From: cdwilde@babbage.waterloo.edu (Chris Wilde)
Subject: Re: Goddam Commies n Capitalist Pigs
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:13:26 GMT

In article <5Z4JoB6w165w@korova>, jbs@korova (jacques) writes:
> Does it help to define capitalism, communism, socialism, etc., as 
> activities or types of behavior we take up as the situation demands? It 
> seems that you otherwise risk making the above into idols to be slavishly 
> worshipped and sacrificed (heretics) to. Evolution seems to have favored 
> us for competing and sharing by turns.


Capitalism and communism are idealistic concepts, and as such may only be
simulated by reality.  Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages,
and when looked at from certain viewpoints are 'perfect'.  When implemented,
the disadvantages of both cause their downfall.
For instance, Communism's downfall in the USSR can be directly linked with
their economy.  Why was their economy in such shambles?  Nobody had the
motivation to work at their maximum efficiency.  This is thanks directly
to the constant value paycheck:  since the workers were being paid whether
they worked hard or not, the workers slacked off becoming increasingly
unproductive.
The alternate side of the coin is the threatening of the Capitalist system
in the USA.  The 'survival of the fittest' attitude is failing as those
who begin disadvantaged find it increasingly hard to work their way up.
This goes equally for the ghettos and the farms.  The lack of a helping
hand serves to keep people locked in a downward spiral that must be
rectified.  Yet, the average American is not interested in seeing her/his
paycheck further diminished to help the unfortunate.  The result is what
occured several months ago in various US cities, specifically, riots and
eventually armed revolution.
Socialism is the entire range of the democratic systems (with communsism
(which is a democratic government, since it is also a rule by the people
system) at one end and capitalism at the other).  Various governments
place in different positions on the socialist scale.  Typically the US
would place at near (but not on) the right edge, while Yugoslavia would
have placed far to the left (5 years ago).  Currently Canada may be a
little right of centre (though it is technically a dictatorship (rule by
head of state, in this case the Queen) I am placing it with respect to its
socialist policies).
The other form of government is Dictatorship.  This includes Monarchy as
a sub-type.  This is simply rule by a non-elected individual.  This makes
Canada, Britain, and Australia technically democracies since the Queen may
veto any legislation at her leisure without explanation (the Govenor-
General of Canada acts in her name).  Here in Canada, all government lands
are owned by "the Queen of Canada", and criminal prosecution is done as
"the Queen vs. (name of suspect)" not "the people vs.".  Now, it is
possible in many cases, like Canada, the UK, etc. to place the country on
the socialist graph, however, an oppressive dictatorship like that in
Haiti may not be able to be placed properly.  It could, of course, be
viewed as a pure Capitalistic society, a true "survival of the fittest",
but I feel uncomfortable with that.

So finally, no, the definitions of Capitalism, Communism, Socialism, and
Dictatorship are not subject to activities or types of behavior.  A policy
is Socialist or not according to its merits, and has no relation to the
situation it is intended to solve or cause.
As for worshipping a system of government, the idea is absurd.  It is
possible to be overly supportive, but worship implies godhood, and I
don't think anybody truly wants to worship a politician (though some
come close).

cdwilde@sunee.waterloo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution