Jim Choate wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Marcel Popescu wrote:
>
> > Er... what part of "feudalism is a form of socialism" you don't understand?
>
> None of it since they're not the same thing at all....
>
> Socialism is the ownership and management of all property by the state
> with the elimination of private property.
>
> Feudalism is the situation where within a geographic area EVERYTHING is
> property and owned by a single INDIVIDUAL.
>
> Why you would claim they're equivalent is mind boggling. Oh, wait. I get
> it. If the only tool you have is a hammer then everything looks like a
> nail.
Erm, it is the same thing if you happen to be the worker/serf. You are
owned and anything you have in your possession isn't yours. It doesn't
matter much whether it's the Lord or the Party that owns it. What does
matter is that you don't. :)
The flip side is also true to some extent. The members of "Party" can
be thought of the same way as the Lords. They all report to the king or
chairman, but they enjoy luxury and power while the workers/serfs don't.
--
---------------------------- Kaos Keraunos Kybernetos --------------------
+ ^ + Sunder "Only someone completely distrustful of /|\
\|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] all government would be opposed to what /\|/\
<--*--> -------------------- we are doing with surveillance cameras" \/|\/
/|\ You're on the air. -- NYC Police Commish H. Safir. \|/
+ v + Say 'Hi' to Echelon "Privacy is an 'antisocial act'" - The FedZ.
---------------------------- http://www.sunder.net -----------------------
I love the smell of Malathion in the morning, it smells like brain cancer.
