Re: Australian pinko communists

Michael S. Lorrey (
Sat, 21 Aug 1999 18:31:54 -0400

Patrick Wilken wrote:
> > Mike:
> >
> >It is more fascinating listening to people in a country whose relative
> >standard of living continues to drop rubbishing a country that is inventing
> >the future. It is particularly true in our area of Psychology, don't you
> >think?
> I assume you are somehow suggesting that I have in someway been rubbishing
> the US. I was not aware that I had done so. I in fact love many aspects of
> the States and travel there regularly. I spent time in Caltech, Berkeley
> and Harvard in January. No doubt a large part of the future is being
> created in North America (though don't forget Europe, and smaller pockets
> elsewhere). However if I want to criticise I certainly will.

Good for you, just don't misattribute to me things that are said by your own countryman, Timothy Bates...

To the extent that any part of the future is being created outside the US, it is typically in those areas where other nations have become Americanized (not cracks about MacDonalds cheeseburgers)... Only a hard line Communist would continue to argue that it is not chiefly the Pax Americana which has engendered the current state of things.

> Yes. Academic psychology has fallen on hard times here in Australia. But
> its because money has been taken away from education by the government. Our
> "socialist" government no longer wants to spend the same amounts of money
> on education (and research in general is an even lower priority).

Education is not research. All of your nationalized businesses together spend less on R&D than Microsoft.

> Personally I find it very difficult to argue with the basic fact that the
> Australian public does not value basic research (at least non-medical) so
> why should it be forced to fund it? I am all for reduced taxes and
> therefore reduced spending. Unfortunately only the latter seems to apply.
> But you can hardly argue that the government in the States doesn't spend
> large amounts of money on research. Isn't that a pretty socialist thing to
> do?

Corporate research has far oustripped government research, as the current new economy has educated them to the value of it. Nationalized businesses in other countries are being gutted of basic research in order to fund the baby boomer choke point of the welfare trough.

> >Pat, do you know what Nazi is an acronym of?
> > National SOCIALIST Party.
> >That is the name which Hitler chose: he may be a qualified judge, no?
> To be honest I wouldn't buy a used car from Hitler. I certainly wouldn't
> swallow anything he claimed publically about the Nazi Party. Spectemur
> Agendo: By our actions we shall be known. If you can't distinguish between
> a fascist and a socialist you are either highly enlightened or not all.
> Either way this conversation is not going anywhere.

fascist: one who beleives that the will and needs of the state as a whole is paramount.
socialist: one who beleives the will and needs of society as a whole
is paramount.

The only difference is the fascist is more of a realist in acknowledging that in a centralized society, the state is the society. The socialist continues to lie to himself and others on this point....until they have successfully stripped the individual of all rights and power. Note how Musssolini and Franco, the fascists, were allied with Hitler the socialist, and how easily Hitler made peace with his Communist counterpart, Stalin, and used his socialist puppets, Le Pen and Quisling.

And I do consider myself highly enlightened, thank you...

Mike Lorrey