SI
SI
discoversearch

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: TimF who wrote (325999)2/16/2007 7:09:40 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578020
 
Now society is 100% socialist, so all real societies have some idea of personal property.

In the case detailed in that link, moving from collective ownership of a particular type of property, to private ownership was highly beneficial and was good environmental policy. And its not just trees in Niger. If people have a stake in something they are less likely to destroy it.


In socialist societies, people own property. In a communist society, everything is owned by everyone. Many of the kibbutzim in Israel operate as communist societies. Everyone in the kibbutz votes on everything that happens to every tree and everything else on the land that that particular kibbutz controls. I am unclear where you got the notion that people don't have a vested interest in those societies.

As for Niger, I am unclear what kind of economy it had but if it has been a communist society the gov't could not have restricted the use of trees without the approval of the people. Capitalists in this country have twisted and confused what it means to have a socialist society or a communist one. Often they use the two terms interchangeably when their meanings are fairly different. They behave not unlike the flat worlders of several hundred years ago who would try to scare the bejezus out of the people who believed the earth might be round by telling them they would fall off into to the abyss if they tried to sail around the earth. Its getting very old.

I suppose there is a reason to have reactionary people within a society but I have yet to figure out what that reason is. ;-)



To: TimF who wrote (325999)2/16/2007 7:38:37 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 1578020
 
Correction to the post I'm replying to -

It should be "No society is 100% socialist" not "Now society is 100% socialist"