[PLUG-TALK] Fair Use, etc.
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
Fri Mar 29 00:36:44 UTC 2002
On 28 Mar 2002, Russ Johnson wrote:
> > Same thing, whatever you say. Is there a significant
> > distinction?
I forgot to address this part earlier, but that's OK because I can deal
with it here.
But the first thing I'd like to say on the topic is that your ignorance on
this subject completely disqualifies you from any intelligent discussion
about its nature.
> Socialism is when the government provides everything for the people.
> There is still someone (or group) in charge, and they decide what's
> best for the people.
Close.
Socalism is a system in which the workers control the means of production.
This is Marx's Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
There's the side-effect of the law that says "He who controls the means of
production defines the political order." making the working-class the
de-facto leaders of government.
> Communism is when everyone is equal, and no one is in charge.
That's pretty darned close. Everyone has equal access to the means and
ends of production.
> In my opinion, Socialism can be achieved in this country (and is in
> many ways. E.G. Welfare).
> Communism can't be achieved. Humans want to be in charge. They want a
> hierarchy of power.
You're neglecting the situtuations that arise when everyone has the means
to undermine the power.
Marx worked under the idea that it would become so effortless to provide
for the needs of the public, that it would become impossible for any
person or group of people to totally control those means of production.
Power is derived from the control of value and value is derived from
scarcity. When scarcity is destroyed, there is either no value or no
control and therefore no power.
We see this dynamic all the time in history. For example, in the dark
ages, there were few who could read and write. The ability to do those
things allowed a person to wield power over those who could not. In time,
however, the knowledge and the ability to create permanent inks and
quality papers at low cost spread and the people took that power into
their own hands. It would be VERY DIFFICULT in this day and age to
structure a society around functional illiteracy because the means exist
to redistribute that power in a very short time.
We're seeing something similar in music publishing. The power to control
the scarcity of recordings is being redistributed just as the power to
control reading and writing was once redistributed.
This is a natural phenomenon.
I don't think it's unreasonable to foresee a time when the basic needs of
mankind are not scarce and, therefore, cannot be controlled.
> > Either one is antithetical to the constitution.
> How do you explain the rampant socialism coming out of Washington?
I assume he'll explain it by pointing out structures in Washington that
act outside the Constitution or were created by unconstitutional law.
J.
--
-----------------
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
-----------------
[cc] counter-copyright
http://www.openlaw.org
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list