Bricks through windows.

Quoted message said:

As a member of a socialist party Blair must have...

Ho, ho, ho.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

Quoted message said:

As a member of a socialist party Blair must have...

Ho, ho, ho.

A right wing socialist party like they have in China where workers get
treated like [censored] and burglars and thieves get executed.

get the picture ?

You can still be a socialist/communist and be a right-wing totalitarian
[censored] like Lenin and the current Chinese govt.

left-wing socialism has rarely ever been tried out anywhere in the world
apart from a few isolated experiments which either collapsed or were
crushed. The Zapatistas spring to mind as being one of the few left-wing
socialist groups around having any success.

Quoted message said:

A right wing socialist party like they have in China where workers get
treated like [censored] and burglars and thieves get executed.

get the picture ?

No. Socialism is "from each according to their ability, to each
according to their need". "From each according to what they're told,
and to each according to them being a card-carrying member of the
government party" is /not/ the same thing.

Quoted message said:

You can still be a socialist/communist and be a right-wing totalitarian
[censored] like Lenin and the current Chinese govt.

No. See above. Just because they /say/ they're socialists doesn't make
them socialists. Remember what "Nazi" is an abbreviation of for more
evidence here.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Quoted message said:

A right wing socialist party like they have in China where workers get
treated like [censored] and burglars and thieves get executed.

get the picture ?

No. Socialism is "from each according to their ability, to each
according to their need".

that is ONE phrase from ONE socialist philosopher .
there are many other socialist philosophers.
Marx also believed in the idea of a dictatorship of a small ideologically
driven hard core party which is what the Bolsviks turned out to be.
The socialism of the bolsheviks was directly inspired by Marx's centralised
idea of socialism which was in contrast to the socialism advocated by
anarchists and others.

Peter Clinch said:

No. See above. Just because they /say/ they're socialists doesn't
make them socialists. Remember what "Nazi" is an abbreviation of for
more evidence here.

/And/ vice-versa. Could someone remind when the last time /anyone/ in the
So-Called Labour Party mentioned the word "socialism"?

Bah!

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

in message <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

(') said:

Peter Clinch said:

Quoted message said:

A right wing socialist party like they have in China where workers
get treated like [censored] and burglars and thieves get executed.

get the picture ?

No. Socialism is "from each according to their ability, to each
according to their need".

that is ONE phrase from ONE socialist philosopher .
there are many other socialist philosophers.
Marx also believed in the idea of a dictatorship of a small
ideologically driven hard core party which is what the Bolsviks turned
out to be.

And Marx was, as you correctly point out, only ONE socialist
philosopher.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

I shall continue to be an impossible person so long as those
who are now possible remain possible -- Michael Bakunin

Richard said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4268873.stm

....

Quoted message said:

"I don't want it to end with a brick through someone's window."

I guess the response to that is "I don't want it to end with two tons of
metal through someone's body.

I originally wrote a ton, but had to edit for reasons of accuracy.

A

Jon Senior said:

Which is all very interesting, but doesn't address the problem raised,
namely: Why is it unacceptable for a person to potentially monitor
their neighbour's behaviour, but acceptable for that neighbour to
pose a threat? Would it be more acceptable if the person who caught
them were a policeman? What if they were also a neighbour?

I should have thought it's obvious. It's an invasion of privacy if someone
who knows you records it, it's a waste of police time if a police officer
books you for it, and it's a substitute for real traffic police if a machine
catches you doing it.

What could be clearer than that?

A

Tony Raven said:

Jon Senior said:

And what the hell is a "right-wing socialist"?

Presumably one of the many socialist millionaires who believe in
redistributing everyone's wealth except for their own.

You mean like Sean Connery?

A