Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (3020)	11/1/2000 1:45:26 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

<<Socialism would deny original sin, as it believes that people are inherently good.>> I made that point, too-- "original unsin" is the socialist belief about human nature. If any measures taken by the state to address social bad luck or inequities are taken to be socialist, then the tenets of socialism have certainly proven their worth in many societies. I think it's just what the far right wants the understanding to be, as a means of associating even modest welfare policies with the horrors of the regimes characterized by full-blown social ownership a la Russia and North Korea. The classical definition of socialism one learns in college is social ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Britain in the 50's now does seem to be what most people seem to mean, now, when they talk about socialism. It was a limited program-- nationalization of various services and industries, but capitalism remained the dominant economic system. And if the press is privately owned, as it was in Britain (but wouldn't be, presumably, under a completely socialist system), and there are free elections that can bring about reversion to privatization, that helps keep socialism under healthy scrutiny and allows for voting it out, as the Brits did.