life expectancy high (79.08 years). > Paid parental leave is available to all Swedes, female and male. Yet > many Swedes complain that their health care system is a bureaucratic > nightmare, with long waits for doctors' appointments and even > surgeries, and little choice for patients when it comes to things like > choice of doctor. Every time Swedes have voted in a nonsocialist prime > minister, they seem [to] regret it, and in only a few years revert to > the socialist system that most have been raised in. This is typical for social-democratic régimes (like Canada in many ways, for instance), where capitalist ideology -- and ekonomik logic -- are supposed to reign over the social sphere, as the final arbiter. The essential problem with this, however, is that there is little democratic control by the citizenry over the decisions being made "democratically" in their name. It's a kind of 'schizoid', hypokritikal, self-serving politikal setup -- and has only lasted this long, because of the privileged position of e.g. the scandinavian countries under the previous imperialist system which held sway during and after the 'Cold War'. But all this is now finished with, of course. The Brave New World beckons us. > Meanwhile, I've spent most of my adult life living and working within a > capitalist system. I neither love capitalism, nor do I hate it, nor do > I perceive it as an inherently evil system. Clearly you have not lived on the short end of this stick. However, it is indeed most unusual for people to understand that which they haven't directly, personally experienced. This is a main reason why revolutionary change usually only occurs in a crisis, for instance. Some of us try to do better. > It simply IS, and I'm used to it. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. > From what I can tell, no political system is perfect. In the end it > always seems to come down to: You get what you pay for. Perhaps it makes you feel good to say this -- but it is not an analysis. Socialism won't be perfect either -- and it will be a moving target as well -- but it will be MUCH more democratic than this present setup. For one thing: democracy will be *direct* and *participatory* -- not "representative" (pfft) like the present -- (extremely) limited -- bourgeois form of democracy. No matter the relentless propaganda lauding it to the skies. And no -- stalinism was not socialism. In any meaningful sense, anyway. For one thing: it completely lacked workers' democracy -- all claims to the contrary aside. > Personally I'm inclined to believe that many within the United States > cling to a ridiculous notion that they will be better off (happier) if > they are taxed less. Paying less taxes, they assume, means they will > have more purchasing power to buy more "stuff". The illusion is that > one perceives wealth, power, or freedom, as being in possession of a > fat bank account that allows one to buy all the "stuff" they believe > that will make them happy because someone told them that being in > possession of such "stuff" is what they really need in order to be > happy. This is no accident of "human nature" that people in the U.S. (and elsewhere) believe this bilge. Many billions of dollars have been spent on creating a propaganda industry which makes damned sure that you either think like this -- or you pay the price to the 'other' industry: the police state apparatus if you don't at least acquiesce to the scam. The U.S. and the Soviet Union had a lot more in common than merely their size and their military power, eh? > Ironically, the exact opposite often seems to happen for many after > they are lucky enough to accumulate all the "stuff" they were told > would make them happy. Now one is faced with all those worries about > all that "stuff" that needs to be maintained or protected from > everyone else who now covets their "stuff.". You got it. And what better way to keep the suburban masses in line than with relentless FUD -- much of it coming out of their 'Home Entertainment Centers' as each sit, alone, in the splendid isolation of their massively-indebted 'freeholds'..? Pass the gourmet popcorn. > IMHO, this country will eventually Eventually? Right now, bubba. > need to perform a serious amount of self-reflection on what makes > itself happy. I would predict that many who might embark on such a task > might be devastated to discover that what they thought would make them > happy (if they were to get it) actually wouldn't > > So then... what does make one happy? And what is wealth? Can one find > true happiness ONLY if we were all to rise up and overthrow the evil > bourgeois system we all live under so that the correct one can be > installed? Pretty much. As for wealth: being rich is actually quite satisfying, I hear. And we should all understand that "wealth" is in fact real, *material* possessions -- not claims made on those goods by financial manipulations involving fancy paper-shuffling sleight-of-hand. Or not even. Good questions. So you say you're a scientist..? ;P - -- grok. - -- Build the North America-wide General Strike. TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas. TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes. ALL power to the councils and communes. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkn41tgACgkQXo3EtEYbt3HvQQCdFUbRLcCfyJfkaNB9TFu5P4UU z5oAoOQ6nRcjWS63nK51AaiOZqgrImBz =OgvW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
