jim@ism780.UUCP (Jim Balter) (09/20/83)
There are many Amerinds living in houses built of uranium tailings (normal by-product of the mining process) here in the U.S. I don't have any way of knowing, but I strongly suspect that tailings are the primary source of the Polish radioactive building materials too, rather than Laura's rather fanciful (and ideologically motivated) explanation "Russia just wants so much enriched uranium, and we produced lots more -- this will look bad, so dump it back into the mine, where there is gravel that is later used to make the bricks that go into the housing materials." I think, Laura, that for you to bring up this practice, which occurs in both the U.S. and Poland, in the course of a discussion about the availability of housing in socialist countries, severely cuts into your credibility as an objective analyst who wants to seriously discuss the viability of socialism as a potential political system. Most Socialists in the West (that is, those operating in nations, such as the U.S., which provide them with a significant amount of intellectual freedom) do not consider Poland to be a socialist nation, as even the slightest review of their writings would reveal. And pointing out specific practices of specific nations without discussing how the origin of the practices is an outgrowth of the political system you are criticizing contributes nothing. I suggest that such practices are a expectable result of depending upon either an "invisible hand" or a centralized bureaucracy for making decisions; the necessary feedback and controls are lacking. Building working social systems is hard work; to believe that after a mere two centuries of modern political development, "capitalism is a terrible system but it is the best we have" (forgive me, Winston) is in any way conclusive is an insult to the creative spirit of humanity. I agree with you that it is important to distinguish between Socialism as an ideal and those governments which claim to be Socialist (I would avoid the phrase "Socialism in practice" because it helps to obscure the distinction). So, to help us know the enemy, I quote from the Encyclopedia Americana: SOCIALISM, a term used to describe a cooperative social order which millions of men and women throughout the world have long been seeking to obtain. It has been likewise used to designate a certain philosophy of historical development and a method of analyzing and interpreting social phenomena. The Goal of Modern Socialism.--As a proposed cooperative social order, socialism may be defined as a social system under which the principal means of production and distribution are socially owned and democratically managed for the common good within the framework of a democratic political structure. Public, Cooperative, and Private Industry under Socialism.--One of the most authoritative statements made in modern times concerning the goal of socialism was that adopted by the Socialist International in 1951. It reads in part as follows: "Socialism seeks to replace capitalism by a system in which the public interest takes precedence over the interest of private profit. The immediate economic aims of socialist policy are full employment, higher production, a rising standard of life, social security and a fair distribution of incomes and property. "In order to achieve these ends production must be planned in the interest of the people as a whole. "Such planning is incompatible with the concentration of economic power in the hands of a few. It requires effective democratic control of the economy. "Democratic Socialism therefore stands in sharp contradiction both to capitalist planing and to every form of totalitarian planning; these exclude public control of production and a fair distribution of its results. "Socialist planning can be achieved by various means. The structure of the country concerned must decide the extent of public ownership and the forms of planning to apply. "Public ownership can take the form of the nationalization of existing private concerns or the creation of new public concerns, municipal or regional enterprise, consumers' or producers' cooperatives. "These various forms of public ownership should be regarded not as ends in themselves but as means of controlling basic industries and services on which the economic life and welfare of the community depend, of rationalizing inefficient industries or of preventing private monopolies and cartels from exploiting the public. "Socialist planning does not presuppose public ownership of all the means of production. It is compatible with the existence of private ownership in important fields, for instance in agriculture, handicraft, retail trade and small and middle-sized industries. The state must prevent private owners from abusing their powers. It can and should assist them to contribute towards increased production and well-being within the framework of a planned economy." Under socialism, therefore, as envisaged by the International Socialist movement, while key industries would be owned and operated by local, state, regional and federal governmental agencies, the title and management of a considerable sector of the economy would be in the hands of voluntary cooperative organizations and private businesses under such public regulation as is necessary for the protection of the consumer, worker, and the general public. Public industry would not be regarded as an end to itself, but as a means to an end--welfare, happiness, and the cultural development of all the people. Socialism and Democracy.--The Socialist International pronouncement maintained that socialism was impossible without democracy and that it was a misnomer to call an economic order a socialist society if it functioned in a totalitarian or dictatorial state. As a means of promoting democracy in the operation of industry under socialism, and of avoiding the bureaucratic abuses, Socialists, as the International Manifesto declared, urge the strengthening of trade union and consumer organizations and the democratic association of the workers with the directors of industry. Socialism and Internationalism.--The Socialist International also insists that "the new world society for which Socialists strive can develop fruitfully in peace only if it is based on voluntary cooperation between nations. Democracy must, therefore, be established on an international scale under an international rule of law which guarantees national freedom and the rights of man . . . Democratic Socialism rejects every form of imperialism. It fights the oppression or exploitation of any people." Socialism and Communism.--Modern Socialists contrast their social goal sharply with that found in states dominated by Russian Communists. "Communism falsely claims a share in the Socialist tradition (asserts the manifesto of the Socialist International). In fact it has distorted that tradition beyond recognition. It has built up a rigid theology which is incompatible with the critical spirit of Marxism. Where Socialists aim to achieve freedom and justice by removing the exploitation which divides men under capitalism, communists seek to sharpen those class divisions only in order to establish the dictatorship of a single party." . . . Jim Balter (decvax!yale-co!ima!jim), Interactive Systems Corp --------
swatt@ittvax.UUCP (Alan S. Watt) (09/20/83)
I agree; some of the comments on this net about the evils of socialism have been irresponsible. To take nations like the Soviet Union, which have always had autocratic governments, and adduce properties of socialism from their behavior is simply flawed. To make a reasonable comparison, you need to look at socialism as practiced in western nations, with long traditions of personal freedom, independent press, civil liberties, and so. A good example is France. Though taking power only 2 years ago, the socialist government has effected significant changes. One goal of socialism is full employment, and this has been one of France's prime efforts. Two years is two short to accomplish this, but they have managed to create 200,000 new government jobs. Government revenue has been expanded to pay for this by increasing taxes on the rich (anyone earning over $15,000 is rich); such people have had their taxes raised by 30-50%, which also has the by-product of reducing the resources at their disposal to exploit the workers. :-) In addition to increased taxes, most workers strongly support the law requiring them to loan the government a percentage of their salaries (non-discretionary government savings bonds). They know they are investing money in a sound future. :-) Very few industries have been nationalized; no one has been murdered, and civil freedoms remain. Citizens are still free to travel just as before (with the single exception that they may not take more that $375 out of the country). It is also wrong to conclude that communist countries are automatically going to reneg on debts and other agreements. From the most recent American Express newsletter: "Now two good reaons to take the Card to China" American Express has signed an agreement with the Bank of China that now allows Cardmembers to charge over-the-counter merchandise at certain stores in Beijing and Guangzhou in the People's Republic of China. Cardmembers can also use the Card to cash personal checks in 27 cities, without the 4% surcharge imposed on holders of other credit and charge cards. Now the acceptance of the Card at selected retail locations greatly increases its usefulness in China. Now when you see a scroll or rubbings of works of art that would be perfect for your living room, den, or office, you have the Card that speaks Chinese.* * 1983 American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. (all rights reserved) Now do you think American Express is going to make an agreement like that with a government that can't be trusted? Just think, now you can pay for your purchases of Mao's little red book with your American Express Card. Who says capitalism and communism can't co-exist? I wonder if AmEx will come up with a new billing plan based on the "From each according to ability; to each according to need" philosophy? :-) - Alan S. Watt