Merle

[Michael Tee]

<<Well put!
<<What stats provided by Mousoulini do you trust?>>

I've never seen any stats provided by Mussolini so I can't really answer your question.  I don't know which ones I trust and which ones I don't trust.  I believe on the basis of what I've seen in Russia that the longevity stats probably did decline substantially after the fall of communism.  The homelessness, alcoholism, criminality, impoverishment, loss of free medical care, loss of pensions, etc. were all too obvious and were everywhere one looked, affecting everyone one spoke with.  How the hell could any of that have been GOOD for life expectancy?

<<Did the world know how much environmental polution was produced in Asia during the USSR tenure?>>

They polluted the fucking earth.  You think they were the only ones? 

<<What happened to the Aral sea?(one of the worlds great lakes , seems to be missing)>>

They pumped out too much water for crop irrigation and then it went dry.  But maybe we should move on to more current events - - what happened to the Gulf of fucking Mexico?

<<Yes we learned a lot of stuff when the Communists fell to peaces , by the way how did they fall to peaces if everyone was satisfied ?>>

plane, believe it or not, you've finally stumped me.  That's one of the biggest mysteries in the world to me, and one I'd dearly love to read up on and study.  I just don't know.  I think about it a lot.  WTF went wrong?  My tentative conclusions are that it was sabotaged from within by witting or unwitting agents of the U.S. and/or Great Britain.    They were fucked.  Gorbachev was either a fool or a traitor, but it's way bigger than Gorbachev.  I can accept that there were huge flaws in the system, some of them even inherent and unavoidable, but I can't believe that a dream that big was simply allowed to die.  That all of the sacrifices made by all of the Communists over all of those decades were - - overnight - - put to naught by the incredible ass-hole decisions of the "liberalizing" leadership.  This was a fucking disaster, the biggest one of the 20th Century,  the betrayal of years of planning and sacrifice.  How DID they "fall to pieces?"  For me that is the Mystery of the 20th Century.

[Plane]

<<Well put!
<<What stats provided by Mousoulini do you trust?>>

I've never seen any stats provided by Mussolini so I can't really answer your question.  I don't know which ones I trust and which ones I don't trust.  I believe on the basis of what I've seen in Russia that the longevity stats probably did decline substantially after the fall of communism.  The homelessness, alcoholism, criminality, impoverishment, loss of free medical care, loss of pensions, etc. were all too obvious and were everywhere one looked, affecting everyone one spoke with.  How the hell could any of that have been GOOD for life expectancy?

<<Did the world know how much environmental polution was produced in Asia during the USSR tenure?>>

They polluted the fucking earth.  You think they were the only ones? 

<<What happened to the Aral sea?(one of the worlds great lakes , seems to be missing)>>

They pumped out too much water for crop irrigation and then it went dry.  But maybe we should move on to more current events - - what happened to the Gulf of fucking Mexico?

<<Yes we learned a lot of stuff when the Communists fell to peaces , by the way how did they fall to peaces if everyone was satisfied ?>>

plane, believe it or not, you've finally stumped me.  That's one of the biggest mysteries in the world to me, and one I'd dearly love to read up on and study.  I just don't know.  I think about it a lot.  WTF went wrong?  My tentative conclusions are that it was sabotaged from within by witting or unwitting agents of the U.S. and/or Great Britain.    They were fucked.  Gorbachev was either a fool or a traitor, but it's way bigger than Gorbachev.  I can accept that there were huge flaws in the system, some of them even inherent and unavoidable, but I can't believe that a dream that big was simply allowed to die.  That all of the sacrifices made by all of the Communists over all of those decades were - - overnight - - put to naught by the incredible ass-hole decisions of the "liberalizing" leadership.  This was a fucking disaster, the biggest one of the 20th Century,  the betrayal of years of planning and sacrifice.  How DID they "fall to pieces?"  For me that is the Mystery of the 20th Century.

It is only a mystery because you think Adam Smith simple and Karl Marx sophisticated.

If you had understood Smith first, you would have laughed at Marxism.

[Michael Tee]

<<It is only a mystery because you think Adam Smith simple and Karl Marx sophisticated.>>

I'm sure that's the general consensus, but I never had the pleasure of reading either of those gentlemen.

<<If you had understood Smith first, you would have laughed at Marxism.>>

What I know of Marxism makes a lot of sense to me.  I don't see anything to laugh at, and since I've heard just about every single anti-communist argument that there is, I would assume that somewhere, buried in one or more of them, are the basic ideas of Adam Smith.  I found none of them convincing.  To me, communism made the most sense, but it had some problems that I thought of as difficult but not impossible to resolve.  Since Capitalism also has serious problems that I think are difficult but not necessarily impossible to resolve, I chose communism simply because it promised a better and more equitable world for mankind, and was based on love of one's fellow man, whereas capitalism promised eternal struggles of each against all and was based on greed and selfishness.

[Plane]

<<It is only a mystery because you think Adam Smith simple and Karl Marx sophisticated.>>

I'm sure that's the general consensus, but I never had the pleasure of reading either of those gentlemen.

<<If you had understood Smith first, you would have laughed at Marxism.>>

What I know of Marxism makes a lot of sense to me.  I don't see anything to laugh at, and since I've heard just about every single anti-communist argument that there is, I would assume that somewhere, buried in one or more of them, are the basic ideas of Adam Smith.  I found none of them convincing.  To me, communism made the most sense, but it had some problems that I thought of as difficult but not impossible to resolve.  Since Capitalism also has serious problems that I think are difficult but not necessarily impossible to resolve, I chose communism simply because it promised a better and more equitable world for mankind, and was based on love of one's fellow man, whereas capitalism promised eternal struggles of each against all and was based on greed and selfishness.

Although Adam Smith did his writeing too early for it to be considered an answer to Communism , he laid down laws that Communism tried to ignore.

Understanding the reason at the base of the systems ought to be early in the process.

Communism promised pie in the sky did it?

That would make me suspicious right there.

[Michael Tee]

<<Although Adam Smith did his writeing too early for it to be considered an answer to Communism , he laid down laws that Communism tried to ignore.>>

I don't know enough to dispute his "laws," but I guess they probably supply some of the ideas in the anti-Marxist literature.

<<Understanding the reason at the base of the systems ought to be early in the process.>>

That sounds reasonable< but there might be some disagreement over what constitutes "the reason at the base of the systems."

<<Communism promised pie in the sky did it?  That would make me suspicious right there.>>

I don't think that's what it promised.  I think you must have confused Communism with Christianity.  Are you suspicious of Christianity?

[Plane]

<<Although Adam Smith did his writeing too early for it to be considered an answer to Communism , he laid down laws that Communism tried to ignore.>>

I don't know enough to dispute his "laws," but I guess they probably supply some of the ideas in the anti-Marxist literature.

<<Understanding the reason at the base of the systems ought to be early in the process.>>

That sounds reasonable< but there might be some disagreement over what constitutes "the reason at the base of the systems."

<<Communism promised pie in the sky did it?  That would make me suspicious right there.>>

I don't think that's what it promised.  I think you must have confused Communism with Christianity.  Are you suspicious of Christianity?

I love Christianity , but I would not ask you to adopt it on my word , read the relivant scriptures for yourself and try to get the sense of them. I will answer questions as I can , but it is the power of God that opens understanding to scriptures which can be miracculously closed otherwise. Want another thread for that?

Adam Smith wrote nothing in answer to Communism , Marx wasn't published yet. If that doesn't make his writeing clean of anti-communism I don't know what would.

[Michael Tee]

<<I love Christianity , but I would not ask you to adopt it on my word , read the relivant scriptures for yourself and try to get the sense of them. I will answer questions as I can , but it is the power of God that opens understanding to scriptures which can be miracculously closed otherwise. >>

That wasn't a serious question - -  I was kidding you.  You said you were suspicious of Communism because it promised pie in the sky.  That was never one of Communism's promises, but numerous opponents of Christianity had criticized it (Christianity) exactly for its "Pie in the Sky" promises.  In fact there's a popular folk-song poking fun at Christian preachers entitled "There'll be Pie in the Sky When You Die (It's a Lie!")   So I took advantage of the confusion to ask if you also were suspicious of Christianity because it promised Pie in the Sky, just like you thought Communism did.

<<Want another thread for that?>>

No, that was just a joke on my part, it's not worth a whole thread.  If it had been a better joke, I wouldn't have had to explain it.

<<Adam Smith wrote nothing in answer to Communism , Marx wasn't published yet. If that doesn't make his writeing clean of anti-communism I don't know what would.>>

I didn't claim that Adam Smith wrote anti-communist stuff, only that some of the stuff he wrote has probably found its way into the arguments of the anti-communists who came after both Smith and Marx.

[Plane]

The truth has a definate anti-comunist bias .

[Michael Tee]

<<The truth has a definate anti-comunist bias .>>

The class war IS the truth.

[Plane]

<<The truth has a definate anti-comunist bias .>>

The class war IS the truth.

Oh are we in diffrent classes?

I havent asked before , because I havent cared.

I still don't really if you don't tell me about your caste I will continue to assume its unimportance.

What class is our President ?

What power has the English house of Lords?

Class struggle was almost over when Marx was a young man.

[Michael Tee]

<<Oh are we in diffrent classes?>>

No, you and the Du Ponts are in the same class as all the rest of America.  Haven't you noticed all the similarities?  Why I bet both of you enjoy a glass of cold beer on a hot summer day, don't you?  Earn your living the same way?  Go to the same schools?  Vacation in the same places?   Who the hell would ever think you're in different classes?

<<I havent asked before , because I havent cared.>>

Naturally, which is why you are a wage slave and they are not.

<<I still don't really if you don't tell me about your caste I will continue to assume its unimportance.>>

Well, in a nutshell, that is exactly how the ruling class continues to rule.  Nobody gives a shit.

<<What class is our President ?>>

bourgeois.  middle class.

<<What power has the English house of Lords?>>

I dunno, next time you encounter one of them working next to you at the aircraft factory, why don't you ask him yourself?

<<Class struggle was almost over when Marx was a young man.>>

Preposterous. 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Many members of the House of Lords have economic power through their holdings in British industry.

There is no class struggle. Bah!
Any time you hear that corporations should pay no taxes whatever, that is the oligarchy launching another shell in the class struggle.

Any time you hear anyone advocating the "Fair Tax" or the "Flat Tax", this is the same thing.

The financial wealth (ie assets that control corporations) has become concentrated in a smaller and smaller number of hands in the US since the Reagan years.That is the class struggle taking place. When Wal*Mart refuses to recognize any union representation of their underpaid workers, that is the class struggle.

[Plane]

  I think that the reason the rich do not hang with you is your attitude , you might punch them .

    I grew up with some rich kids , their dad was plain folks and so are they , mostly.

    Sure I was tenant and they were owner but kids don't make this distinction.

   

       One of these rich kids I knew became a rageing liberal , married a French Diplomat and lives in Mexico working for the Mexican antiquities department.
   I remember her very fondly because when I was four she would read to me, that is the kind of thing that connects , curse all things that promote schism and jelosy.

   

[Michael Tee]

When you're a kid the class differences are less pronounced on a kid-to-kid basis.  I grew up in pretty comfortable circumstances, but some of the kids I went to school with were super-rich.  You'd never know it from their appearance, in fact one with whom I later became good friends impressed me originally as poor, from "the wrong side of the tracks" because of his unkempt appearance, tough-guy attitude and torn old sneakers, etc.  He turned out to live in a very big home with a live-in cook, maid and chauffeur.

The fact is that the class war divisions are much more apparent among adults than among children.  The fact remains, plane, despite your childhood associations, for the most part you don't belong to the same clubs and organizations, you don't work in the same factory, you don't vacation in the same places, you don't shop in the same stores, you don't drink the same booze, you don't attend the same weddings and funerals and unless you live in a very small town, you probably don't even go to the same church.  Your kids don't go to the same schools unless you live in a very small town and for sure they won't go to the same universities (unless your kid wins a full scholarship.)

[BT]

The fact is that the class war divisions are much more apparent among adults than among children.  The fact remains, plane, despite your childhood associations, for the most part you don't belong to the same clubs and organizations, you don't work in the same factory, you don't vacation in the same places, you don't shop in the same stores, you don't drink the same booze, you don't attend the same weddings and funerals and unless you live in a very small town, you probably don't even go to the same church.  Your kids don't go to the same schools unless you live in a very small town and for sure they won't go to the same universities (unless your kid wins a full scholarship.)

And that is a problem because?