It occurred to me that we might see David McLetchie - a well-known Jambo - end up as chairman of Hearts. But of course that would be too obvious. If Mr Romanov wanted a politician as chairman, he would surely stun us all by appointing Brian Monteith - a Hibee!
Comments made on previous template:
International TV news is from London, so no difference from the rest of the UK there. Lots of coverage in our newspapers - I noticed a two-page spread in the Scotsman the other day. I don't recall what "line" they were taking on the causes.
12 November 2005, 18:07:55 GMT
– Like – Reply
Communism and socialism: Great, humane philosophies, if only every layer of government could be run by a machine.
Unfortunately, the petty corruption which always engulfs every attempt at either tends to remind us that even the people who enforce such utopic societies tend to create their own imperfect little free markets whenever the prospect of an extra few quid raises its head.
Socialism and communism aspire to improve society - all 6 billion plus members of it - in one generic swoop. Libertarians/free marketeers aspire to provide the opportunity to improve the prospects of the individual - the only member of society any of us has any right to exert influence over.
Unfortunately, the communists/socialists often believe that by benefitting oneself, the individual does so at the deliberate expense of others, which is of course a nonsense. This is as myopic an argument as that evinced by Digby Jones, CBI chief, that a "Chinaman or an Indian is after our lunch", by the simple act of those countries beginning to lift themselves out of poverty.
A lot of European lunches - especially those dependent upon the production and sale of luxury goods - are being paid for right now by Chinese and Indian consumers.
How many European lunches did Chinese communism pay for?
12 November 2005, 02:39:36 GMT
– Like – Reply
"The Soviet Union was nothing more than a gang of Fascists paying lip service to Marx and Lenin and Democracy and Equality, while they had a system that would have made Benito himself proud of them."
Indeed. Yet there was a time when many socialists regarded the Soviet Union as a model state, some in the Trade Union movement did this into the 1980's (though most socialists had seen the light by 1970).
And yet after Soviet Communism had self evidently failed, socialists started claiming "oh that wasn't really communism at all!".
There are perfectly logical reasons why communism does not work, and all this guff about "Socialism is the democratic rule of the economy by the Citizans and Workers" is just more pie in the sky.
Give it up mate.
11 November 2005, 21:39:26 GMT
– Like – Reply
Hmm. "Democratic rule of the economy by Citizens and Workers", eh? To what level? Does that mean other people should have a vote on whether I buy a cheese and tomato sandwich for lunch, or a ham salad? No? OK then, how about what kind of car I buy? No? What kind of house I live in? Its furniture?
These are all economic activities which at whatever level have an effect on the economy, but I really don't see why they should be submitted to some sort of democratic decision. The consumer, voting with his own money, is a far more efficient at sending signals to producers than is some managed process of democracy. You only have to look at the failure of the Stalinist command model of the NHS, and how it wrestles with insoluble problems of resource allocation, to see that "democratic control" ie politically motivated decision-making, really shafts the consumer at every turn.
11 November 2005, 13:59:44 GMT
– Like – Reply
Sorry I've been gone for so long. But I've got a lot to respond to.
"Socialism in whatever form which includes fascism, communism, doesn't work."
Fascism: No. It isn't in any way related to that right-wing psychobabble. Communism: Yes, but not in the way that you think. Communism isn't an oligarchal party owning everything. It's a moneyless, classless, democratic global society. The Soviet Union was nothing more than a gang of Fascists paying lip service to Marx and Lenin and Democracy and Equality, while they had a system that would have made Benito himself proud of them.
"Socialism is freedom from - the King/Daddy/bureaucracy is taking care of you from cradle to grave.
Freedom for - I am the king and I and my family can take care of me, thank you very much.
This is just for starters."
Socialism isn't the Welfare State that everyone thinks it is. Socialism is the democratic rule of the economy by the Citizans and Workers.
"Have you taken the political compass test Ragnar. www.politicalcompass.org/
Since you know who Adam Smith is I suspect you would be closer than you might be comfortable with to many here. The left/right dichotomy is increasingly meaningless for many questions - for example internment without trial."
Just because I've heard of Adam Smith doesn't make me a Libertarian. Hell, my psudonym came from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged." You've heard of Marx, correct? That doesn't make you a Socialist, now, does it?
Oh, and on that test...
I think they need a middle catigory on that. I didn't always fully agree or disagree. I was in the middle on several issues, like "controling inflation is more important that controling unemployment." Both are dangerous, and they need to be watched and altered. Also, on that Charity v. Social Security.
I landed right there next to Ghandi, the Dalhi Lama, and Nelson Mandela. I've also landed (on other tests) next to Lenin and Trotsky, Martin Luther King, and Pope John Paul II.
11 November 2005, 12:34:01 GMT
– Like – Reply
OT: So, how's Scotland covering frogistan's campfire?
10 November 2005, 22:47:47 GMT
Post a Comment