Dustbin wrote:
[...]

> Socialism hasn't failed because socialism hasn't
> been tried --- YET!

Interesting idea.  In theory, there is a socialist ideal, and I would
argue that it has been tried, but we don't know it because its duration
was so fleeting.  I'll simply call this "true socialism," although I
would like if you would expound on your idea of socialism.

True socialism is like an intermediate step in a fast chemical
reaction, with the reactants being "free" and the products being
"oppressed."  Scientists know what the reaction mechanism is, but it
happens so fast that they can't isolate any of the intermediate
chemicals, which don't exist in nature because they are too unstable.
You can only see and measure what you had, which is freedom, and what
you inadvertently make, which is oppression.

People who believe in true socialism can't be considered immoral.
Their intentions are good, although I do dislike that they would
include me in their ideal, when I would rather not be included.  Their
mistake is that they think that if only it were done right, it would
work.  But if it's never been done right, why do you think it can be
done right?  As one can easily read in any self-help book, if you do
what you've done, you'll get what you got.

Truth is, I don't know what's best for you, and I don't want any say at
all in how you conduct your life.  Doesn't that make me more your ally
than someone who thinks he knows what's best for you?

> >
> >>Fuck big business and it's craven ways. Bring on the Christian
> >
> > morality -
> >
> >>esp, the material poverty part.
> >
> >
> > That's easy.  We have only to keep doing what we're doing.
> >



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/2/05 1:34:46 PM ---