Don’t fret about the regatta, listener; it was obviously a joke. And as for Bernie being [GASP!] a socialist, only a very few lunatic fringe politicians are not. Consider a single example: the military. Everybody pays to support the national military forces, like it or not; that’s pure socialism. Does any sane person think we should go back to making war with feudal levies? That is about the only alternative. In fact, that IS the only alternative I can think of. We don’t even have to consider schools, sanitation, old age pensions, or health care—all necessary to provide a good workforce to support the military. Socialism (at least by the early, general definition) is not incompatible with nationalism, imperialism or capitalism—or human decency, either.
Absolutely! Far from being a dirty word,Socialism is the necessary framework of modern, enlightened civilization. To add to your list, it is also compatible with Christianity. What else are, say, the Franciscans if not radically socialist? But people just refuse to see it. They insist that Socialism is synonymous with Communism. So, you have to explain that, first, it isn't and, second, the dictatorial totalitarianism that called itself Communism actually bore very little resemblance to true communism. By that time, their eyes have glazed over and you realize that it's a losing battle.
Please explain to me why that is. Why is it so difficult to understand that what the Soviet Union became was no more representative of true communism, much less socialism, than the excesses of the Inquisition were representative of true Catholicism? Are people really that stupid? Don't answer that. I know they are. My dad is a very bright man, and yet he's scared to death of the specter of Socialism. He, who lived in Navy housing, was cared for in Navy hospitals by Navy doctors and nurses, shopped at Navy commissaries and exchanges and receives a Navy pension. He honestly cannot see that that is Socialism.
Well spoken, Cat! Wow! Even I hadn't thought of it that way.
I hear you about the Franciscans and the difference between Inquisiiton and Catholicism. It's the difference between extremists of any stripe and the Life and True Essence of the tradition they have warped out of all recognition.
"Marxism-Leninism," I have read and reasonably suppose (but have not yet verified) has little to do with either Marx or Lenin, and would be more accurately described as "Stalinism." Hmmmmm...... I recall when it was verboten for....who? a Secretary of the Treasury in the Nixon administration?... to use the word "recession" and substituted the word "banana" in his testimony at a congressional hearing. Do we need to do something similar with "socialism?" BTW, I had reason to read up on the Social Credit movement. I don't know enough about economics to evaluate it, but it sure is interesting. Now back to my work simulation--dinner break is over. --Alan
Alfred E. Kahn! [Click] Breezily, too, he winged his way in government. He was an academic, after all; he had nothing to lose, so he would speak his mind. Asked once by a reporter if he could defend the defence budget, he said “No”. Told off for using the word “depression” in public, he replaced it with “banana”, and announced that the country was heading for its worst banana in 45 years. Told off by the head of United Fruit for using “banana”, he made it “kumquat”. As the oil price continued to soar he called the Arab producers “schnooks”, earning yet another rebuke; but he didn't care. He could always go back to being dean of Cornell's College of Arts and Sciences, as he did in 1980, even though “dean is to faculty as a hydrant is to a dog.”
Social Credit? Is that the same as the Respect Economy? I read an article about that by Jim Kelly in Asimov's a few months back and it made me feel ever so much better. Being as I am modestly successful in the Respect Economy beats all heck out of being an unemployed loser in the money economy!
"Social credit is an interdisciplinary distributive philosophy developed by C. H. Douglas (1879–1952), a British engineer, who wrote a book by that name in 1924."
In a nutshell, it seems to be a philosophical and economic justification for a universal minimum income--I see in my perusal of it echoes of Marx and Keynes (not that I am any expert on either of them). It had quite a vogue at one time, but little following now. I had heard of it in passing before and decided to look it up when I read that there is a Social Credit Party in Alberta (where the provincial parliament just made an unexpected transition to the left during the recent election).
Tell me about the Respect Economy or give me a pointer if you can.
Smooth sailing with Dean!
ReplyDeleteI left notes on the last thread. :-)
Don’t fret about the regatta, listener; it was obviously a joke. And as for Bernie being [GASP!] a socialist, only a very few lunatic fringe politicians are not. Consider a single example: the military. Everybody pays to support the national military forces, like it or not; that’s pure socialism. Does any sane person think we should go back to making war with feudal levies? That is about the only alternative. In fact, that IS the only alternative I can think of. We don’t even have to consider schools, sanitation, old age pensions, or health care—all necessary to provide a good workforce to support the military. Socialism (at least by the early, general definition) is not incompatible with nationalism, imperialism or capitalism—or human decency, either.
ReplyDelete--Alan
Absolutely! Far from being a dirty word,Socialism is the necessary framework of modern, enlightened civilization. To add to your list, it is also compatible with Christianity. What else are, say, the Franciscans if not radically socialist? But people just refuse to see it. They insist that Socialism is synonymous with Communism. So, you have to explain that, first, it isn't and, second, the dictatorial totalitarianism that called itself Communism actually bore very little resemblance to true communism. By that time, their eyes have glazed over and you realize that it's a losing battle.
DeletePlease explain to me why that is. Why is it so difficult to understand that what the Soviet Union became was no more representative of true communism, much less socialism, than the excesses of the Inquisition were representative of true Catholicism? Are people really that stupid? Don't answer that. I know they are. My dad is a very bright man, and yet he's scared to death of the specter of Socialism. He, who lived in Navy housing, was cared for in Navy hospitals by Navy doctors and nurses, shopped at Navy commissaries and exchanges and receives a Navy pension. He honestly cannot see that that is Socialism.
Well spoken, Cat! Wow! Even I hadn't thought of it that way.
DeleteI hear you about the Franciscans and the difference between Inquisiiton and Catholicism. It's the difference between extremists of any stripe and the Life and True Essence of the tradition they have warped out of all recognition.
*"That" being military life.
Delete"Marxism-Leninism," I have read and reasonably suppose (but have not yet verified) has little to do with either Marx or Lenin, and would be more accurately described as "Stalinism." Hmmmmm...... I recall when it was verboten for....who? a Secretary of the Treasury in the Nixon administration?... to use the word "recession" and substituted the word "banana" in his testimony at a congressional hearing. Do we need to do something similar with "socialism?" BTW, I had reason to read up on the Social Credit movement. I don't know enough about economics to evaluate it, but it sure is interesting. Now back to my work simulation--dinner break is over.
Delete--Alan
Alfred E. Kahn! [Click]
DeleteBreezily, too, he winged his way in government. He was an academic, after all; he had nothing to lose, so he would speak his mind. Asked once by a reporter if he could defend the defence budget, he said “No”. Told off for using the word “depression” in public, he replaced it with “banana”, and announced that the country was heading for its worst banana in 45 years. Told off by the head of United Fruit for using “banana”, he made it “kumquat”. As the oil price continued to soar he called the Arab producers “schnooks”, earning yet another rebuke; but he didn't care. He could always go back to being dean of Cornell's College of Arts and Sciences, as he did in 1980, even though “dean is to faculty as a hydrant is to a dog.”
—Alan
Social Credit? Is that the same as the Respect Economy? I read an article about that by Jim Kelly in Asimov's a few months back and it made me feel ever so much better. Being as I am modestly successful in the Respect Economy beats all heck out of being an unemployed loser in the money economy!
DeleteSocial Credit [Click]
Delete"Social credit is an interdisciplinary distributive philosophy developed by C. H. Douglas (1879–1952), a British engineer, who wrote a book by that name in 1924."
In a nutshell, it seems to be a philosophical and economic justification for a universal minimum income--I see in my perusal of it echoes of Marx and Keynes (not that I am any expert on either of them). It had quite a vogue at one time, but little following now. I had heard of it in passing before and decided to look it up when I read that there is a Social Credit Party in Alberta (where the provincial parliament just made an unexpected transition to the left during the recent election).
Tell me about the Respect Economy or give me a pointer if you can.
--Alan
Big news from Pluto! [Click] Plutonic astrologers would have a lot more to work with than their terran colleagues, methinks…
ReplyDelete--Alan
Thanks, Alan. Fascinating!
Delete