orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) (01/05/86)
> > "The enemy is the communist system itself - implacable, insatiable, > unceasing in its drive for world domination. This ... is a struggle > for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God > vs. ruthless godless tyranny." -- John F. Kennedy > > David Olson Interesting. I thought the usual religious belief was either everyone was under God or nobody was. Perhaps Durkheim was right: God is simply a reflection of society. If so then a given deity can be wished out of existence. Take Zeus for example..... tim sevener whuxn!orb "one person over God"
cramer@sun.uucp (Sam Cramer) (01/05/86)
In article <463@whuts.UUCP> orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: >> >> "The enemy is the communist system itself - implacable, insatiable, >> unceasing in its drive for world domination. This ... is a struggle >> for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God >> vs. ruthless godless tyranny." -- John F. Kennedy >> >> David Olson > >Interesting. I thought the usual religious belief was either >everyone was under God or nobody was. What was meant is clear. The choice is between ideologies that recognize that there are moral (God-inspired) limits to the power of the state, and ideologies which recognize no higher authority than the state and act accordingly. Communism is the example *par excellence* of the latter. Sam Cramer sun!cramer
tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) (01/07/86)
> [David Olson] > >> "The enemy is the communist system itself - implacable, insatiable, > >> unceasing in its drive for world domination. This ... is a struggle > >> for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God > >> vs. ruthless godless tyranny." -- John F. Kennedy ----- > >[Sevener, I think] > >Interesting. I thought the usual religious belief was either > >everyone was under God or nobody was. ----- > [Sam Cramer] > What was meant is clear. > > The choice is between ideologies that recognize that there are moral > (God-inspired) limits to the power of the state, and ideologies which ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > recognize no higher authority than the state and act accordingly. > Communism is the example *par excellence* of the latter. ----- A question for Sam Cramer: In which category is Iran? Personally, ideologies in EITHER category scare the hell out of me. -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan
sykora@csd2.UUCP (Michael Sykora) (01/07/86)
>/* cramer@sun.uucp (Sam Cramer) / 2:05 pm Jan 5, 1986 */ >The choice is between ideologies that recognize that there are moral >(God-inspired) limits to the power of the state, and ideologies which >recognize no higher authority than the state and act accordingly. >Communism is the example *par excellence* of the latter. > >Sam Cramer sun!cramer Indeed, this is how the choice is perceived. I believe the true choice is between the political system that benefits men the most -- a system based on individual liberty and property rights, and one that benefits them much less -- a system based on the primacy of society over individuals within and without that society. What does the god stuff have to do with this, anyway? It only clouds the issue. Mike Sykora
bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (01/07/86)
In article <whuts.463> orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: >> >> "The enemy is the communist system itself - implacable, insatiable, >> unceasing in its drive for world domination. This ... is a struggle >> for supremacy between two conflicting ideologies: freedom under God >> vs. ruthless godless tyranny." -- John F. Kennedy >> >> David Olson > >Interesting. I thought the usual religious belief was either >everyone was under God or nobody was. Perhaps Durkheim was right: >God is simply a reflection of society. If so then a given deity >can be wished out of existence. Take Zeus for example..... > tim sevener whuxn!orb > "one person over God" I think Kennedy was reflecting on the acknowledgement of God's place in the affairs of men on the part of a government, not the objective reality of his being or omnipresence. -- / / / Tom Albrecht Burroughs Corp. ===/ / /=== ...{presby|psuvax1|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl ===/ / /=== (215)341-4656 ===/ / /=== CompuServe: 72626,2550 / / / "That's the news from Lake Wobegon ... "
cramer@sun.uucp (Sam Cramer) (01/08/86)
In article <1528@ihlpg.UUCP> tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) writes: >> [Sam Cramer] >> >> The choice is between ideologies that recognize that there are moral >> (God-inspired) limits to the power of the state, and ideologies which > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> recognize no higher authority than the state and act accordingly. >> Communism is the example *par excellence* of the latter. >----- >A question for Sam Cramer: > In which category is Iran? The barbarous theocratic regime in Iran, while guilty of horrendous crimes, does recognize limits to it's own behaviour - those outlined in the Koran. While I'm not a big fan of that book, there is an important theoretical (and, I think, practical) difference between Khomeiniism and communism, which, rejecting "bourgeois morality", recognizes no limits to it's behaviour. For those who are interested, there is a good discussion of this issue in "Modern Times" by Paul Johnson (available in paperback at finer bookstores nationwide, as they say). Sam Cramer {decwrl,hplabs}!sun!cramer
aouriri@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP (Chedley Aouriri) (01/08/86)
> > >Interesting. I thought the usual religious belief was either > > >everyone was under God or nobody was. > > > > The choice is between ideologies that recognize that there are moral > > (God-inspired) limits to the power of the state, and ideologies which > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > recognize no higher authority than the state and act accordingly. > > Communism is the example *par excellence* of the latter. > ----- > A question for Sam Cramer: > In which category is Iran? > > Personally, ideologies in EITHER category scare the hell out of me. > -- > Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan A question for Everybody : In which category is Israel? Chedley Aouriri / ITT-ATC, Shelton,CT.
kort@hounx.UUCP (B.KORT) (01/12/86)
Bill Tanenbaum makes a good point regarding communism as tyranny. It is an observable fact that most communist countries also have totalitarian governments, although this connection is not a *necessary* feature of communism. There were utopian communities in the US and there are collective communes in Israel (Kibbutzim) which omitted the totalitarian element. Iran is totalitarian, even though the government is run by the country's religious leader. By the same token, democracies can countenance tyranny, too. Both ancient Greece and the US permitted slavery. Oppression is where you find it. Ask any chld. --Barry Kort