Harry -

Interesting technique...want to take your marbles home and not play
anymore? Jeeezzz...
I didn't promote or say that any "ism" was better than any other...all I
did was 1.) try to put your remarks into historical perspective and 2.) ask
for a definition of terms instead of trying to guess what you meant.

----------
> From: Harry Veeder <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CHOMSKY] socialist unions
> Date: Tuesday, May 20, 1997 5:56 PM
>
> In response to your whole post...GET REAL.
>
> I am so sick tired of every god damn "ism" there is. I am sick of hearing
> how such and such an "ism" is better than that "ism", this "ism" works
and
> that "ism" is a failure, this "ism" means freedom that "ism" implies
> servitude or oppression.
>
> I must be a fool to enter and promote such a silly war of ideas. I also
> don't believe the "rational" creed, which says that waring with ideas
> saves or protects humanity from real violence.
>
> GAME OVER!
>
> Harry Veeder
>
>
>  Sun, 18 May 1997, DDeBar wrote:
>
> > Please excuse me for repeating the string - it's not too long, and it
was
> > easier to do it this way on this one.
> >
> > - Don DeBar
> >
> > ----------
> > > From: Harry Veeder <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: [CHOMSKY] socialist unions
> > > Date: Saturday, May 17, 1997 2:33 PM
> > >
> > > On Sat, 17 May 1997, Michael Coghlan wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would have thought that it was abundantly clear - and again this
is
> > not
> > > > from a theoretical standpoint - that socialism has failed in
practice
> > and
> > > > that capitalist societies have shown themselves to be remarkably
> > resilient
> > > > in providing comparatively better lives for their citizens. People
can
> > > > debate the advantages of one against the other on a theoretical
level,
> > but
> > > > in practice the answer is clear. Socialism has failed.
> >
> > What has been demonstrated is that a country or bloc, regardless of
it's
> > composition or mode of social, economic, or political organization, can
be
> > successfully frozen out of the world economy and, if the material base
of
> > the said country or bloc is devastated by invasion and occupation, and
> > reconstruction is forced to occur under the threat of atomic, and then
> > nuclear, annihilation and in such isolation, a decisive advantage can
be
> > had.
> >
> > > What went on in Russia for 70 years wasn't real socialism! It was
really
> > > state capitalism.
> >
> > I have heard this claim many times, yet have never really been given
the
> > definition of "state capitalism"  required to evaluate the veracity or
> > accuracy thereof. Please provide one...
> >
> > > In a competitive world state capitalism will always
> > > fail. That is all that has been demonstrated.
> >
> > ?!!
> >
> > > Capitalism tends to measure "success" according to external
> > > criteria, ie. the failure of OTHERS. Capitalist communities have
> > difficulty
> > > confronting and admitting internal failure.
> > >
> > >
> > > Socialism, as a philosophy, is just the right of the worker, to
> > > have some say in the decision making over his choosen vocation.
> >
> > If  I am not mistaken, Socialism is an economic system distinguished by
> > advanced development and the public, or social, ownership of the means
of
> > production. "Socialism, as a philosophy...", then, is a philosophy that
> > sheds illumination on the subject and/or it's implications for the
> > development of humanity.
> >
> > >  Contrary to popular belief, socialism can be intertwined with
capitalism
> > without
> > > canceling capitalism.
> >
> > I don't know WHAT you are talking about here...
> >
> > > That is the challenge facing today's unionism.
> >
> > I disagree. Look at the history of the trade union movement here and in
the
> > west, particularly in the UK.
> >
> > > Harry
> >