On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:17:19 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:

> According to rbowman <bowman@montana.com>:
>>On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The French invented the system.
>>
>>Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create
>>a brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>
> Have you been to France? Pretty well if you ask me.

No. After a couple of more empires, Napoleon, the Return of the Bourbons,
another revolution and taking a beating in the Franco-Prussian War, WWI,
WWII, and losing all its colonies the country survived. It even has
survived Macron.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:14:44 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 21 Oct 2024 23:17:12 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:53:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Once the Left introduced morality into politics it left the door open
>>>> for every kind of hatred and bigotry.
>>>
>>> I thought it was the Right, not the Left, that wanted to turn abortion
>>> rights from a health issue into a religious issue.
>>
>> The left are just as religious in a secular sort of way.
>
> Is that supposed to be saying something good about religion, or
> something bad?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

1, if you leave aside the supernatural and 3 are fitting. Hoffer's 'The
True Believer' is dated but still valid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer

You might want to examine one of your beliefs, equality. Unless you
abstract it to the point of meaninglessness it is no different than a
belief in a diety, an afterlife, salvation, or any other fervently held
beliefs.

> Or indeed, males who cannot have babies at all, also supporting such a
> thing. You find it odd that human beings might want to support each
> other in a common fight?
>
> I never thought of compassion as a “left-wing” thing, but so be it ...

I've been rereading Nietzsche. You should try some. How do you equate
brutal, short lives without a coercive government with compassion as a
universal virtue?

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> The French invented the system.
>
> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create a
> brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>

Classic "democrats". You can still see traces of that in their US
relatives today. ;)

On Mon, 21 Oct 2024, Dave Yeo wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:00:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I would say that they are capitalist grifters using social morality to
>>> justify what they do.
>>>
>>> Same as the whole West.
>>>
>>> Socialism is the new opium of the people.
>> Wait ... socialism is actually “capitalist” now? Does that make it good or
>> bad?
>
> There's always been socialism in the market economy working much like the
> capitalists. Consider Credit Unions, socialist companies owned by their
> members competing against capitalist banks. Various types of Co-op's too.
> It's always funny people like D who don't seem to have anything but
> propaganda to inform them that socialism equals big government.
> Dave
>

You have no clue about what sociaism or capitalism is. Credit unions are
definitely not socialism and neither is a company owned by employees. In
fact, what makes those two forms possible, is private property rights and
capitalism. Nowhere does capitalism state that there can be only one
individual owner.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024, John Levine wrote:

> According to rbowman <bowman@montana.com>:
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The French invented the system.
>>
>> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create a
>> brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>
> Have you been to France? Pretty well if you ask me.

Horrible. There are arabians and negroes rioting everywhere, burning cars
and crime.

But, there is hope. If Le Pen & Co will win, they could turn this around
by ejecting the arabians and negroes and start to rebuild what has been
destroyed.

On 22/10/2024 00:17, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:53:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Once the Left introduced morality into politics it left the door open
>>> for every kind of hatred and bigotry.
>>
>> I thought it was the Right, not the Left, that wanted to turn abortion
>> rights from a health issue into a religious issue.
>
> The left are just as religious in a secular sort of way. I do find it
> amusing to see menopausal women all heated up about pro-choice. I don't
> have a dog in the fight; neither do they.
>
> Personally I don't want to see a Federal law either way; the issue should
> be decided at the state or local level. If you don't like what the people
> of the state decide, move.

Indeed. One of the reasons the USA has held together is because state
legislation is quite powerful and federal more sparse.
Imagine if there was a federal law insisting that you pick up your dog's
shit and put it in a shitbin, and they applied that in Montana..

--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.

On 22/10/2024 07:30, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:14:44 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 21 Oct 2024 23:17:12 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:53:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Once the Left introduced morality into politics it left the door open
>>>>> for every kind of hatred and bigotry.
>>>>
>>>> I thought it was the Right, not the Left, that wanted to turn abortion
>>>> rights from a health issue into a religious issue.
>>>
>>> The left are just as religious in a secular sort of way.
>>
>> Is that supposed to be saying something good about religion, or
>> something bad?
>
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
>
> 1, if you leave aside the supernatural and 3 are fitting. Hoffer's 'The
> True Believer' is dated but still valid.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Believer
>
> You might want to examine one of your beliefs, equality. Unless you
> abstract it to the point of meaninglessness it is no different than a
> belief in a diety, an afterlife, salvation, or any other fervently held
> beliefs.
>
>
Deity.

>> Or indeed, males who cannot have babies at all, also supporting such a
>> thing. You find it odd that human beings might want to support each
>> other in a common fight?
>>
>> I never thought of compassion as a “left-wing” thing, but so be it ...
>
>
> I've been rereading Nietzsche. You should try some. How do you equate
> brutal, short lives without a coercive government with compassion as a
> universal virtue?

In the end Nietzsche was just another nutter,. A comedian poking fun
which some people took seriously.

Where morality is concerned, we are products of ancestors whose
behaviour *for whatever reason* enabled us to be born and survive long
enough to be here.

Nietzsche observed that life's losers didn't reproduce. Hitler made it
policy.

--
“Progress is precisely that which rules and regulations did not foresee,”

– Ludwig von Mises

On 22/10/2024 01:51, Dave Yeo wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:00:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I would say that they are capitalist grifters using social morality to
>>> justify what they do.
>>>
>>> Same as the whole West.
>>>
>>> Socialism is the new opium of the people.
>> Wait ... socialism is actually “capitalist” now? Does that make it
>> good or
>> bad?
>
> There's always been socialism in the market economy working much like
> the capitalists. Consider Credit Unions, socialist companies owned by
> their members competing against capitalist banks. Various types of
> Co-op's too.
> It's always funny people like D who don't seem to have anything but
> propaganda to inform them that socialism equals big government.
> Dave

It does today, and that is what most people mean by socialism. Not the
natural tendency of co-operation in the tribe, but the post Marxist
elevation of that to a faux principle to justify the moral imperative of
big government up to and including full blown communism.

The difference (used to be) between Left and Right was that the Left
attempted to maximise the State, whilst the Right attempted to minimise it.

Today everyone wants totalitarian government. Provided it reflects
*their* worldview.

This is what Russia has managed to achieve in Western society since
WWII. A tacit acceptance that democracy is pathetic and weak.

Behind 'social justice' lies the faux post Marxist principle that
'everyone is oppressed, or oppressing, and therefore a natural state of
conflict exists, and it is the job of government to fix that'.

Never was so much bullshit imposed on so many by so few.

No, I hold it as self evident that anyone who thinks that 'all men are
created equal' is a dangerous raving lunatic and belongs in an asylum.

--
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house
for the voice of the kingdom.

Jonathan Swift

On 22/10/2024 08:46, D wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024, Dave Yeo wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:00:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would say that they are capitalist grifters using social morality to
>>>> justify what they do.
>>>>
>>>> Same as the whole West.
>>>>
>>>> Socialism is the new opium of the people.
>>> Wait ... socialism is actually “capitalist” now? Does that make it
>>> good or
>>> bad?
>>
>> There's always been socialism in the market economy working much like
>> the capitalists. Consider Credit Unions, socialist companies owned by
>> their members competing against capitalist banks. Various types of
>> Co-op's too.
>> It's always funny people like D who don't seem to have anything but
>> propaganda to inform them that socialism equals big government.
>> Dave
>>
>
> You have no clue about what sociaism or capitalism is. Credit unions are
> definitely not socialism and neither is a company owned by employees. In
> fact, what makes those two forms possible, is private property rights
> and capitalism. Nowhere does capitalism state that there can be only one
> individual owner.

The mere fact that you both talk about socialism as the antithesis of
capitalism shows that wittingly or unwittingly you both have absorbed
implicitly the Marxist worldview.

In reality the best companies are co-operative ventures between staff,
shareholders, and directors, in which oddly enough everyone contributes
according to his means.

Unfortunately they seldom pay out according to agents needs, but hey,
its half the equation, right?

But the point about Marxism is not that it identifies a solution through
revolutionary struggle towards Utopia, but that it divides society
neatly into black hats and white hats, and sets up an eternal gunfight
at the wall street corral.

It is a purely destructive force. One that justifies a new elite far far
worse than the old as the apparatchiks bureaucrats and commissars in
charge of the moral compass of the nation, having usurped it from the
priests, and in charge of the capital wealth of the nation, having
usurped it from the one most competent in using it to generate wealth,
can now oversee the descent of the nation into 'the equal sharing of
poverty' - apart from the apparatchiks who buy in all the Capitalist
goods they cant make themselves for their palaces and dachas.

Or that was the way it used to be, before the Left became capitalists
themselves, and realised that the cost of buying enough politicians.
marketing people and activists to pass laws and taxes to make something
as ridiculous as - say - windmills, a highly profitable investment, was
vastly preferable to the extremely hard and detailed engineering needed
to build a grid that actually worked using - say - nuclear power stations.

In that sense the companies themselves have gone 'socialist' in that,
like Marx, they regard economics as a zero sum game.

That is, it isn't about creating more wealth, it's about who gets to own
what there is left.

--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

On 22/10/2024 09:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Behind 'social justice' lies the faux post Marxist principle that
> 'everyone is  oppressed, or oppressing, and therefore a natural state of
> conflict exists, and it is the job of government to fix that'.
>

This is what law and order is about, having rules, not socialism.

It is clear that rules are required. The trick is to provide rules that
incentivise contribution to society, and collaboration with society.
That is where communist style "socialism" failed. Capitalist societies
have failed too. Why they failed is nuanced. There certainly needs to be
a balance.

We could have a viable society that ruthlessly eliminated the weak, like
Nazi ideology, or even stronger. However, I think most of us like having
a society that cares for the old and infirm. Some of us benefit from
such a society. You should be careful about saying all rules are wrong.

> Never was so much bullshit imposed on so many by so few.
>
> No, I hold it as self evident that anyone who thinks that 'all men are
> created equal' is a dangerous raving lunatic and belongs in an asylum.
>

I think all men are created equal was about class hierarchies rather
than innate ability. i.e. about being citizens rather than subjects or
slaves.

On 22/10/2024 10:01, Pancho wrote:
> On 22/10/2024 09:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Behind 'social justice' lies the faux post Marxist principle that
>> 'everyone is  oppressed, or oppressing, and therefore a natural state
>> of conflict exists, and it is the job of government to fix that'.
>>
>
> This is what law and order is about, having rules,  not socialism.
>
Red herring.

All societies need law and order. That's not socialism and its not
capitalism.

> It is clear that rules are required. The trick is to provide rules that
> incentivise contribution to society, and collaboration with society.
> That is where communist style "socialism" failed. Capitalist societies
> have failed too. Why they failed is nuanced. There certainly needs to be
> a balance.
>
> We could have a viable society that ruthlessly eliminated the weak, like
> Nazi ideology, or even stronger. However, I think most of us like having
> a society that cares for the old and infirm. Some of us benefit from
> such a society. You should be careful about saying all rules are wrong.
>
>> Never was so much bullshit imposed on so many by so few.
>>
>> No, I hold it as self evident that anyone who thinks that 'all men are
>> created equal' is a dangerous raving lunatic and belongs in an asylum.
>>
>
> I think all men are created equal was about class hierarchies rather
> than innate ability. i.e. about being citizens rather than subjects or
> slaves.
>
You think? Interesting. So you don't actually clearly *know* what is -
or was - meant by those stirring words of Liberté, Egalité and
Fraternité?

The ones that led to a nice line in regicide and the execution of
thousands at the hands of Madam La Guillotine?

--
Of what good are dead warriors? … Warriors are those who desire battle
more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory … The good of dead warriors, Mother, is
that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:11:23 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> With advanced things like MicroPython around (and feasible on modern
> hardware), there is even less need for Forth than there was before.

OTOH, what I'm seeing for baseline memory footprint for uPython (i.e.
sufficient for building non-trivial embedded applications) is something
like 8KB RAM/128 KB Flash; my 65C02 SBC is running Tali Forth (a fairly
full-featured, speed-over-space variant) in about 24 KB EEPROM, while
more minimalist Forth kernels can fit into 8-16 KB, and working RAM
usage (depending on the application) is often commensurately small.

Which, sure, beefy microcontrollers with comparatively spacious memory
loadouts are cheaper than ever, but less luxurious ones are cheaper
still - and a byte saved is, as always, a byte earned ;)

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:22:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Indeed. One of the reasons the USA has held together is because state
> legislation is quite powerful and federal more sparse.
> Imagine if there was a federal law insisting that you pick up your dog's
> shit and put it in a shitbin, and they applied that in Montana..

We try. The trailheads have free plastic back dispensers and pictorial
descriptions of the technique used to pick up the shit without soiling
your hands. Unfortunately the instructions stop there resulting in
brightly colored bags of dog shit along the trails.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:01:47 +0100, Pancho wrote:

> We could have a viable society that ruthlessly eliminated the weak, like
> Nazi ideology, or even stronger. However, I think most of us like having
> a society that cares for the old and infirm. Some of us benefit from
> such a society. You should be careful about saying all rules are wrong.

The problem lies with differentiating between the care of the old and
infirm and the support of generations of an underclass. The saying 'a
safety net, not a hammock' is apropos.

On 22/10/2024 18:30, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:22:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Indeed. One of the reasons the USA has held together is because state
>> legislation is quite powerful and federal more sparse.
>> Imagine if there was a federal law insisting that you pick up your dog's
>> shit and put it in a shitbin, and they applied that in Montana..
>
> We try. The trailheads have free plastic back dispensers and pictorial
> descriptions of the technique used to pick up the shit without soiling
> your hands. Unfortunately the instructions stop there resulting in
> brightly colored bags of dog shit along the trails.
>
Which is as usual with legislation a far worse outcome than a
biodegradable dog turd.

--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:53:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Once the Left introduced morality into politics it left the door open
>>> for every kind of hatred and bigotry.
>>
>> I thought it was the Right, not the Left, that wanted to turn abortion
>> rights from a health issue into a religious issue.
>
> The left are just as religious in a secular sort of way. I do find it
> amusing to see menopausal women all heated up about pro-choice. I don't
> have a dog in the fight; neither do they.
>
> Personally I don't want to see a Federal law either way; the issue should
> be decided at the state or local level. If you don't like what the people
> of the state decide, move.
>

I used to argue against abortion, but with all the fuss I have come to
realize that my libertarian instincts have risen to the top. Just have the
government stay the h*ll out of it.

--
Pete

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 22 Oct 2024 00:44:34 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The French invented the system.
>>
>> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create
>> a brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>
> It worked well enough that they were friends of yours, supporting your
> revolution, too.
>
> Have you forgotten where that big statue in New York City came from?
>

It was King Louie the <mumble> who supported the revolution. He just wanted
to twist the British Lion’s tail.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: The joy of Democracy
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:14:32 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <706271996.751312948.070462.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
References: <vemfq7$1qobu$5@dont-email.me>
<venqec$24hhj$2@dont-email.me>
<sFRPO.380393$FzW1.50024@fx14.iad>
<mm96uk-us2.ln1@anthive.com>
<82bcedf2-be4a-a2da-3f77-fbbed147ef30@example.net>
<b_cQO.485643$_o_3.184210@fx17.iad>
<ves1hu$2tsr0$2@dont-email.me>
<JehQO.486095$_o_3.317717@fx17.iad>
<ves7mv$2uo13$7@dont-email.me>
<lndphtFfcr3U2@mid.individual.net>
<vetdc9$388hc$13@dont-email.me>
<veuj7o$3fkh5$4@dont-email.me>
<lngmi7Fst0qU1@mid.individual.net>
<vevftq$3o9uo$2@dont-email.me>
<XYRQO.507906$_o_3.272542@fx17.iad>
<vf19hg$1uso$4@dont-email.me>
<pc%QO.57699$vtH3.38256@fx07.iad>
<vf24e6$9mo4$1@dont-email.me>
<ErcRO.309186$v8v2.196849@fx18.iad>
<vf3sp0$itru$6@dont-email.me>
<vf5ctq$t9to$10@dont-email.me>
<lnnojfF86tU1@mid.individual.net>
<vf6fcu$13ctc$5@dont-email.me>
<lno59sF2de8U3@mid.individual.net>
<vf6n86$14l9a$4@dont-email.me>
<lnoarhF368kU3@mid.individual.net>
<vf6uch$15nlq$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 20:14:33 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="43c6581996a190e02a007a23102206ec";
logging-data="1691444"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18OZuojxieq5MRQPCo8ACB1"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.3.1 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EgG0DnxGGBmx7SdJm3CZpEuUmSY=
sha1:9g1c6Bf/TX7YduQPWQpGxlan2qA=
Xref: unconfigured alt.folklore.computers:1430 comp.os.linux.misc:3782

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 22 Oct 2024 00:44:34 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The French invented the system.
>>
>> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create
>> a brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>
> It worked well enough that they were friends of yours, supporting your
> revolution, too.
>
> Have you forgotten where that big statue in New York City came from?
>

It was King Louie the <mumble> who supported the revolution. He just wanted
to twist the British Lion’s tail.

--
Pete
.

--
Pete

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> According to rbowman <bowman@montana.com>:
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The French invented the system.
>>
>> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create a
>> brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>
> Have you been to France? Pretty well if you ask me.
>

France is a hot mess, struggling with an indigestible influx of Arab
immigrants. Although you wouldn’t know it to listen to the current
political rhetoric, America does a lot better integrating recent
immigrants. Could we do better? Sure, but we’re doing better than Europe.

--
Pete

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:17:19 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:
>
>> According to rbowman <bowman@montana.com>:
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 23:14:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> The French invented the system.
>>>
>>> Yeah, at the same time they were chopping heads off and trying to create
>>> a brand new culture. How did that work out for them?
>>
>> Have you been to France? Pretty well if you ask me.
>
> No. After a couple of more empires, Napoleon, the Return of the Bourbons,
> another revolution and taking a beating in the Franco-Prussian War, WWI,
> WWII, and losing all its colonies the country survived. It even has
> survived Macron.
>
>

Just watched a movie, maybe “Lost Command”, about the dirty war in Algeria.
It really was a mess. I worked with a guy who was a para in Algeria, and
now I see why he never spoke about it.

--
Pete

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 22/10/2024 08:46, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024, Dave Yeo wrote:
>>
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:00:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would say that they are capitalist grifters using social morality to
>>>>> justify what they do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same as the whole West.
>>>>>
>>>>> Socialism is the new opium of the people.
>>>> Wait ... socialism is actually “capitalist” now? Does that make it good
>>>> or
>>>> bad?
>>>
>>> There's always been socialism in the market economy working much like the
>>> capitalists. Consider Credit Unions, socialist companies owned by their
>>> members competing against capitalist banks. Various types of Co-op's too.
>>> It's always funny people like D who don't seem to have anything but
>>> propaganda to inform them that socialism equals big government.
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>> You have no clue about what sociaism or capitalism is. Credit unions are
>> definitely not socialism and neither is a company owned by employees. In
>> fact, what makes those two forms possible, is private property rights and
>> capitalism. Nowhere does capitalism state that there can be only one
>> individual owner.
>
> The mere fact that you both talk about socialism as the antithesis of
> capitalism shows that wittingly or unwittingly you both have absorbed
> implicitly the Marxist worldview.

The fact that you talk about Marxism shows that you have shifted the goal
post. I am talking about socialism of which marxism is a subset.

> In reality the best companies are co-operative ventures between staff,
> shareholders, and directors, in which oddly enough everyone contributes
> according to his means.

My point exactly. Thank you. Although not everyone contributes according
to his means. It's an imperfect world. Some contribute more some less, and
of course there are single person companies and LLC who can very well be
among the best.

All as it should be due to the plurality and experiment encouraged by the
market.

> Unfortunately they seldom pay out according to agents needs, but hey, its
> half the equation, right?
>
> But the point about Marxism is not that it identifies a solution through
> revolutionary struggle towards Utopia, but that it divides society neatly
> into black hats and white hats, and sets up an eternal gunfight at the wall
> street corral.

That goes for all isms looking to strengthen the in-group, and the expense
of the out-group. See national socialism, religion, woke:ism etc.

> It is a purely destructive force. One that justifies a new elite far far
> worse than the old as the apparatchiks bureaucrats and commissars in charge
> of the moral compass of the nation, having usurped it from the priests, and
> in charge of the capital wealth of the nation, having usurped it from the one
> most competent in using it to generate wealth, can now oversee the descent of
> the nation into 'the equal sharing of poverty' - apart from the apparatchiks
> who buy in all the Capitalist goods they cant make themselves for their
> palaces and dachas.

Socialism is a very dangerous and destructive force. That is correct, and
it must be fought again, and again, where ever it pops up.

> Or that was the way it used to be, before the Left became capitalists
> themselves, and realised that the cost of buying enough politicians.
> marketing people and activists to pass laws and taxes to make something as
> ridiculous as - say - windmills, a highly profitable investment, was vastly
> preferable to the extremely hard and detailed engineering needed to build a
> grid that actually worked using - say - nuclear power stations.
>
> In that sense the companies themselves have gone 'socialist' in that, like
> Marx, they regard economics as a zero sum game.

Incorrect. By design they do what they do, and whether the economy is zero
sum (it is not) or not, does not really apply. That is why todays
crypto-socialist government is so extremely dangerous. It subverts and
distorts the markets, just by existing.

> That is, it isn't about creating more wealth, it's about who gets to own what
> there is left.

True.

On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:53:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Once the Left introduced morality into politics it left the door open
>> for every kind of hatred and bigotry.
>
> I thought it was the Right, not the Left, that wanted to turn abortion
> rights from a health issue into a religious issue.

And every one of them practicing medicine without
both a license and a moral compass.

On 2024-10-21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On 21 Oct 2024 19:33:03 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> Add up all those milliliters and pretty soon you have another bottle of
>> booze to sell.
>
> Make them say “millilitres” first ... if they can’t, don’t sell it to
> ’em ...

Easy. It's pronounced "see see".

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

On 2024-10-22, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> We can build better statues out of spare parts.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_the_Rockies

Thanks for that. We went through Butte this summer, but missed it.
Time for a return trip.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

On 2024-10-22, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:22:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Indeed. One of the reasons the USA has held together is because state
>> legislation is quite powerful and federal more sparse.
>> Imagine if there was a federal law insisting that you pick up your dog's
>> shit and put it in a shitbin, and they applied that in Montana..
>
> We try. The trailheads have free plastic back dispensers and pictorial
> descriptions of the technique used to pick up the shit without soiling
> your hands. Unfortunately the instructions stop there resulting in
> brightly colored bags of dog shit along the trails.

That's not unique to Montana. We see those little bags everywhere
here in suburbia - sometimes right next to the bin where they belong.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

On 2024-10-21, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

> Charlie Gibbs wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2024-10-21, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> On 21/10/2024 12:11, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As an American, I have to say that America is *backward* and *dumb* in so
>>>>> many ways, so many more than I ever realized. Especially in the last
>>>>> decade or so.
>>>>
>>>> In some ways nostalgically innocent too. And therefore blessed by
>>>> ignorance.
>>>>
>>>> I cant criticise anyone for not knowing. Only maybe for not listening
>>>>
>>>>> Just gonna open up this bottle of bourbon and chug it. <glug glug glug glug
>>>>> glug glug glug glug glug ... ahhhhh>.
>>>>>
>>>>> Damn metric quarts! There's nothing to 'em!
>>>>>
>>>> I don't believe there is a metric quart. a litre is near enough. but larger
>>>
>>> It's a joke about the American resistance to the metric system. (I copped it
>>> from Proctor & Bergman).
>>
>> There's a couple of names I haven't heard in a while
>> (along with Austin and Ossman).
>>
>> "He's no fun, he fell right over."
>>
>>> One picture is worth more than ten thousand words.
>>> -- Chinese proverb
>>
>> But what if I'm looking for something that can be
>> concisely described in a hundred words? Even worse
>> is having to sit through a 20-minute YouTube video
>> to accomplish the same thing. Don't get me started...
>
> I hate "explanation" sites which are text, not video, but they start with manyh
> paragraphs explaining the subject of the question, before getting to the answer
> to the question. And of course all interspersed with ads and links to other
> ads and other topics.

At least with text you can skip ahead. You can't easily skip ahead in
a video and land at the right spot - assuming that there is one spot
and not a bunch of little spots separated by fluff and ads.

> Hiya friends! Ralph Spoilsport here from Ralph Spoilsport
> Motors, the world's largest new used and used new automobile dealership:
> Ralph Spoilsport Motors here in the city of Emphysema. Let's just look at
> the extras on this fabulous car! Wire-wheel spoke fenders and two-way
> sneeze through wind vents, star-studded mud guard, sponge-coated edible
> steering column, chrome fender dents - and factory air conditioned air from
> our fully factory-equipped air conditioned factory!
>
> It's a beautiful car friends, with doors to match! Birch's Blacklist says
> this car was stolen but for you friends a complete price: only
> two-ninety-five hundred dollars in easy monthly payments of twenty dollars
> a week twice a week and never on Sunday!

Antelope Freeway, one five hundred and twelfth mile.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut