From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Jul 30 2003 - 23:30:13 MDT
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:
> and then to Rafal:
>
> >Do you think that you might have been a follower of Lenin in
> >the early days?
Rafal may be better qualified to comment on this than I...
but... The problem was not Lenin so much as Stalin.
Having seen first hand what the Russian "collective"
society was capable of (e.g. the Moscow subways, the
defeat of Hitler's armies, the reliable space program
and rocket engines we (in the U.S.) use even today
(as Spike admits)) -- the question seems to come back
to "what does one get?" and "what does it cost you?"
The question I would like to ask is "How much of what
Russia achieved in so short a span of time could have
been achieved without Stalin or Lenin?" [1]
Robert
1. It is worth understanding that Russia went from essentially
a feudal state to a superpower in less than 100 years.
Estimates of the combination and Stalin and Hitler on
Russia range from 10 to 100 million lives lost. One has
to wonder what might have been accomplished without the
unextropic vector (but under a similar "command" economy)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 30 2003 - 23:38:12 MDT