BCITORGB wrote:
TnT says:
================
But I would be interested in knowing how your world view
would define the various political systems if not capitalism and
socialism
================

What you're referring to are not political systems but, rather,
economic systems. IMHO, it is dangerous to confuse the distinctions.


I see them as two sides of the same coin, you don't have a political
system without an economic system. They are joined at the hip. You
can't deal with one, without dealing with the other. Though I can
understand your fine line distinction.

Further, I think it useful to begin by agreeing that no economic
system
exists in a pure form. We might put the systems on a continuum from
less socialist to more socialist, but most developed nations --
including the USA -- would be located on this continuum.

I would agree with you on this one, though the identifying
characteristic of the US indicates stronger individual participation in
the social model. It may be in individual corruption, instead of mass
corporate corruption, but even that is changing as we watch Enron, etc.

Most right-wing Americans, for example, are reluctant to admit that
the
defense industry is one of the most socialistic endeavours to be
found
on this globe. If you don't believe it, ask yourself how many
research
facilities are propped up by government money. How many firms in the
munitions and aircraft industry would not exist were it not for
massive
government funding?

Marx talked about "government (the people) owning the means of
production." In the USA, the government may not "own", but it
certainly
"controls" the means of production in more than a few cases
[historical
note: what was the deal with the Krupp industries in the Germany of
the
1940's? Is that or is that not a parallel?] The control is clear:
without government monies, these firms go under.

And where are the right-wing Americans when government money is doled
out in corporate welfare to huge agri-business concerns? This money
comes, too often, in the form of cheap water sold (given?) to these
businesses at prices way below the market price.

Why is it that the American right-wing can get their knickers in a
knot
over welfare to unemployed poor people, but thinks nothing about
cramming more money than they need into the pockets of agri-business
executives.

Now that's socialism! Capitalism is a long lost and forgotten ideal
(not a very practical or viable one either, BTW).

Cheers,
frtzw906

Eisenhower warned us of the growing military/industrial complex after
WW2. We have seen creeping socialism more and more in USA. Not just
Defense, but Education, Arts, Interior resources like national forest
and oil. All we need to do is go out and try to drill an oil well on
your own land, and we would have all kinds of federal visitors telling
us we can't do that. Or try starting a grade school without approval of
some agency. Try starting a resturant, and here come the food
inspectors. And anyone can get a grant for some crazy scheme as long as
you are willing to have Uncle Sam looking over your shoulder.

I am self employed small business owner. If I get too big, I would have
to incorporate, which is just another way that Uncle Sam is always
there. So yeah there is plenty of social involvement in our government.
I choose to stay small and below the radar. I don't take any handouts,
which may mean I will never make the top 500 companies, but that is the
price of freedom, but then my knickers are not in a knot!

I also find that generally the conservatives try to go down the
socialistic slide slower than the liberals, at least in areas that
normally affect me on a daily basis! Selfish isolation, I know, but I
just want to be left alone. Red or Blue, I really don't care the color
of the hat of the task masters! TnT