>
> Well I guess I'd like to be told of a socialist state that's working. Cuba
> maybe?

But what exactly do you mean by "working"? No socialist ever claimed that
Socialism can compete successfully against Capitalism in the international
economic arena, where no rules (apart from 'Might is Right' and 'Money is
Power') are in existence - i.e. an arena favourable to RICH capitalist
economies.

> (I didn't mean to imply that the Soviet bloc represented all socialist
> states - I just used it as an example.) I was also referring to the several
> countries my students come from - Russia, former Yugoslavia, Ukraine,
> Poland, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, central America, etc. And not one of them
> - not one of hundreds in my experience - will defend socialism, and will
> even howl me down if I try and portray it is a viable alternative.

        Presumably they were angry at the totalitarian nature of their
state, the corruption and the lack of democracy. As I said before, this is
not the fault of Socialism.

> Morally? Not a relevant issue for me. Global migration tells its own story -
> and it's virtually one way traffic. People are not moving in droves towards
> socialist lands, but the opposite is definitely true.

Now that most countries in this world have capitalist economies, has this
movement stopped? It's not a movement from Socialist countries to
Capitalist countries, it is a movement from poor countries to rich
countries. Now, the question is why are the poor countries getting poorer
(in some cases not just in relative terms)?

> Yes very much aware. And yes the global reach of capitalism ensures a pool
> of poverty. And yes, the non-white third world matters very much. But what
> is the non-white third world? When I first visited Singapore and Malaysia 20
> years ago these countries belonged in this category. Now people from these
> countries come here (Australia) to do their bargain shopping. The wheel has
> turned. And maybe they got there by embracing capitalism?

True, but keeping in mind that there will always be a 'pool of pverty'

(a) what solace is this for the many countries that might never make it?
(b) why not think of another solution?

While I agree that a Socialist utopia such as that envisaged by Marx, is
unattainable, there is a great deal that can be done to help a great
number of poeple by combatting the current vesion of Capitalism. Even
imposing (any ideas how?) 'free trade' on the richer economies would be a
step in the right direction, from the point of view of at least some of
the poorer states.

Peace,
Ihab