RE: Democracy?

[Greg Peisert <gpeisert@jamesgregory.com>]

Margaret;

   Me thinks thou doest protest too much! You are guilty of precisely the 
things of which you accuse me. In your last diatribe, you rant about the 
rich, (a kid of racism against the rich), you make sweeping generalizations 
and accusations that are reminiscent of Hitler (indeed, you brought him 
up), you advocate a society in which one class can make some kind of 
immoral claim on another based on the blank check of "need" and then you 
accuse me of lacking substance in my replies?

   Roy offered you a response to the issue of taxation that offered up 
specific numbers, specific scenarios, demonstrating how the poor would do 
better under the FairTax proposal. Did you respond to any substance? NO! 
You responded with leftist diatribe about the eeeevils of capitalism and 
the rich. You see a "capitalist conspiracy" under every creative idea.

   I notice that since my response to Laura on the Social Security issue, 
all has been eerily silent. Well, can you admit that it's a damned good 
idea and get behind it, or must you oppose every creative idea becuase you 
are so afraid of being taken in that you can't be taken out.

   I'm engaging in no McCarthyism here, no political witch hunt, no 
diatribe about communism, no name-calling. I'm claiming that the premises 
for society that you espouse are fundamentally Marxist. And I can back that 
up with specifics, if you'd like. You should view that as at compliment, if 
you really hold those positions; stand up for what you believe in.

--Greg



On Friday, February 05, 1999 11:19 AM, Margaret Tarbet 
[SMTP:tarbet@swaa.com] wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 09:51:22 -0500, Greg wrote:
>
> >   What you advocated was Marxism. Indeed, one reason I withheld my 
answer
> >(which sits in one of my mailboxes, unsent), is that I want to get 
copies
> >of two books and have a look at them, in light of your response. One is
> >"The Communist Manifesto" by our friend Karl, and the other is "Mein 
Kampf"
> >by that sterling paragon of logic, the then imprisoned German corporal.
>
> Greg, waving bogeymen like banners is not argument, it's demagogery.
> Did you ever read Adams's _Goodbye and thanks for all the fish_?  In
> one of the openings scenes, to get a certain little dog yapping
> madly all folk need do is to say 'Commie!  Commie!'.    There are
> plenty people in the US and elsewhere who are like that little dog,
> trained to yap in response to such an empty pavlovian stimulus, but
> i'll wager those in this list are not such.  Save it for those who
> are hard-of-thinking, okay?   Respond with ideas, not ideology.
>
>
> >  I of course utterly reject this nonsense that the purpose of a society 
is
> >to "take care of it's members." I believe the purpose of a society is to 
> >help ensure that its members retain the freedom to "take care of
> >themselves." These two perspectives are at the opposite ends of the
> >spectrum.
>
> As usual, Greg, you mis-read what i said.   Is the basis for your
> beliefs so fragile that you cannot even read correctly?   For pity's
> sake!
>
>
> >  So, will I ever send that other reply? I think not.
>
> Yeah, i didn't think you would.