Subject:
|
Re: Liberty vs. Socialism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:17:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1831 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim David wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim David wrote:
> >
> > > Why is this thread called Liberty vs Socialism?
> > >
> > > Liberty and socialism aren't opposites anyway
> >
> > Sure they are. Show me a socialist country where you are free, in all senses of
> > the word.
>
> But a world with complete (personal) freedom can't exist because the more
> freedom you get the nearer anarchy you get and then you lose the freedom because
> another persons 'freedom' impinges on yours.
> To my mind a county like Denmark (which has a pretty socialist attitude) gets as
> near to a good balance as anywhere. I'm not saying that it is perfect by
> anymeans but to my mind infinately preferable to the US. (plus its the home of
> Lego!)
>
> I know that this doesn't really answer your question but my point is that the
> two arent mutually exclusive
I'm not sure you've shown that, actually.
Note please that I am not asserting that (for example) the US is not a socialist
state, for it is... I'm merely talking about the general case.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Liberty vs. Socialism
|
| (...) But a world with complete (personal) freedom can't exist because the more freedom you get the nearer anarchy you get and then you lose the freedom because another persons 'freedom' impinges on yours. To my mind a county like Denmark (which has (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
