Re: Apple II Reference Manual ("Red Book")

[pausch@saafNOSPAM.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <20000421141858.01464.00000900@ng-df1.aol.com>,
Regnirps <regnirps@aol.com> wrote:
 
> pausch@saafNOSPAM.se  (Paul Schlyter) wrote:
> 
>>>> FYI: there are other countries than the US.  Yes I know many americans
>>>> finds
>>>> it hard to comprehend this, but nevertheless most people of the world
>>>> lives outside the USA.
> 
>>> Well, we were talking about copyright and a book from the U.S.
>>Yes, the book was a US book.
>>> and U.S. politics I thought.
>  
>> It was never explicitly said whether the policits was international,
>> US domestic, Swedish domestic, Martian, or whatever.
> 
> Aha! It was, I recall that you brought up the American religious right
> and that started this whole thing.
 
It still wasn't explicitly said that the following discussion about
left vs right should apply only to US domestic politics.
 
>>>>> National Socialists not Leftists?
>>>  
>>>> Nope!  They imporisoned socialists and communists, and collaborated
>>>> with other right-wing dictatorships, such as Mussolini's Italy and
>>>> Franco's Spain.
>>> 
>>> But serious Socialists always imprison or liquidate other Socialist factions
>>> and ideological backsliders.
>  
>> Now you've invented the term "serious socialists".  Neither the
>> former socialist premier of France, Mitterand, nor the current
>> socialist premier of Sweden did ever imprison anyone for any
>> political reasons.  Are you claiming these people are "non-serious
>> socialists" ???
> 
> If they were really Socialists with the power of a Socialists leader in a
> Socialist counrey there would be no private ownership and disidents who
> showed a lack of proper selflessness would be disciplined or re-educated.
 
OK, so by "serious socialists" you mean a fundamentalist extremist,
who follows the texts of Marx to the letter?  OK, in that case there
are no "serious Capitalists" either, simply because all Capitalist
countries allow some things which aren't profitable.  People aren't
executed when they no longer can work due to old age, for instance,
even though it's unprofitable to keep them alive when they're old.
In a Serious Capitalism they would, because Capitalism is about
maximizing efficiency and profit, remember?
 
>>> This is a press fabrication by the left. Right wing = more individual
>>> freedom, left wing = less. Fascists are defintitly left wing.
>  
>> This is a press fabrication by the right. Right wing = less influence
>> by the people and more by money, left wing = the other way around.
>> Fascists are defintitly right wing.
> 
> Ah, its the money!
 
Yes, Capitalism is about money -- didn't you know that?
 
BTW *all* political systems are about two things: money and power.
 
Money: let anyone grab as much money as they can = Capitalism.  Distribute
the money evenly among the people = Socialism.
 
Power: let anyone grab as much power as they can = Dictatorship.  Distribute
the power evenly among the people = Democracy.
 
> This is an impass. In the USA conservatism = individual freedom and
> liberalism = government control and bigger government.
 
I thought liberalism was about individual freedom and conservatism
was about preserving the remains of fedualism..... at least the
conservatives here in Europe tend to support monarchy, etc.
 
> The papers talk about "bigger and better governance" as a very good
> thing. It is the solution for all problems.
 
Well, isn't "bigger and better" of ANYTHING the american way?   :-)
 
>>> Capitalism is a philosophy not a system of government. It can be applied
>>> in any number of systems.
>  
>> So is socialism....
> 
> Is socialism compatible with a free market?
 
Democratic socialism is -- Sweden had a free market during all its
years of socialist rule for instance.
 
> What is the incentive for creation in a philosophy of selflessness?
 
The common good for everyone -- any individual will gets its share
of that too.
 
Using selfishness as the base of how to rule a country will yield
a cold and hard country, with a lot of criminals (if selfishness
is the norm, why obey the law if you can profit more on breaking
the law?) --- pretty much like today's USA....
 
>> Without Communism I believe Capitalism would still
>> be pretty much like it was 150 years ago, when Marx and Engels
>> started criticizing it: slavery would remain, little or no civil
>> rights of today, 80-100 hour workweeks....
> 
> I doubt it. It is the difference between catastrophic and slow change.
> Some countries took the catastrophic route. The USA has taken a a more
> liesurely evolution based on increased productivity. The War between the
> States was about States rights and federal power. Slavery had already
> been made economically dead by the cotton gin and the McCormic Reaper.
> Then with steam and internal combustion it was all over. Higher
> productivity has allowed lower manual labor. We work a 4 day week
> compared to my grandfather.
> 
> The unions and socialists and communist activists like to claim
> responsibility for all this but it was really Ely Whitney, McCormick,
> Edison, Ford (who raised wages enough that a typical employee could
> buy a car), etc.
 
See?  GIving the majority decent living conditins isn't such
a bad idea after all.  Thus Capitalism and Socialism needn't
necessarily be absolute opponents -- it's possible to merge
the two.
 
> The Unions have always been behind the curve. After all, they
> started as criminal associations who murdered competitors like
> the Irish Teamsters
 
Well, they didn't have the option to kill their opponents legally,
like the government did....
 
> as they took over transport on the docks in NY by applying the
> techniques that had developed for creating labor monopolies in
> their homeland.
>  
>>> For one, I have not killed any Native Americans or owned any slaves.
>  
>> Did I ever claim you had?  But you're still living on the land your
>> grandgrand.....grandfathers stole from the native americans, right?
>> Do you intend to finally give it back to them?  Or do you intend to
>> keep it?
> 
> The country was not exactly filled from edge to edge with occupied
> land or land even used or traveled over by the Natives. My great great
> grandmother was born in Fort Stillicoom (A Hudson's Bay trading post)
> in 1864 not far from where I live. Herman Springer arrived from Germany
> in 1632. Like the black plague in Europe, the smallpox and chicken pox
> and measles epidemics dramatically reduced the native poulation and
> like in Europe, people moved into empty areas.
 
Well, that's one way to do it:  travel to a new continent, bring
new diseases along with you against which the original population
has no resistance, watch them die off and then take over their land...
 
> It wasn't till Andrew Jackson that Indians were forced to the west
> by the military and he defied the Supreme Court to do it. (The
> court doesn't have an army but the President does).
 
...those few that survived the diseases you gave them...
 
Next: what excuses do you have for abducting blacks from Africa
and making them slaves in America?
 
>>> I do fear the way capitalism is applied in the U.S. Not as much as
>>> Communism, but my freedoms are steadily decreasing and my taxes steadily
>>> increasing. The portion of my life's work laid claim to by the State is
>>> now 49% to 51% in money alone.
>  
>> Possibly -- but you do get something in return, don't you?  LIke
>> schooling, police protection, hospitals, etc.  Try to do a market
>> survey, and find out what it would cost if you instead paid for
>> all of this by your private money.....
> 
> With competiton to privide service? Of course it would be both
> cheaper and better.
 
So you want competition among armies, so you can choose which one
will defend you incase Saddam Hussein would attack?   <g>
 
Or do you want competition between different systems of currency,
so you can choose which currency to use the next time you go
and buy groceries?
 
Or competition between different law systems so you can choose
which law system to use the next time you want to do something
and you're nnot sure whether it's legal?
 
Sorry, but competition doesn't always make sense...
 
>>> Buy your .50 cal Browning now beore they are made illegal!
>  
>> I don't even know what that is..... lemme see, .50 cal is that half
>> a calorie?  Is Browning some kind of fuel which produces heat?
>> Why is fuel soon becoming illegal?
> 
> Machine gun. Penetrates one inch of steel. Mounting in the wings
> of planes, on jeeps, tanks, and carried by troop teams. Helped push
> NAZIs out of Scandinavia.
 
To what legal purpose would a private citizen want such a thing?
 
> We can still buy the ammunition and rifles that use it as well as
> semi-automatic version of the machine guns but a group of liberal
> congressmen fear the long range sniper ability and want them all
> made illegal as well as the sale of the ammunition.
 
I sincerely hope they succeed!!!  Didn't you learn the slightest
thing from all those deaths from shootings among schoolkids in
the US in recent years?
 
If the USA would want to apply for membership in the European Union,
you'd be disqualified for membership, for two reasons: 1. you still
have capital punishment, and 2. you have far too liberal gun control
laws.
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se   or    paul.schlyter at ausys dot se
WWW:     http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch    http://welcome.to/pausch