Subject:
|
Re: Trying to understand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:31:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
562 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas wrote:
>
> > But this is not a socialist country.
>
> I think you need to recheck things a bit. The US has a number of
> Socialist features. 'Socialist' isn't a black-and-white, yes-or-no
> thing.
A country can have socialist features and still not be Socialist. It's
sort of like "Space" vs. "space"...capital-S has a very specific
meaning, while small-s is more malleable. Semantics...with a small s.
;)
<dredge...dredge...>
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Trying to understand
|
| (...) And that would mean that 'Socialist' is just a descriptive label, without much specific meaning. Sort of like calling the leader of a country 'President' doesn't mean the country is a Democracy based on inalienable human-rights and personal (...) (25 years ago, 20-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
