From: Mike Lorrey (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 06:54:27 MST
Samantha Atkins wrote:
> Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
> > In a message dated 2/6/02 4:42:09 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> > email@example.com writes: For types of progress requiring more
> > concentrated energy/material resources and greater organization it is
> > not automatically given that these can only occur under capitalism.
> > Samantha,
> > If I understand you correctly you are right -- under various
> > dictatorships "progress requiring more concentrated energy/material
> > resources and greater organization" has been made. However I believe
> > all of these todate have eventually collapsed of their own weight, in
> > the long run slowing progress. Or, did I misunderstand you?
> > Ron h.
> Are you imply dictatorships are the only alternative to
> capitalism or what dresses itself up in that name today?
Any society that doen't recognise the sanctity of private property, of
the individual's right to the fruit of their own labor (and what may be
earned by investing the savings of that), is quite rightly called a
dictatorship. Anything that isn't capitalism is tyranny.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:38 MST