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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (151208)	9/10/2002 12:00:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586653

Tim, this is the last time I will say this. I hope so... With dictatorships, typically, there is not a socialistic, capitalist or communistic economic model instead its most likely to be a hodge podge. In all countries there is a hodge podge. Dictatorships run by one man instead of a party or committee can be less stable in terms of the composition of that hodge podge, but at least after Stalin the USSR was a dictatorship of the communist party not of Kruschev, or Brezhnev or Andropov. Party dictatorships often change less quickly or frequently then democracies. The state does not own Cuba's production facilities, Castro does. He too is a dictator. No the state owns most of them. Of course Castro controls the state so the distinction is not as big as it would be say between government owned facilities in the US and the private property of GW Bush. I showed the link that explained the duplicity of Lenin and Trotsky. 1 - Their duplicity does not mean they didn't call themselves socialists. If I call myself the queen of England then that is what I am calling myself even though I am obviously lying. So despite your contention that they did not they did call themselves socialist. 2 - Yes they where liars and evil men and they distorted Marx's ideas. But they still lead a socialist country. Tim