XPost: alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics.socialism, alt.politics.usa   
   XPost: alt.politics   
   From: mars1933@hotmail.com   
      
   On 14 Jun 2006 03:49:04 -0700, "Propaganews"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   >You really like arithmatic, it seems.   
   >   
   >A gut feeling?  It is not a word that becomes associated with the   
   >intuited insights like the concepts, of mommy or daddy when first   
   >coming into cognition.  One cannot have a gut feeling about   
   >"capitalism" until one begins to understand the teachings one is being   
   >exposed to.   
      
     Or when one sees that the jobs are being outsourced because more   
   profits can be made in India and Mexico.   
      
   >  In all the world's history, in all the trades, in all the   
   >times, whether cave man or space man, there has been "capitalism".   
      
    But starting with the Industrial Revolution it was found that the   
   value of humans in the supply and demand system was not very high. The   
   problem was that the machines and technologies only benefited the   
   business owners and not all the people.   
      
   >There has been no word to describe the manner in which people commerce   
   >their trades, until communists came along needing one to overcome.   
      
   This is what capitalists believe:   
      
   1. There should be private property.   
      
     That is like saying 2 + 2 = 4   
      
   2. There should be free enterprise with a profit incentive.   
      
     That is like saying 3 + 3 = 6   
      
   3. There should be no laws restricting greed.   
      
      That is like saying 4 + 4 = 17   
      
      If you disagree with the third one they can't hear you or   
   understand you. They think you are disagreeing with the first two.   
      
   >They don't want people to commerce their trades.  They want to control   
   >the commerce for all people, so that trades exist only between   
   >themselves, the state, and other states. Where that leaves materialism,   
   >is that they have all the materials, and the people have only what they   
   >are given.   
   >   
   >   
   >This concept of equality being a reason for arguing one system of   
   >freedom against a different system of slavery,   
      
     We should have good leadership whether anarchists or libertarians   
   like it or not. For example there was leadership on the Star Ship   
   Enterprise, Captain Kirk was the leader. According to anarchists that   
   makes everyone else on the ship slaves, but anarchy is what would make   
   the ship really bad to live on.   
      
   > is one that is the most   
   >confusing kind of hyperbole I have ever seen. Yes, people are not built   
   >the same as others.  But, equality of rights is the same. What does   
   >someone being equal in ability to another have to do with capitalism?   
      
     It's true that Capitalism is "fair". Consider the guy who invented   
   the car and all the millions of people who benefit from that who don't   
   know the first thing mechanics. In America something like 2% of the   
   people have 95% of the wealth or whatever. I forget the actual   
   figures. Some of this was dishonest, but much of it was from producing   
   things, like microsoft software.   
      
      People who start businesses and create things are in fact superior   
   In all fairness there should be the few very rich and the many very   
   poor and that is what capitalism produces. But here is the point -   
   what good does it do them to have billions of dollars? What more can   
   they own or do, than if they merely had millions of dollars?  Compare   
   that to the difference between having enough to afford shelter and   
   being out in the street. The guy who invented the car did a lot to   
   make things better for people. Replacing capitalism would also make   
   things better for people.   
      
     Capitalists don't agree that they are greedy. They say a person can   
   take their job for $5 an hour or they will find someone else to take   
   the job. It doesn't matter if they are making billions of dollars.   
   It's all perfectly fair in their minds. And they are totally against   
   "big government" doing anything to stop them. We can put an end to   
   their pathetic ideas without having any nonsense ideas like Communism.   
   Obviously we should have private property. And viewing business   
   leaders as enemies is also ridiculous. But capitalism is a horrible   
   idea and should go as extinct as the dinosaurs. In the future we have   
   should advanced economics designed to make things good for people.   
      
      
   >Do you really suppose that this has some kind of meaning, some   
   >relevancy, or are you convinced of something that you have not taken   
   >apart for all its particles?   
      
     It has meaning. If you don't understand it I am not too surprised.   
      
   > Why should people be equal in business,   
      
    They are not and once we scrap capitalism that will not be a problem.   
      
   >and why does everyone being equal in business make capitalism work?   
      
      Few would be working for ten cents an hour if they were all equal   
   in business.   
      
   >Capitalism is the only word that does not have a real meaning other   
   >than what the communists gave to it.  But if one is to argue against   
   >the communists   
      
     When you see a communist it would be appropriate to argue against   
   it. But you are understandable. Bringing up Communism is the only   
   possible way to make Capitalism look good by comparison. So you have   
   little choice.   
      
      
   > one must come up with a definition that gets at the   
   >substance of the real issues.   
   >   
   >Therefore, one must come to the fact that capitalism is the only system   
   >of commercing trades that has ever existed between able traders for all   
   >of human history.   
      
    Absolutely false.   
      
    "We stand for the maintenance of private property...We shall protect   
   free enterprise as the  most expedient, or rather the sole possible   
   economic order." - Adolf Hitler   
      
        Here are some quotes from Hitler's speech on January 27, 1932, at   
   Dusseldorf:   
      
    IF TODAY the National Socialist Movement is regarded amongst   
   widespread circles in Germany as being hostile to our business life, I   
   believe the reason for this view is to be found in the fact that we   
   adopted towards the events which determined the development leading to   
   our present position an attitude which differed from that of all the   
   other organizations which are of any importance in our public life.   
   Even now our outlook differs in many points from that of our   
   opponents....   
      
    There are indeed especially two other closely related factors which   
   we can time and again trace in periods of national decline: the one is   
   that for the conception of the value of personality there is   
   substituted a levelling idea of the supremacy of mere numbers -   
   democracy - and the other is the negation of the value of a people,   
   the denial of any difference in the inborn capacity, the achievement,   
   etc., of individual peoples. Thus both factors condition one another   
   or at least influence each other in the course of their development.   
   Internationalism and democracy are inseparable conceptions. It is but   
   logical that democracy, which within a people denies the special value   
   of the individual and puts in its place a value which represents the   
   sum of all individualities - a purely numerical value - should proceed   
   in precisely the same way in the life of peoples and should in that   
   sphere result in internationalism. Broadly it is maintained: peoples   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)