[Peace-discuss] AWARE single-payer liberal vs. socialist debate

[Bob Illyes]

Claudia writes:

"The single payer movement will require people to be informed, and be 
willing to educate, and not attack others with whom they do not agree 
completely."

The reason for this war of words, which has made peace-discuss pretty much 
useless for some time, is perhaps best summed up by Chairman Mao in his 
short paper "Combat Liberalism":

"liberalism negates ideological struggle and advocates unprincipled 
peace... Liberalism is passive in character and produces the effect of 
helping the enemy...there should be no place for it".

Against someone who believes that liberal democracy is the best way to go, 
as I do, there is no middle ground that is of interest to this sort of 
socialist. It is all or nothing, including single payer or nothing.

On the other hand, if the subject is simply single payer health care rather 
than socialism vs. liberal democracy, the case is simple:

1) All industrialized liberal democracies but us have single-payer or 
something that is functionally equivalent (like the German highly-regulated 
and non-profit insurance system).

2) Therefore there is no reason to believe that we have to throw away our 
form of government to achieve what the rest have, or to doubt that we can 
have it. All that stands in our way is the hard work of making it happen. 
Due to democratic constraints, this will almost certainly proceed in steps.

QED


Bob


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.