Yet Another evolution article on Slashdot

[bsniadajewski]

Anything, when taken to extremes, can and will lead to violence. (I'm not going to Godwin this thread though.)

@rms it may (or may not be) wise in all situations, but it is something to work towards (turn the other cheek , ect.)

So ... no bitterness towards the other fromer Yugo slav republics (even after the hell that was Bosnia, for all factions)?

[woodsmoke]

Something that comes to mind are a few lines from the works of Cyril Scott.

woodsmoke

[SteveRiley]

One might also remember that extreme liberalism(communism)

I would quibble with the assertion that "extreme liberalism" = communism, because there is actually very little liberty in such places as the examples you cite.

A more general assertion is that violence is a necessary and sufficient tool for any restrictive regime to obtain and maintain power.

[rms]

So ... no bitterness towards the other fromer Yugo slav republics (even after the hell that was Bosnia, for all factions)?

None. I see it personally as a retribution for WWII. They were all collaborating with the nazis and gave us hell. So, our turn came... now we are even.

[bsniadajewski]

It sounds like you were referring to the Nazi-coollaborating Ustaši. IT goes to show you it's always the bad apple(s) that somewqhat ruin it for the whole group.

Interesting fact, Tito was Croat-Slovene.

[rms]

Interesting fact, Tito was Croat-Slovene.

Looking from this perspective, he's nationality didn't matter. He managed to unite us at least around certain topics and life was better than, in some ways, than it is now when we're wide apart. Integration is always much better than disintegration. So, I look with sympathy on EU although I don't know if it will last long considering present economic issues.

[bsniadajewski]

He did a very good job, regardless of ideology, of keeping things somewhat peaceful, considering there was some tensions brewing resulting in the 1974 Constitution (a good compromise there). It seemed that only after Milošević (speaking of bad apples) took over did things really start unravelling. I'm getting it from the Wikipedia article on Yugoslavia, looking at its more recent history (just before the breakup.)

Integration works best if all parts [in this case all the various ethnicities] are respected and treated equally.

[woodsmoke]

SR.
I think that most folks would agree that Marx states that "capitalism/conservatism" must end up on the ashpile of history.

Therefore the only other alternative to "conservatism" is "liberalism", if one discounts "libertarianism".

Marx wanted to destroy capitalism/conservatism, so one does not "start" with what one wants to destroy. The opposite of capitalism/conservatism is "liberalism".

So..the beginning liberals are replaced/forced into, more and more extreme liberalism, these people are more and more vehemently against conservatism/capitalism... Marx himself outlined the progression to socialism, Marxism and then Communism.

Communists want state ownership of the means of production. Communists "say" that they want everyone to be equal, nobody gets a dacha unless everybody gets a dacha.

Of course that is not what has happened in ANY case where capitalism/conservatism was replaced by "another system" and the other system, by definition starts with liberalism, which, as propounded by the President himself villifies everything there is about capitalism.

And then he goes and asks for campaign donations from the very capitalists he villifies.

I don't know that the "most" of the present day "liberals" in the U.S. "want" to actually "destroy" capitalism, I think they want to get enough of it destroyed that somehow they get to keep their nice incomes because they "should"....since they are smarter than all those "other people"... just destroy "enough" of it to make them feel like they are in control.

What they don't understand is just what Calvin showed in Geneva... he was going around counting the number of women's shoes in their closets and the height of the heels because it was bad for their soul. Calvin being an example of a hyper conservative. The women just hid their shoes.

What do we see now with liberalism? A law forcing people to not buy a 32 ounce drink because it is bad for people's waistline. However they can just buy two 16 ounce drinks and double the amount of trash in the landfills.

The problem with either extreme position is that the people at the "beginnings" of it think...."oh it will never happen to ME!".

But the simple fact of the matter is that in no communist country which killed untold thousands of people.....did they start with the "premise" that the "new order" would be one of "conservatism/capitalism" .they wanted to destroy it and produce a more.....liberal society, free of the wicked capitalists.

woodsmoke

[SteveRiley]

It would appear that you view liberalism as a category, and communism as an instance of a thing in that category. I guess here's where we would disagree. Liberalism derives, of course, from liberty, which we all equate to a form of freedom.

I agree with you about the nanny-state garbage. But conservative/capitalist regimes can be just as guilty of drinking the control kool-aid. Consider, for example, conservatism's unhealthy fascination with what consenting adults choose to do behind closed doors. If the government has no business poking around inside my wallet, then it has no business poking around inside my bed, either.

[woodsmoke]

You and I are in complete agreement that both sides can have extremes.

woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

I forgot to post this essay: on the muddying of the waters in terms of the terms socialist and liberalism/liberal and communism

it is short and worth a read.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...onah-goldberg#

woodsmoke

[rms]

It seemed that only after Milošević (speaking of bad apples) took over did things really start unravelling. I'm getting it from the Wikipedia article on Yugoslavia, looking at its more recent history (just before the breakup.)

Integration works best if all parts [in this case all the various ethnicities] are respected and treated equally.

I have the opinion that there was more than one bad apple. They were all(the presidents of 6 republics, all party men hungry for power), to greater or lesser degree, fighting for power trying to become another Tito cause we where not living in communism/socialism under Tito but in some strange concoction which was in it's nature a dictature and Tito was a cult(not really, most people were unwilling to pay the price of speaking their minds).

You can imagine when, Tito died, how attractive this supreme position was for the bad apples. But since nobody of them could get the upper hand, they decided to ruin it and become caliphs in their backyards and that was easiest to accomplish by raising chauvinism and xenophobia. Sadly, the tactics worked and the rest of it is known.

As for respect and good treatment, some people appear to be childish even in adult age. No matter how much you give of both, in goodwill, they always feel they are maltreated because they have this soap-bubble-opinion-imagination that they are very, very special.

[bsniadajewski]

... cause we where not living in communism/socialism under Tito but in some strange concoction which was in it's nature a dictature and Tito was a cult(not really, most people were unwilling to pay the price of speaking their minds). ...

So, almost like Stalin, but somewhat less paranoid?

(BTW, I'm loving this conversation about ... evolution, socialiam, Yugoslavia and religion. Interesting combo)

[bsniadajewski]

@woodsmoke

That is a very interesting read.

[rms]

So, almost like Stalin, but somewhat less paranoid?

Not less, just with a better guise.



Those who didn't like him, at one time, where sent on a free vacation to Goli Otok where they, who survived, mastered the art of stonemasonry.