I'm working on a more comprehensive rebuttal, but first, I want to say that the entire premise of socialism is based on violence directed at the individual. When a government steals money earned by a worker, it is practicing a form of violence.
Remember, if a worker resists the government's demand for his money, he will be met with violence.
Do you refute this? If so, please explain how taxation is nonviolent. If you don't refute this, please explain how government mandated violence against individuals fits in with Extropian principles.
---Samael <Samael@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> I'm forwarding this to a fiew friends as well for opinions.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry Donaghe <email@example.com>
> >Amen! I would love to see a rational defense of socialism by some of
> >our collectivist associates. I posit that it can't be done
> >Any takers?
> Any defense of socialism I would mount would have to take into
> basic assumptions:
> 1) Human nature is such that all people try to benifit themselves
(and to a
> lesser extent their friends/relatives) as much as possible.
> 2) 'Property' does not actually exist and is merely a way of saying
> you access to this'.
> 3) Sufficient social/monetary inequality leads to social disruption.
> Communists tend to forget point (1) and focus on point (2).
> Capitalists tend to forget point (2) and focus on point (1)
> (3) tends to cause problems in capitalist societies on an internal
> the UK, under more capitalist policies the percentage difference
> rich and the poor went up by about 7% over the 10 years the
> party was in power. This caused large amounts of social unrest,
> demonstrations and the biggest landslide in living history for their
> opposition party).
> (3) tends to cause problems for communist societies on an external
> (When the Soviet Republics realised how much better of Western
> they revolted.)
> A fourth point is sometimes useful to remember.
> (4) Homo Sapiens is a pack animal that naturally speaking has a
> People are most comfortable with a chain of command. They like to
> the chain of command listens to them and considers their feelings
> it is looking out for them. It is a mistake to indulge this too
> it is worth bearing in mind.
> Having shown that both Communist and Capitalist societies tend to
> about one of (1) or (2) thus causing (3), I would say that it makes
> mix them sluightly, taking into account of both (1) and (2) which
> My preferred method of socialism would be to provide free Gealth
Care (of a
> standard necessary to get people back to work) and enough of a
> allow people to survive. This handout should _not_ be means tested
> drops as they start earning here is less incentive to start
> Education will also be provided (education leads to raised output
> GNP's as well as lowering reproduction), but not in the current form
> has been pointed out most current education sucks.
> I look forward to hearing objections.
The Millennium Bookshelf: <http://www.donaghe.com/mbookshelf.htm>