|31 earlier messages|
|Rodent of Unusual Size||Nov 8, 2002 5:48 pm|
|Rodent of Unusual Size||Nov 8, 2002 5:51 pm|
|James Taylor||Nov 8, 2002 5:56 pm|
|Craig R. McClanahan||Nov 8, 2002 5:58 pm|
|Craig R. McClanahan||Nov 8, 2002 6:05 pm|
|Sam Ruby||Nov 8, 2002 6:17 pm|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 8, 2002 6:38 pm|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 8, 2002 6:40 pm|
|Ceki Gülcü||Nov 9, 2002 12:29 am|
|Jeff Turner||Nov 9, 2002 2:44 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 3:27 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 4:13 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 4:25 am|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 9, 2002 4:27 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 4:31 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 4:35 am|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 9, 2002 4:36 am|
|Danny Angus||Nov 9, 2002 4:39 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 4:50 am|
|Martin van den Bemt||Nov 9, 2002 5:21 am|
|Ceki Gülcü||Nov 9, 2002 6:28 am|
|Costin Manolache||Nov 9, 2002 8:50 am|
|Sam Ruby||Nov 9, 2002 9:29 am|
|Costin Manolache||Nov 9, 2002 10:23 am|
|Ceki Gülcü||Nov 9, 2002 10:49 am|
|Ceki Gülcü||Nov 9, 2002 10:58 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 9, 2002 12:33 pm|
|James Duncan Davidson||Nov 9, 2002 3:29 pm|
|James Duncan Davidson||Nov 9, 2002 3:37 pm|
|Chuck Murcko||Nov 9, 2002 6:08 pm|
|Rodent of Unusual Size||Nov 10, 2002 5:29 am|
|Ceki Gülcü||Nov 10, 2002 6:22 am|
|James Duncan Davidson||Nov 10, 2002 9:14 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 11, 2002 7:05 pm|
|Stephen McConnell||Nov 11, 2002 7:26 pm|
|Sam Ruby||Nov 11, 2002 7:41 pm|
|Jeff Turner||Nov 11, 2002 7:43 pm|
|Stephen McConnell||Nov 11, 2002 7:43 pm|
|Ovidiu Predescu||Nov 11, 2002 9:34 pm|
|Ovidiu Predescu||Nov 11, 2002 9:36 pm|
|Sam Ruby||Nov 11, 2002 9:51 pm|
|Jeff Turner||Nov 11, 2002 11:18 pm|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 12, 2002 7:18 am|
|Stefano Mazzocchi||Nov 12, 2002 7:25 am|
|Martin van den Bemt||Nov 12, 2002 8:19 am|
|Joe Schaefer||Nov 12, 2002 8:20 am|
|Jeff Turner||Nov 12, 2002 8:20 am|
|Andrew C. Oliver||Nov 12, 2002 8:28 am|
|Henri Yandell||Nov 12, 2002 8:41 am|
|Costin Manolache||Nov 12, 2002 9:58 am|
|26 later messages|
|Subject:||Re: Rules for Revolutionaries|
|From:||Ceki Gülcü (ce...@qos.ch)|
|Date:||Nov 9, 2002 10:49:33 am|
At 08:50 09.11.2002 -0800, Costin Manolache wrote:
I think you got your analogy mixed up completely :-)
On the contrary, this particular analogy is pretty good even many of analogies aren't.
The communism is characterized by dictatorship ( not always benevolent). Most western countries are characterized by democracy.
On a wider scale, it was very hard for the West to fight Communism because the communist ideology sells much better to the unprivileged. Yet 75 years later, the West won, not because of its persuasiveness but because it had much more to show on the store shelves than the communists. Communism is a great idea but it doesn't work. Capitalism is hard to sell but it ends up having better results on the long run.
We are talking about different aspects. My point is that on paper Communism *looks* much better than Capitalism. The fact that in the West Capitalism is exercised within a liberal democratic system is an orthogonal aspect.
After WWII many developing countries, actually most of humanity, entertained the idea of switching to Communism. China did switch. During much of the cold war many of the non-aligned countries were far friendlier to Russia then to the West.
Communism is a very attractive and modern ideology. Here is a presentation:
Communism is a society without money, without a state, without property and without social classes. People come together to carry out a project or to respond to some need of the human community but without the possibility of their collective activity taking the form of an enterprise that involves wages and the exchange of its products. The circulation of goods is not accomplished by means of exchange: quite the contrary, the by-word for this society is "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs".
It almost sounds like us if you ask me. :-)
The Libertarian Communist Home Page addresses precisely the point you raise. The link is: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Embassy/8970/
On paper, Communism presents much better than Capitalism. This does not mean that the implementation of a communist system has bettered the condition of the countries were it was implemented. Not all that glitters is gold. One must be wary of ideologies, *all* ideologies, because they have a tendency to see only selected parts of reality.
The communism didn't fall because of ideology - I can tell you the ideology had little to do with the reality. At least in some countries it fell because of centralized economy, abuses, etc.
This is orthogonal to my argument.
As for the "liberal ideology" - that's how apache has worked so far. Every committer has a vote and a veto ( and unfortunately the veto can turn anyone into a small dictator ).
TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793