Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 last
To: commieprof
You stated that the US "controls" 60% of the worlds "wealth". There is a problem with you premise, wealth is created (continiously) it is not controlled. The economy is a process not a thing, it is dynamic (and chaotic) not static. Marxist see a fixed sized ecomnomy which is divided, whoever the size of the economy is not fixed, wealth is not static, it can and is created constantly.
You contend that our way of life isn't the key to an improved standard of living for those in poor countries, you are wrong. Property rights, and Economic Freedom are requirements for Political Freedom. With these freedoms you will have the basis for a better standard of living for the poor.
You suggested some reading materials, thanks. I would like to suggest some reading to help you understand why socialism is bankrupt and capitalism is the way to go, try "Free to Choose" by Milton Freidman and "vision of the Anointed" by Thomas Sowell.
185 posted on
07/09/2002 8:55:44 AM PDT by
Leto
To: commieprof
Man, it must steam you to work for an organization that exists solely to make a profit. And it must simply
kill you if you have tenure. (I mean, you can't even get your butt thrown out on the street in protest).
And always in the back of your simple, me-versus-the-world mind is the disturbing feeling that your students don't give a damn what you think (you already know that the outside world looks upon you with amusement), and that instead they simply want a good grade in your class so that they can graduate and buy a nice car. How frustrating that must be.
I doubt that you are very objective at all, and I suspect the above reasons are why you insist so strongly that you are open to all points of view. Color me sceptical.
To: commieprof
As a socialist (not a Stalinist, and there is a difference),
Correct.
The difference between a Stalinist and a socialist is that a Stalinist knows what he is doing.
To: commieprof
Aren't we caught up with ourselves? I didn't read what you first wrote and only scanned this nonsense. What you say does not matter. You are not important. Actually, you are a waste of time. Have a nice day.
To: commieprof
I get join out out of the fact that commie scum like you will soon burn in hell!
To: commieprof
Assitant Professor of Communications = Couldn't get a real job if your life depended on it.
To: commieprof
I suggest you read The Black Book of Communism. It documents 80-100 million dead in the 20th Century due to your evil, bankrupt philosophy. And from your remarks it appears your ilk wants to do it all over again in the 21st Century. I'm sure the people of the world will be grateful.
To: commieprof
Boy this is a real piece of work. The fact is that neither Jefferson nor Franklin said those words in reference to a democracy. There is a greater difference between a democracy and a republic than socialism and Stalinism.
To: commieprof
Ms. Cloud, I apologize for any threats of harm you may have received from my counterparts on Free Republic. Most of us are proponents of the Constitution and respect your right to dissent (regardless of how little we agree with it), so long as you attempt to effect change through democratic process. I personally respect your right to try to achieve this within the United States and do not suggest that you relocate to a foreign nation that would not allow you the right to speak your mind.
I do however wonder what solution you might offer to the wasp nest hanging here? You are right when you suggest that our way of life offers no hope to people living under the thumb of dictators. We have made attempts (albeit proportioned toward self interest) to correct this by removing some of the curruption from these nations. The result is typically that the dictator or government we extricate is replaced by another equally vile dictator or government and we wind up in a game of semantics, accusing our incumbent party at home of ineffective policy. The real reason that nothing changes is that the socitial structure of these afflicted nations consistently promotes despots to power and nothing short of occupation, measured in generations not months, will change this manner of thinking.
We have tried throwing money at the situation and know that most charitable institutions pocket the lions share of the support and that direct government aid rarely makes it to the intended recipients. We have also seen at home what happens when you hand people what they need to survive; they fail to learn how to provide for themselves or loose the initiative to change their circumstances.
While we are at it, Socialism and Communism don't seem to be valid solutions so long as human behavior remains unchanged. We can see what happened with the USSR and like it or not, China is slowly moving in the direction of the "Glasnost" environment. Do you think that there will be any tangible deviation from the outcome of the same situation in the Soviet Union? People are inherently greedy Professor, this may not appeal to your sense of fairness but it is the truth and it is not about to change. We want more for ourselves and our families. More possessions, more luxury, more security, and believe it or not, for others not to suffer out of our own want of magnanimity. People are willing to strive to better their situation but if you remove all hope of prosperity, people will not work to obtain it. This is why Communism usually winds up as Totalitarianism and Dictatorship. You need force to compel people to work because otherwise there is no motivation to do so.
And why do you think people go to work in Nike factories overseas when the pay is poor and the working conditions even worse. Could it be because it still provides a better lifestyle than they were accustomed to? Is it possible that the reason they begin complaining about it is that they still want more for themselves? You are quick to point out that you want to fight avarice but in doing so is it possible that you are supporting envy?
To: commieprof
"... When four percent of the world's population controls more than 60% of the world's wealth [...] it is impossible for me to remain uncritical..." You should dedicate yourself to improving your critical thinking.
The 'wealth' you cite is created by the same minority of people.
It's not as if an evil gang of capitalists is stealing resources from an previously-untapped African mine full of Microsoft Office XP CD-ROMs, is it? Are they conspiring with third-world dictators to rob his subjects of their natural deposits of k.d. lang albums?
What use has a Kenyan Masai tribesman for a $2.8 million Sun StorEdge 9980 System except to smash the magneto-optical storage discs inside it into tiny bits to fashion necklaces for his whole tribe?
It really is insulting to use an alarmist and thoroughly-unexamined economic non-sequitur in attempting to seed guilt on people that have nothing to feel guilty about in the first place.
Have you ever considered putting down the signs and sloganeering and getting your hands dirty doing the hard work to help the people that you claim to champion?
By the looks of it, you rarely get your fat ass off the couch except to wolf down another box of Dove bars -- yet another overpriced capitalist item that a Masai tribesman doesn't need.
To: commieprof
Please answer me a question: If you are a communist of the Karl Marx persuasion should you really be so active? According to Marx, there is no way to ``speed up'' the dialectical process. Each economic stage rises and declines in it's own time, according to Marx. There is no way humans can have an impact. If, according to Marx, capitalism will decay when it reaches that stage, and not before, why would someone try do the impossible, try to influence the process? Either you won't have any effect at all, or possibly you could prolong the capitalist stage.
To: commieprof
From your "Theories of Persuasion" Class Curriculum:
"This course is an introduction to persuasion in its various contexts, from political campaigns to advertising campaigns, from the President of the United States to popular music, from the nightly news to used car sales. The goal of this course is to encourage you to receive persuasive messages with an analytical and critical mindset. This is a receiver-oriented class. This means we will be taking apart persuasive messages in order to better understand how influence is wielded in everyday communication settings like interpersonal relationships, television news, popular culture, and political speech.
We will be dealing with some controversial and sensitive political issues such as news coverage of the Gulf War, persuasion about the Holocaust, abortion rhetoric, and contemporary race relations. Our purpose is not to come to conclusions about where to stand in these cases. Instead, let's look at how each public event we study is put together, arranged and structured for popular consumption. We must ask ourselves what we are being asked to do, to believe, and to value by the texts we encounter every day, and how messages are structured to get us to come to those beliefs and values."
Sounds like back to the classroom for you.
To: commieprof
Dear Commieprof
Help me out here. Please. What country(s) (nation-state), if any, do you think do things the right way? I am trying to imagine (ala J. Lennon) what a country would look like if based on your beliefs. If, currently, there are no countries in the world that you find "acceptable/passable", please let me know the ones that come closest.
Your obediant prole,
parsy.
To: commieprof
To: commieprof
"If you cherish the freedoms of the United States, it would be hypocritical of you to be intolerant of the expression of opinions that differ from yours."
It was the founding fathers "intolerance" towards Britain's government that gave us our Democratic republic in the first place.
It is intolerance to murdering babies that will save their lives.
It is intolerance to radical regimes that will give their citizens freedom.
It is intolerance to this socialbabble that will keep us free and sovereign.
It is intolerance to professors such as this who are on the dole of the taxpayers who use their time against the taxpayers.
It is intolerance toward radical islam that will win the war on terror.
It is blind tolerance that allowed us to get into the situation that we are in. Tolerance of radical homosexual agendas, radical enviro policies, abortion, moral relativity and tolerence of leftists as they try to silence us through intimidation and demand that we are tolerant.
The only tolerance that we should show, is when other views do not try to take from us the freedoms that we are assured through the constitution. When others as part of their agenda demand us to accept immorality, illegality, and irresponsibility then we must stand up and become intolerant.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson