>From: "zeb haradon" <zebharadon@hotmail.com>
>From: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers@hotmail.com>
>>Actually I was thinking more of a society of people enlightened enough to
>>realize that what's good for the whole is good for the individual.
>
>If people were enlightened enough to realize that, wouldn't they be
>enlightened enough to be prosperous in a free society? Aren't you saying
>the
>only society in which communism would work would be one where it is not
>needed? (I'm of the opinion that the best thing about communism is that it
>doesn't work)
"Enlightenment" is not synonymous with "business acumen." Think of W.R.
Hearst, Rothschilds, J.P. Moran, Rockefeller, Bill Gates. To they strike
you as "enlightened" individuals?
>>It's simply a matter of realizing that the surest way to keep your
>>neighbor
>>from stealing your bread is to be sure that he has enough to
>>keep his own belly full. I call it "enlightened self-interest."
>
>The surest way to prevent someone from stealing from you is to set up a
>government which will steal for you for him?
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is
stealing?
>Either way, you're left with
>the same amount.
>It's much more to your self interest to live in a society where someone who
>steals from you is considered a criminal, because you are allowed to defend
>yourself against him, and he can go to jail. In either case, the result is
>that there are less people among the populace who are going to steal from
>others.
The recent dip in the national crime statistics notwithstanding, it doesn't
seem to me that capitalism has been very effective at discouraging theft.
>Ensuring that your neighbor has enough bread to keep his belly full is his
>resposibility, not yours.
All that says is that we currently live in a capitalistic society. To which
I can only agree.
>He would have more options available to help him
>meet this need under capitalism.
Communism says "to each according to his *need*." Capitalism says "to each
according to his luck and ability." This alone would lead me to believe
that you'd have a much better chance of having your "needs" met in an
optimally communistic society.
>>Unfortunately such a society is unlikely to be stable for long as long as
>>there is not enough to go around for *everyone*. But hopefully that minor
>>problem will soon be solved by the good folks over at Foresight :)
This part of my post you didn't respond to, and this is the most important
part of what I said.
-Zero
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
--Thomas Jefferson
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:17 MDT