"Benjamin Lee" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
>
> > >
> >
> > You cannot dismiss the US side of the Cold War as a mere phobia or an
> > irrational fear. FromWWII to the 60's the USSR gained in military power
> to
> > the point that the US couldn't defeat them on the battlefield (Western
> > Europe) except to use nuclear weapons. The Soviets were so aggressive
at
> > the time that our good friend Charles de Gaul pleaded with the US to
> promise
> > to use nukes as a first strike if the Soviets invaded Europe.
>
> The French are a weird bunch. They were thinking of using nuclear weapons
in
> Vietnam too.
>
The point is that the Soviets were so aggressive it scared everyone. Even
the French. Kennedy felt that nuclear war with the Soviets was inevitable.
They were practically daring us to use nukes, because they didn't think we
had the guts to use them and knew they outgunned us otherwise. The Soviets
showed very little restraint in pushing for revolution in third world
countries worldwide.
People mock the US for believing in the domino theory. But, the Soviets
themselves gave everyone every reason to believe in it. So to dismiss US
policy as centered on a "phobia" of Communism is trite and shows a complete
lack of understanding of the times.
> >
> > Communism doesn't work and can only persist by force. It stifles the
> > creation of wealth and in the end everyone is equally poor and miserable
> > except for a few connected to the party elite. The Soviets made no
secret
> > of their intent to bring about revolution in the 3rd world: Southeast
> Asia,
> > Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East and Africa. They made
no
> > secret of their intent to retake West Berlin. Phobia not required to be
> > worried.
> >
> >
>
> Communism is a economic system. It should have nothing to do with how a
> nation is governed.
>
Wrong. The means of production is owned by the government. The economy and
the government are one. Property is owned by the government. Wages are
paid by the government. People who seek to enrich themselves above others
are punished by the government.
> A socialist country can be democratic like Norway. A
> capitalist society can be a totalitarian society. Witness current China or
> what it tries to become.
If Socialism is the means of production owned or controlled by the workers,
then I'm not so sure the nordic countries qualify because corporations and
business are privately held. However, they do highly tax themselves and
provide cradle to grave services. It's a choice they make. The profit
motive is still there, dampened by high taxes. You can also bet there is an
active and thriving secondary economy to get around the high taxes.
> Soviet Union was not democratic not because of communism. It was because
> they did not have a man named George Washington during the revolution.
> America is democratic not because we embrace capitalism, but because
George
> Washington relinquish his power to let the people rule themselves.
>
Democracy always flourishes in at least one form inside Communist countries.
People flee.
You may be able to separate Communism and the police state in your mind, but
they go hand in hand.
> The US government was using a single example, the Soviet Union, to
> illustrate how communism means totalitarianism. Part of the problem was
that
> the general public can only understand simple concepts
Cambodia, North Korea, Albania, Eastern Europe, Cuba, USSR, China, etc. No
the public is quite informed of how Communism and the police state go hand
in hand. I can't think of an example to the contrary.
> By the way, the US
> is quite socialistic today with our minimum wage, labor unions, health
care
> and wellfare. We in a way are turning into an example of socialistic
> democracy. The ultimate goal of any labor unions is to do nothing all day
> while making the same wage as the CEO.
Be careful how you throw the world "socialistic" around. A society that
chooses to tax itself to this degree is not socialistic. That happens when
benefits become rights and society can't vote to untax itself.
> That sure sounds like communism.
> A popular misconception is that socialism equals misery. We have enough
> production capability for everyone to live a comfortable life while
working
> half the time we are now. All it takes is for the rich to share their
wealth
> with the rest of us.
That's the mistake socialists always make. The presumption that wealth is a
constant and must be redistributed equally to be fair. If the profit motive
is killed by taxing too high, production diminishes, unemployment rises, or
underground markets emerge.
> If everyone made about the same wage, we would all be
> pretty comfortable
Who do you think would be paying this equal wage?
> With such a large underclass in America, the gradual
> trend towards socialism may be inevitable. All it takes is for them to
> realize they have voting power too, or somebody to motivate them.
>
>
Where've you been? Under a rock? The so called underclass isn't so large
as you think it is. It's the middle class who's votes carry the most
weight.
