andree@uokvax.UUCP (11/24/83)
#R:dciem:-48900:uokvax:5000027:000:2213 uokvax!andree Nov 22 20:25:00 1983 /***** uokvax:net.politics / dciem!mmt / 6:42 am Nov 19, 1983 */ Why shouldn't the nuclear right make a similar film about how delightful the world will be in 2583 after the population is reduced to a manageable size by a nuclear war some centuries previously? /* ---------- */ No, the correct `response' of the `nuclear right' would be a film depicting the results of a Soviet takeover of the U.S. - from the viewpoint of both the underground (I certainly hope their would be one) and of the non-underground. No private news facilities (USENET qualifies), no private information reproduction equipment (like my micro), etc. Honestly, NOBODY likes the idea of even a limited nuclear exchange given the probable affect it would have on the world. Very few (I hope none) like the idea of war at all. To clear this up RIGHT NOW, would anyone who is actually in favor of a nuclear exchange please say so!!! It is a bad habit of the left (and right...) to carry opposition of their stratagies to opposition of the thing they are trying to prevent. This is generally unjustified. I am horrified by the thought of a nuclear exchange, and don't expect to survive it. However, I much prefer living with that threat hanging over my head to living in a country run from the Kremlin. And while I'm on the topic: Marxist doctrine (as far as I can tell; if you think I'm wrong, send mail INCLUDING REFERENCES!) is that eventually the entire world will be socalist. The Soviet regime shows signs of wanting to rush this eventuality by means of armed force. Add in that the U.S. is the only country capable of threatening or opposing them, and the conclusion that they must (eventually) conquer the U.S. is inescapable. Since the Soviets are running their economy into the ground by trying to `plan' it, as opposed to letting it run itself, they are in need of client states to prop their economy up - not to mention help feed their populace. The country in best shape in this regards (excess food & etc.) is the U.S. Since the U.S. would be a great boost to their economy, conquering us as soon as possible is the logical course. This explains my `city-a-day' response to the question of unilateral disarmament. <mike