- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Re: Socialism? ...Naaahhh!

Posted by: Justine Holders ( Ireland ) on June 20, 1997 at 20:37:18:

In Reply to: Re: Socialism? ...Naaahhh! posted by Robert Rush on June 20, 1997 at 19:53:18:


: :
: : Gee, a friendly froggy ecologist answer at last, from a beautiful country where people live today with a socialist government !

: A beautiful country where people live today with a socailist government? There's nothing quite like France, in fact. Always get to take a trip over there and see striking truck workers in action. You would think that workers in France, with about a zillion hours of vaction time, would a least get off their lazy arses and do some work. Oh, and I understand your complaints about America. I mean, if we hadn't saved your behind from those Germans a few years back, you'd all be living in a totalitarian utopia! Sorry to take that future away from you guys. We'll try better next time, believe me.


yeah right - the workers in France have and continue to strike under either gaullist or socialist governments - it has nothing to do with the government being a parliamentary socialist party. The thing here appears to be that they have a greater freedom to express their grievances and manifest them in a vocal and an emotive way than some other countries - eg the UK. This of course would be complete aenathema to your good self as workers should and need to be controlled in your perfectly well oiled world of capitalism.

As for the derogatory statements re: world wars - they were wars funded by capital, wars fought over capital and wars won by capital. Also though I feel the world wars to be something that did not really amount to anything about ideologies and that people were used by their respective countries in efforts not to defend their freedom but to defend nation states, capital and vested interests ...

About the US' role in the these wars - basically the USA wanted to stay out of the war - why? because they saw it as a war on the european front? becuase they couldn't decide what to do? no because the US administration realised that it would be a great drain on resources, would affect trade, affect big business and comprimise the position that allowed them to trade with all sides ... basically because of economic reasons. Whether or not 'you saved our behinds' is not relevant - what is is that the USA decided to enter the field of battle when they felt that they could gain most - and what happened the years following the last war saw US world economic domination escalate at an ever increased rate.


Follow Ups:

None.

The Debating Room Post a Followup