2005-11-24 19:14:00
Larry writes:
Your definition goes counter to the common way the word is understood by the vast majority of people on the planet. Most people understand the word "socialism" to denote a political system, and all political systems are based on force. Essentially what you are talking about is anything that you can loosely call a "social program," and you are differentiating between those that freely accepted vs. those that are forced on people by government.
Agree 100%
Larry:
You certainly have the right to define "socialism" however you like. Unfortunately though the result will be that you will end up spending more time defending your definition than communicating new ideas. That is what happens when you try to put "new wine" into "old bottles."
If this happens I will adapt and you can say "I told you so."
Larry:
In any case I have registered by objection. You have had heard it. There are better conceptual frameworks to place these ideas on, but you will have to bear the weight of the one that makes sense to you.
Objection registered and I am happy to bear the weight. I predict there will be other weights much heavier than this. I don't mind the exercise.
Happy Thanksgiving to you Larry and to the rest of the group.
Love you man...
I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated. Poul Anderson (1926 - )
Copyright © 2005 by J J Dewey, All Rights Reserved