On Apr 29, 2:17 am, Andy <andrewrichardwainwri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> On 29 Apr, 03:00, Neolibertarian <cognac...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <dc46db8a-65f4-484a-95b0-f5fea0040...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
> > Andy <andrewrichardwainwri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > What to say if accused of being a "socialist"
>
> > > When you use the term "socialism", do you meant socialist ideals or
> > > socialist practice? Indeed, I am a fan of the former. Jesus, Hermes,
> > > Buddha, Mohammed all held ideals which could be deemed "socialist".
> > > Brotherhood, equality etc, what's wrong with that?.
> > > However, socialist practise is a different matter.
>
> > No, it's not a different matter.
>
> > Of your list, only Mohammed offered guidance about how a society
should
> > be governed. He, of the four, was the empire builder.
>
> > Socialism is control of property and means of production by the state.
> > It has nothing to do with "generosity" or "charity." Which is why it
> > always fails--and why it stands diametrically opposed to the teachings
> > of Christ. Hermes doesn't seem to belong to the list at all. Buddha
> > seems to agree with Yeshua that spiritual matters are separate from
the
> > cor****eal world altogether.
>
> > Democratic socialism is nothing more or less than authoritarian or
> > totalitarian rule by the mob. It has nothing in common with most
> > religious ideals.
>
> > --
> > NeoLibertarian
>
> >http://www.elihu.envy.nu/NeoPics/UncleHood.jpg
>
> Thank you for your intelligent reply :)
>
> Socialism (in it's original form) was indeed the taking over of the
> "means of production" by the state. Whereas fascism is the take over
> of the state by the "means of production". Either way, you end up with
> an all-powerful military-industrial complex where the rights of the
> individual citizen are stripped away.
>
> Would you like to live in a world that was free, fair, prosperous and
> peaceful? A world where no-one went without food, shelter or medicine?
> I think most of us would. These are ideals, not ideology.
>
> What I am suggesting is that those with honourable motives, instead of
> trying to rob the rich or force some government system on those who
> don't want it, try to achieve their "socialist" aims by putting more
> into their own relation****ps and communities. The butterfly effect is
> the only way in which utopia could be brought to planet Earth.
If you had to make a choice of which economic system to live under;
which would you choose? Socialism or Capitalism?
|
