[kj] oliver / fox election spin

[GREG SLAWSON]

Once again, Oliver, you've hit the nail on the head. Too bad so many are influenced by misleading 
terms pushed by the press, etc.> Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 14:30:45 -0600> From: bigblackhair at sbcglobal.net> To: gathering at misera.net> Subject: Re: [kj] oliver / fox election spin> > My understanding of socialism is this:> > 1. Government ownership of the means of production.> > If a society has a democratic government, then the government control of > the means of production means poular, democratic control of the means of > production. If he society is totalitarian (like North Korea), the > government ownership is very "centrally planed economy"-style and thus > not democratic.> > A democratic economy, where those who live n the country actually > control it, and make it for them, instead of a privileged few at the > top, has been the long standing goal of the progressive left as I > understand it. You can also have a stateless society where the means of > production and economy are run through workers' unions, community > organizations, and other popular associations.> > In the media and in common, casual parlance, the Eastern Bloc and > countries like Cuba, China, etc., are called "communist," when > technically they are not A lot of this is due to these countries' > totalitaian governments cynically calling themselves "communist" because > communism was a popular idea among the people, so, hey, call yourself a > communist, get popular support, whether you were or are a communist or not.> > North Korea also calls itself a Republic, like the US does. But does > anyone believe they really are a republic? No. But do people really > believe they are communist (when they are not)? Yes. Why? Ideological > reasons, because communism must be associated with all that evil and > wrong, and democracy al that is good. So even though the Union of Soviet > Socialist REPUBLICS claimed just as much to be republican like the US, > US ideologues simply ignored that word and focused laserlike on their > claim to be socialist, preferring to associate that with > totalitarianism. The Nazis also claimed to be socialist. It was a > popular thing to claim to be, to get support, whether one was socialist > or not.> > -Oliver> > > GREG SLAWSON wrote:> > My party (progressive labor party) defines socialism as 2 types:> >> > _______________________________________________> Gathering mailing list> Gathering at misera.net> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
_________________________________________________________________
Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/119462413/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20081107/b14f2c45/attachment.html>