On 2002-03-19 21:31, Marc Lamb wrote:
Marx had a maxim, Mr. Reed, it's very simple to learn, love and live. It goes like this:

<FONT SIZE="+2"><center>From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.</FONT></center>

My family operates that way.

I don't expect my seven-year-old to earn what she needs to buy groceries for herself, clothes, shelter, etc... She is expected to go to school and learn, to do homework and practice her recorder, to be nice to her Mom, to clean up after herself, to do some household chores, and the like.

I expect your family operates the same way, yes? Are you a Marxist? :grin:

On 2002-03-20 07:03, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
In the Opinion section of today's Washington Post AVOT's Mr. Wm. Bennett turns his firepower on that Principal of Darkness, the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania, the Demon Dubya. Say it isn't so, Bill!

Where Bush Rewards Terror

Israel, but I bet you guessed that already.

With a great air of proper respectability, ye stand on the sidelines while triangulating above it all, Mr. Saari--All the while throwing neat little spit-balls at the actors upon the stage.

The real question is... WWVD?




<FONT SIZE="-1">WWVD? is What Would Virgil Do?</FONT>

What I would like to know is, if Bush is so "dumb" and such a "loser," how come the American people have been so trusting of this guy for so long? Are the American people dumb losers?

On the topic of GWB's "dumbness":

By some measure, it is no doubt objectively true that GWB may have a lower IQ than many other politicians.

However, I'm pretty convinced that the media blew this out of proportion during during the 2000 campaign. I still remember how flabergasted I was by the "smirk" issue. It made the cover of Time, for crissakes! Hello! Can we have real issues, please?

A couple of years ago there was a lot of public discussion about "other kinds of intelligence", things like "emotional intelligence (EQ)" as opposed to IQ, things like that.

I am begining to suspect that GWB scores pretty high on these "other kinds of intelligence". Reports are pretty consistent across the board about this.

In a sense, this makes him the opposite of Gore.

A weak IQ, all other things being equal, is certainly not a benefit, but it can be compensated for by having high-IQ advisors.

My home is a religious institution, Ms. Genser. Something our fair Republic is not.

Or at least, should not be. :grin:

On 2002-03-20 06:38, Stonewall Patton wrote:

-snip- AVOT's list

:lol: :lol: :lol: :cry:

I'll try to articulate my response later.

On 2002-03-20 08:24, Jenny Genser wrote:

On 2002-03-19 21:31, Marc Lamb wrote:
Marx had a maxim, Mr. Reed, it's very simple to learn, love and live. It goes like this:

<FONT SIZE="+2"><center>From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.</FONT></center>

My family operates that way.

I don't expect my seven-year-old to earn what she needs to buy groceries for herself, clothes, shelter, etc... She is expected to go to school and learn, to do homework and practice her recorder, to be nice to her Mom, to clean up after herself, to do some household chores, and the like.

I expect your family operates the same way, yes? Are you a Marxist? :grin:

Excellent point, Jenny.

In college, I minored in political science, and was taught the following as practically an axiom:

COMMUNISM WORKS BETTER IN SMALL, HOMOGENOUS GROUPS. THE SMALLER AND MORE HOMOGENOUS, THE BETTER IT WILL WORK.

Yes, absolutely, most families are and have always been organized in a communist fashion. The parents have the most abilities, the older children fewer, the young children fewer still, and babies practically none. These various family members are expected to contribute according to their abilities.

Likewise, the babies are the most "needy", and are supplied their needs from the group. Etc, etc.

However, obviously, families are the smallest groups in society, and they are usually quite homogenous (in terms of culture, etc.)

Small collectives of dozens of people (such as kibbutzes) have also managed to apply communist principles with some degree of success for decades, but problems arise even at that small level.

Small, homogenous countries such as Iceland, Ireland, and Denmark have managed to be very socialist for long periods, with a degree of success, although there are big problems. I note that more problems are arising recently as their societies are becoming less homogenous due to immigration.

With a large, very diverse society like the U.S.A., communism would be a collosal failure from the start.

However, the term "Marxist" is only correctly used when discussing large groups. The fact that families are communist units does not make everyone a Marxist.

More on EQ:
I once heard a highly intelligent guy who had served for a time in the Army tell a hilarious story.

The guy, who we can call Grabowski, was new recruit. I can't remember how long he had been in the Army, but it wasn't very long. This may have even been in boot camp.

Grabowski and a bunch of other guys were given an intelligence test. Grabowski describes being pretty sleepy during the test, and was afraid he hadn't done very well, as some of the questions were tricky.

Well, when the results came back, Grabowski had scored at genius level. His Drill Instructor didn't believe it, and made him take the test again, all by himself, to be sure he wasn't cheating.

When Grabowski scored even higher the second time, his Drill Instructor remarked "Well, what the hell! I guess you are a genius, Grabowski! Well, LA-DEE-FUCKING-DA!"

Grabowski didn't get a lot of special treatment after that, although sometimes his DI did single him out to help the other guys in certain things.

My favorite part of the story was that Grabowski said his DI was smarter than him.

The real question is... WWVD?

About AVOT? About the Demon in the White House? About our armies and navies and air forces and marines and national guards spread about the planet? About our entangling alliances? About Neo-Cons? About Marc Lamb's pragmatism? About Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat?

Nah, Mr. Saari, about Mr Rush and Mr. Lamb.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story...670598,00.html

On 2002-03-20 07:03, Virgil K. Saari wrote:
In the Opinion section of today's Washington Post AVOT's Mr. Wm. Bennett turns his firepower on that Principal of Darkness, the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania, the Demon Dubya. Say it isn't so, Bill!

Where Bush Rewards Terror

Oh my goodness! The suspense is killing me! It makes you want to get a towel and clip it to your shoulders with clothespins! Will our hero pull through?

TUNE IN NEXT TIME...SAME BAT-TIME, SAME BAT-CHANNEL.

That's for sure.

Maybe the Millenials will fight the evil designs of Bush....
they'll mobilize against greedy capitalists who pollute our environment. No, you don'thave to be anti-American to oppose this administration. Just anti-Bush.


The Millenials will fight for socialism and green power. They won't fight Mr.Bush's war.
Progressive Power!

What is surprising, is that anyone,in the glaring light of history, would want to continue to even consider the Marxist ideology of the Russian Social Democratic party which is your first love

But it isn't, Marc. My first love was, and remains, social justice.


And that's where your entire structure falls apart.

Also,
the Millenials will fight for full equality for women and minorities. They won't forget the poor.

Progressive Power!

Millenials will build the world's tallest buildings in America again. They will modernize the Internet.

Millenials (1978-1999) will fight for the masses.

Progressive Power!

<FONT SIZE="+1"><center>"Social Justice" =</FONT></center>
<FONT SIZE="+1"><center>"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." =</FONT></center>
<FONT SIZE="+1"><center>Marxist ideology of the Russian Social Democratic party =</FONT></center>
<FONT SIZE="+1"><center>"Millenials (1978-1999) will fight for the masses!"</FONT></center>




Progressive Power!


<FONT SIZE="-1"><center>not that i'm agin' it, mind ya, just scared shitless by whole notion of it, is all. :smile: </FONT></center>



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-03-20 12:42 ]</font>

On 2002-03-20 12:13, Sbarros wrote:
They will modernize the Internet.

OK, that's about where you started to sound like you were joking.

I mean, compared to the other stuff, saying you will modernize the Internet is like saying you will repair the roads and paint the houses.

Sure, Millenials will modernize the internet. That's fine, but it's no big deal. Us lowly Xers do that every day.

What I want to know is, WILL THEY GO BACK TO THE MOON? WILL THEY COLONIZE THE ASTEROIDS?

But, if you were joking, it was funny:

Millenials will cure cure cancer!

Millenials will improve fuel efficiency!

Millenials will add vitamin A to rice!

Millenials will jump-start your car!

Millenials will improve baseball averages!

Millenials will develop better roofing materials!

Hey, go for it, kids!

Thank you for stating your errors so succinctly, Marc. And in large, bold type, too, just to be sure nobody misses them.


The equations you posted are false. In both cases, the first statement does not equal the second.

not that i'm agin' it, mind ya, just scared shitless by whole notion of it, is all.

As I said, the idea that the right of some to be richer than others might be compromised in favor of the right of the others to live decently (or at all) is the greatest terror to the greedy and unscrupulous.

By the way, my house could use painting, if any Millienials are looking for something to do...

Progressive Power!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: firemind on 2002-03-20 12:57 ]</font>

On 2002-03-20 10:24, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

The real question is... WWVD?

About AVOT? About the Demon in the White House? About our armies and navies and air forces and marines and national guards spread about the planet? About our entangling alliances? About Neo-Cons? About Marc Lamb's pragmatism? About Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat?

Virgil, you need to have Wagner playing in the background when you mention these points of neocon pride.

Have no fear. Operation Barbarossa will be a success. The F?hrer has a master plan. We will steal the Bolsheviks' oil if it bankrupts us and costs us the lives of every young man in the Reich!

On 2001-09-23 18:54, William Strauss wrote:
Please, let's keep all posts on this topic on this point only.

We're not very good at that, are we?

If you could use the QUOTE function, but still post to a different folder, we might be a little better at it, but I'm sure we'd still get off track.

On 2002-03-20 12:47, firemind wrote:

What I want to know is, WILL THEY GO BACK TO THE MOON? WILL THEY COLONIZE THE ASTEROIDS?

But of course, firemind. :wink: And they won't stop there:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/726652.asp

Anyone for this? Robert Reed? :grin:

On 2002-03-20 12:49, Brian Rush wrote:
Thank you for stating your errors so succinctly, Marc. And in large, bold type, too, just to be sure nobody misses them.


The equations you posted are false. In both cases, the first statement does not equal the second.

not that i'm agin' it, mind ya, just scared shitless by whole notion of it, is all.

As I said, the idea that the right of some to be richer than others might be compromised in favor of the right of the others to live decently (or at all) is the greatest terror to the greedy and unscrupulous.

Also the greatest terror to many others who fear, rightly or wrongly, that the establishment of social justice requires a Communist - style meat-grinder approach, and that some criteria having little to do with greed or lack of scruples could cause them and their loved ones to be chewed up, too. Why do you think people like Mr. Lamb keep bringing up Communism and it's brutalities? In his case, for instance, he may well be thinking of state - mandated atheism, strictly enforced, as under Stalin.

On 2002-03-20 13:04, firemind wrote:

On 2001-09-23 18:54, William Strauss wrote:
Please, let's keep all posts on this topic on this point only.

We're not very good at that, are we?

If you could use the QUOTE function, but still post to a different folder, we might be a little better at it, but I'm sure we'd still get off track.

:lol: We are TERRIBLE at it. Hell, we will even change the topic on the second post of a thread. I'm sure many of us have memories of Susan's sabbatical thread (which she never acted upon).

I'm surprised that Strauss and Howe don't steer the conversations on these forums.

On 2002-03-20 13:08, Kiff '61 wrote:

On 2002-03-20 12:47, firemind wrote:

What I want to know is, WILL THEY GO BACK TO THE MOON? WILL THEY COLONIZE THE ASTEROIDS?

But of course, firemind. :wink: And they won't stop there:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/726652.asp

Anyone for this? Robert Reed? :grin:

Hmmm...sounds good. However, I am designing a colony to place on the Martian Moon Phobis. A very strategic location, if you ask me.