[Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but also bad

Wed Dec 10 13:36:32 CST 2008

To put it plain and simple, that is libertarian bullshit.  You don't' have
to go to Chinese history to find a genuine disaster and widespread
starvation; you just need to look to the US during the "dust bowl" period or
check out Appalachia or the poor black communities in Mississippi even
today.  But we know that libertarians and capitalist promoters will be
reluctant to attribute the US examples to the lack of government control
leading to these genuine disasters and widespread starvations as they are
willing to attribute the Chinese experience to "the heavy hand of government
control."  It seems to me that a wonderful job of cherry picking is being
engaged in here.  Interestingly, in cases like China, we are very fast to
attribute the problems to government control rather than to a specific style
of government control or to the specific leadership style employed  during
that period by officials of the government; but when it comes to instances
of problems that take place in capitalist  societies, we excuse it as being
an aberration, the fault of specific leaders or leadership styles, chance.
or mother nature.

We know how good live was for the American Indian, the Afro-American, the
Mexican-American, and the Asian-Americans under Amerikan capitalism , free
enterprise, and WASP liberty during the history of the country.  Ask the
Japanese-Americans about American liberty under capitalism during the 1940s
when they were put into concentration camps and the white man stole their
private property after they were put into those camps and retain ownership
to this day.  What about the Native Americans or Blacks whose properties
were taken from them by the white population or  white owned companies with
the help of  the state, local, and federal governments and officials under
the free enterprise capitalist system of individualism and liberty you tout
so readily.

One may just as well argue that Socialism has  never been truly implemented
in any pure form so as to be tested just as it has been argued when
capitalism fails that it was not truly capitalism but some impure variant of
it that failed.  Those who view it to be discredited tend to be those who
are true believers in the establishment values and perspectives as well as
the assumptions that the establishment culture is based on.  If pure
unadulterated  capitalism were so good; why is it that the corporate
establishment all support corporate welfare and corporate socialism, seek
government contracts and subsidies including immunities, uses and relies
public educational and research facilities and money to train employees and
do basic and advanced research and technical development for them for them,
or supply their owners and executives with incorporation protections from
personal liability for the corporation's actions where it is not the case
for the owners and executives of unincorporated businesses or individuals.

But I have wasted too much time attempting to refute the myths of a secular
religion when I know it is not going to change anything - especially your
beliefs.  After all that is what religion is all about- unchallengeable
articles of faith, isn't it?

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of E. Wayne
Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 11:27 AM
To: Brussel Morton K.
Cc: Peace-discuss
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but also bad

I really cant find anything good to say about the government bailout of
industry.  People have
short memories and don't seem to do their history homework.  The heavy hand
of government
control led to genuine disaster and widespread starvation in China in the
1960's and 1970's, 
and since adapting a more capitalist
model they can truly say "Ming tian geng hao!"  Tomorrow will be even
better.

Socialism and its closely allied doctrine have been very sadly discredited.
Even
sadder is the notion that it should be tried here since it has been already
found
to be a horrible idea with horrific consequences.  

Liberty has worked well for us here.  We should go back to it.

Suggested reading--- Bastiat, "The Law"
http://www.fee.org/library/books/thelaw.asp

Brussel Morton K. wrote: 

Comment below.  

On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:05 AM, John W. wrote:

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:36 AM, Karen Medina <kmedina at illinois.edu> wrote:

Peace-discuss,

I would like to discuss the US taking over an industry.

Let us take the postal service as an example. The postal service has always
been
tied to the federal government. And has done well.

But as an institution, it was extremely sexist and racist clear into the
1980s. I
blame this on the fact that it was tied to the federal government. For a
very long
time, the postal service did not have to abide by OSHA's safety guidelines,
again
because it was a government institution. The postal service used to be one
of
the highest stress occupations -- again because it was run by the government
and was managed top-down and so very close to the way the military was run
that many ex-military people were employed by the postal service.

I am not saying that I think the postal service should be privatized, I am
just
saying that when the government runs an industry, it tends to overlook human
dignity issues and is slow to change -- and it makes us all guilty for the
human
rights abuses done by the institution.

It is good sometimes to be able to point to a CEO and say that person is
bad,
but it is really hard for the public to turn and look at the way the public
is
running an industry and say "we are bad".

-karen medina

I guess I'd like to take the opposite view.

While I have heard about the stress involved in working for the post office
(particularly at "the Plant"), I doubt that it's any worse than working for
some private-sector corporation, most of which are also managed in a
top-down style.

Historically, government institutions like the military and the post office
have been among the LEAST racist and sexist employers in America.  In the
black community of the 1940s and 1950s, having a job at the post office was
about the best job that one could hope for.  Teaching was also a viable and
desirable option in the black community.  The police and fire departments
proved more difficult to integrate.

An irony of history is that, because of the way the law has evolved,
public-sector unions have been for the past 30 years FAR stronger than
private-sector unions, providing public employees with far greater job
protections.  Of course, it also helps that government jobs can't be
exported overseas.

Again, due to the peculiar nature of our labor laws, the government is in a
position to mandate things like affirmative action, a living wage, etc. not
only in its own employment practices but in instances where it contracts
with private-sector vendors.  Legally, we have not seen fit to extend the
same level of government-mandated worker protections to private-sector
employers who do not do business with government.

There are pros and cons both ways, of course.   But on balance, I would MUCH
prefer to work for the government, and I think that basic industries having
to do with food, energy, and essential services should be nationalized for
purposes of national security and the public good.

John Wason

Amen to all that!, and I'd add to the list "food, energy and essential
services" health insurance, the railroads. The profit motive (capitalism) in
"essential institutions or industries" is not one which can be trusted to
lead to the best and most efficient services for all the people, and which
will lead to a sustainable society.    --mkb

_______________________________________________

Peace-discuss mailing list

Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net

http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

  _____  

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081210/268dfef9/attachment.html