X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:00:09 MET
From:         Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
Organization: Institute of Computer Science, Jagellonian University Cracow
Subject:      Re: Definitions
Comments: To: POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
              18, 93 1:33 pm

Jamie pisze:
>>
>> J:
>> >> Gary did not PUT anything in a definition. It was already there when
>> >> Gary was born.
>>
>> Caius:
>> >Do you suggest Gary is younger than 13?
>>
>> I do not.
>>
>> >WHERE was it already, when Gary was born?
>>
>> In many, many dictionaries, and more important, in public usage.

For example??. Which one?

Some time ago, public was speaking about flat Earth. Do you agree that public
is sometimes wrong?

>> Do YOU suggest that Gary made up his definition?

No, I don't. I suggest the author, Gary is quotting, made up his definitions.


>> Definitions, Caius, do not describe reality.

Really? Are we discussing POLITICS of this world or of Freedonia?

>> So far, though, there is only one disputant in this debate
>> who insists on making up his own definitions, and that is you.

No, all definitions I have presented to you, are not my own. I tried to
show you that those definitions are consistent with the history, and only
reply I recieved was "You are wrong, You are wrong, You are wrong". It
will not convince anybody.

>> >I think most of us will agree with the following definition:
>>
>> >Nazism  : (abbr of National-Socialism)
>> >          the political system in Germany 1933-45
>> >Fascism : (1) the political system in Italy 1922-43
>> >          (2) both nazism and fascism(1)
>>
>> That is not a definition. However, I think most of us will agree
>> that those two regimes were fascist.

If we all agree that those regimes are called fascist, all definitions MUST
be in agreement with the historical evidence. Webster def is not.

>> >After closer examination you will discover:
>>
>> ||fascism(2):Political system in which individual rights are systematically
>> ||      denied in favor of the powers of the government.  Property
>> ||      under facism is officially "owned" by individuals, but it can
>> ||      be taken at any time, and will be, in order to meet State goals.
>>
>>
>> Caius's argument is nearly incomprehensible, but I THINK he
>> is trying to prove something about fascism in general by
>> pointing to a couple of examples. This method is faulty.

The only thing I am going to prove is that fascists were denying basic
individual rights, and therefore calling them "rightist" is inappropriate.

One of them, *property*, is a fundamental of all rightist political systems.
Another one, economic freedom, was impossible under fascist planned economy.
The nominal "owners" were only administrators.

All rightists speak about law and order. In Nazi Germany it was significantly
different: "The law and the will of Fuhrer is the same" ( in oher words :
no law at all)

Morality and justice is a necessary element of all rightis ideologies.
A. Hitler offer "justice of the winner" instead.

Only a couple of examples. But what sort of examples. What else do you want?


>> >Of course you can put <right> or <extreme right> in definition of
>> >fascism, but it will be contradictory with the historical reality.
>>
>> No, it will only be contradictory with *your description* of
>> historical reality.

*My description* is based on the description I have received from the previous
genarations. In various methods: verbal, writing and pictures. What is yours
based on?

>> Again, why does Caius keep saying that Gary or I have PUT something
>> into the definition of "fascism," when both of us have cited
>> our sources? Maybe Caius thinks that Gary and I have a lot of
>> influence at the American Heritage Lexicographical Society?

Someone on this list said 'The word of Bible cannot be taken "literally"'
Why should I take the words of that arbitrarily selected dictionary so
literally. Why that dictionary.

In my dictionary rightist is simply "less government intervention in economy
and/or less social change". If I have two contradictory definitions I prefer to
accept that one, which better fits in reality I can observe.


>> Let's just find out now: Does Caius believe that he knows better
>> how to use the English words "fascism" and "rightist" than
>> the American Heritage Dictionary?

Not me. All Longman dictionaries, for example.

>> >If you want a set of definitions to be usefull, they must be
>> >non-contradictory. Agreed? What the Logic Czar will say?
>>
>> Agreed. But irrelevant.

Irrevelant? I insist two (at least) definitions in your dictionary ARE
contradictory. If you want to convince all of us, you will have to prove
I am wrong.

>>
>> >> I don't know what Caius means by this. "Right" as a portion of
>> >> the political spectrum, means "conservative" or "reactionary."
>> >> (American Heritage Dictionary) I predict Caius will now demand
>> >> a definition of "conservative." "Tending to oppose change; favoring
>> >> traditional views and values."  (Same source.)
>>
>> >Thank you. I basically agree with these definitions. I see now they have
>> >similar meaning all over the world.
>>
>> Hooray. So Caius now agrees: Yeltsin was a leftist, Gorbachev was
>> relatively to the right, and the KGB was far-right.

What? All above are leftist.

All I have told about National-Socialism is also true in case of International-
Socialism (Communism). Those two political systems are nearly the same.

>> >Nazism (national-socialist) is not conservative, and not reactionary.
>> >So it cannot be rightist. Can't you see it?
>>
>> I can't see it, because it isn't true. Val has explained better
>> than I could.
>>
>>
>> >ENOUGH? Is it all you have to say?
>>
>> No, Caius, it isn't all I had to say. I had a great deal more
>> to say, as you very well know.

That small percentage of the "great del more", you have alraedy revealed,
is unsafisfactory to me.

>> Caius? Is that all you have to say?

No, I am ready to continue proving "my" definitions.
>>
>> Jamie
>> ====
>>

Caius
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU