posted
I respect those who post here even though I disagree with many of their views. This is free and open discussion.
1) I object to anyone disparaging socialism or communism on this forum. As if our economy had some big advantage over the economy of the Soviet Union, or other socialist countries of our time. If we do, it sure isn't showing anywhere.
2) We need to create jobs where and only where there is useful work to be done.
3) Just because Amtrak (or anything else) is a relatively small operation doesn't mean it is insignificant. To say let's not support Amtrak because they only carry a few passengers is like saying don't bother voting because your vote doesn't count.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I on the other hand object to anybody promoting communism anywhere, as it is a system that had produced more widespread misery and death in the world than any other. If you regard our system as having no advantages over that of the now collapsed Soviet Union, I would suggest that you take a closer and more honest look at what it did and did not do.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can think of one advantage American capitalism has over Soviet communism. The former is still here and operating. To be sure we are falling down a bit, but we are getting back up. Falling down and getting back up is growing. Falling down and not is death.
Posts: 229 | From: Long Beach CA | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As for Communism producing misery, one could just as well say that capitalism causes working people to be abused and treated unfairly, and visits war on innocent people in the interests of empire. We also might be confusing the fulfillment of satisfied workers, under communism, with poverty. There is a big difference.
I didn't say capitalism didn't have advantages. I said it didn't have some big advantage. Here are some great achievements of the U.S.S.R.:
1. Providing jobs 2. Providing health care and retirement 3. Transportation (especially passenger railroads) 4. Democratic representation 5. Freedom of speech, assembly, conscience, etc. 6. Equality for women 7. Providing education 8. The space program 9. National and civil defense 10. Science and technology 11. Industrial production
I'm sure there are more these are good places to start.
posted
Well Comrade 4021, as you know from reading my material over at the Amtrak forum, I favor Long Distance trains only to the extent that they are needed to ensure the legislative majority (caucus if you will) to have Amtrak funding move forth and buried deep within an Omnibus spending bill. Maintaining an LD system, which had I been a passenger rail "czar" (instead of a Management Trainee as I was with a Class I on A-Day) would have been gone by now, is done only because passing about a little political largess over a wide area is "the Washington way" - and that is one thing LD's are efficient in doing.
That the LD's have a loyal "niche" following comprised of hobbyists, 'can't drives-won't flys', and the very few for whom both originating station, schedule arrival and departure time, and destination station represent convenient travel, as well as even having knowledge they exist, hardly comprise a population that could represent a meaningful passenger transportation resource.
The Sunset you note, and the Sunset East (the suspended New Orleans-Orlando segment) to which I believe you are specifically referring, simply represents the worst of the worst. How any service operating through the fastest growing region of the country can have practically the lowest ridership of any LD train is simply indicative that its service can only be considered meaningless. Sure, I know what the advocate calls for - Daily, multi frequency service. But as I have held, what right does any public agency have in "appropriating' needed rail capacity from an investor owned business enterprise for some service that only enjoys quite limited public acceptance. Maybe such is the case in your espoused society, but hardly in ours.
Posts: 9979 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Communism did not allow freedom of worship. Republican democracy does.
Communism did not allow freedom of expression, either political or artistic. Republican democracy does.
Communism did not allow freedom of personal movement. Republican democracy does.
Communism did not allow direct political choice or true competition for a representative. Republican democracy does. Look at the school boards and State assemblies nationwide, I dare you to tell me otherwise.
Communism was an abhorrent social system as practiced. I've studied the theory. Even Marx clearly understood his theory was an abstraction and wouldn't work in an imperfect world. I served, as did Gil Norman, in the Cold War (albeit he was in a particularly hot engagement within it). Our system of republican democracy is not perfect, but the American experiment is unique perhaps save Great Britain in having one Constitution and one governing methodology for over two centuries.
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just looked at my 1998 "Certificate of Recognition" signed by William Cohen for being a "Cold Warrior" myself. Never realized that the "Cold War" had official beginning and end dates (9/2/45-12/26/91). Wonder how they figured those dates out exactly?
-------------------- Ocala Mike Posts: 1530 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Captain Sir, Sep 2, 1945 WWII ended with Japan's surrender. Dec 26, 1991 was the USSR's last day of business.
Posts: 9979 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Gil; I should have known the first one, anyway, and kind of suspected the second one had something to do with the end of the USSR.
Posts: 1530 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. Freedom of conscience and freedom of religion are guaranteed in the Constitution of the USSR, as is freedom of expression.
2. The USSR Constitution spells out explicitly that elections to the Supreme Soviet are universal, equal, and direct. They are a direct democracy at all levels of participation (in the Gorbachev era citizens of the USSR voted overwhelmingly to preserve the union). If you don't believe this read the History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
The USSR is a great country founded on Socialist principles, From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
"Labor is a matter of honor, a matter of glory, a matter of valor and heroism." - J.V. Stalin
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. 4021's views are correct IF one ignores the actual history of the USSR beginning with Lenin and continuing to Gorbachev.
Posts: 41 | From: South Dakota | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you really are interested in the history of the USSR, a good book is On My Country And the World by Gorbachev. Reading this, one sees the Soviet Union as it really was (and is) -- a great modern country not nearly so different from our own as we often think.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not sure how this debate has anything to do with trains, but I’ll give you my thoughts concerning capitalism and communism.
Some of the principals taught in communism are great. Today, there are some religious groups that hold property in common, but they don’t force their members to stay nor do they look at their neighbor’s property and force them into their communal group. Now, with Soviet Union, it forced millions of people into their giant communal society. If they didn’t like the way the government was run, either they were shot and buried in a field or sent to Siberia. The Soviet Union also forced other countries into its ever expanding communal society. Another problem with the Soviet form of communism was that the head of government was a criminal, Joseph Stalin. He was a train robber and murdered people. He didn’t take highly to any form of criticism. Now with somebody like that running a country, no good is going to come: only evil.
Now it really doesn’t matter what system you are under: capitalism, communism or socialism or any other economic system, if you have thugs running your government. The use of brutal force under any system is wrong. Now democracy and capitalism don’t always go together even though people believe they must go together. The United States Constitution doesn’t say anything about an economic system, but in practice it has protected its people from abuse of their government. It hasn’t been perfect, but it hasn’t resulted in the death of millions under the Soviet form of government.
-------------------- Jason K Albee Posts: 4 | From: Vancouver, WA | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
