[PLUG-TALK] Fair Use, etc.

Jeme A Brelin jeme at brelin.net
Fri Mar 29 10:46:44 UTC 2002


On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, J.A. Henshaw wrote:
> Jeme A Brelin wrote:
> >>>Same thing, whatever you say.  Is there a significant 
> >>>distinction?
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> It was I who wrote "Same thing".

I certainly knew at the time of writing that those were your words.

If I failed to keep the attribution when trimming extraneous quoted
material, then I apologize PROFUSELY to Russell for any mistaken
attribution.

> Because either one is not important to me in the context of this
> discussion;
> 
> One requires force to deploy, and the other doesn't work anyway.
> 
> Just like your Utopia would require force, because there are MANY who
> reject your thinking because we know better- we know it won't work and
> is against human nature.
> 
> Major flaw.

First, again, I will state that it's not MY utopia.  It seems to me that
you want to personalize these sentiments so you can easily dismiss them as
the thoughts of a sole individual.  This isn't a philosphy I devised nor
even really one to which I adhere.  I can't see why you continue to call
this MY system.  I certainly don't call selfish YOUR idea.

Now, let's talk about the above... I'll quote it again for clarity.

> One requires force to deploy, and the other doesn't work anyway.

I'm going to assume you're talking about socialism in the former and
communism in the latter.

Every system BUT communism requires force to deploy.  That's why Marx
called them dictatorships.  There's the dictatorship of the wealthy few,
the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the dictatorship of the proletariat,
and so on.  You go on and on about the dictatorship of the majority...
same thing.

If you think that the system you support doesn't require force to deploy,
you're absolutely and totally disconnected from reality.  The protection
of your beloved private property is probably the single greatest
instigator of violence in the history of the world.

As for communism "not working anyway" (to paraphrase), it is a tribute to
communists that they recognize their ideal as unattainable.  The Laissez
Faire "Free Market" capitalists generally ignore the inherent
unattainability of a perfect market and, what's worse, deny the more
salient flaws of the system including the eventual emergence of a
"winner", the failure of purely economic motivators to encourage concern
for environmental quality, and the negative difference between the rate of
increase in the amount of wealth in a system and the rate at which the
percentage of that wealth held by the elite grows.

While communism is a nice ideal that's simply unattainable, capitalism is
an unattainable ideal that is destructive to the majority of the people in
the system.

J.
--
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org





More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list