X-Loop: openpgp.net
From: Tom Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Strawman. Hitler and Stalin weren't the same. However, they were both
> > socialists, which was my point.
>
> you're trying to prove a point by assuming it. come on, you can do
> better.
I'm not trying to PROVE anything. I'm DEFINING socialism as "state
interference in private transactions".
> if you argue this way, you've got to accept stalin's time-line. given
> the fact that the USSR was doing quite ok (according to his preferences)
> at the time of his death (half of europe and parts of asia under strong
> USSR control), I doubt he died as a loser. it may have crumbled later,
> but that's irrelevant.
>
> having lost just because you're dead only counts if your goal was
> immortality.
I was (maybe wrongly) assuming that both those men's goal was world
domination. Stalin has failed to achieve that; the Pope is actually quite
close to it. [Which, incidentally, is something I don't like.]
X-Loop: openpgp.net
From: Colin Rafferty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Actually, that was my point. If you redefine a common word to have
> your own personal meaning, you can apply it however you want, but no
> one will agree with you, since no one has the same underlying
> assumptions. Everyone else is speaking English, but you are speaking
> some parody of it instead.
Dictionaries don't CREATE words; they just record the most common use. Words
are tools we use to express concepts. I am less interested in the concept of
"governmental ownership of ... goods", considering it a particular case of
state intervention in economics (which I define as the study of purposeful,
rational human action - again a pretty non-mainstream definition). Whether I
use your definition is non-sequitur, what matters is that we manage to
communicate *concepts* reliable. So, from now on, you'll know what I mean
when I say "socialist", and I'll know what you mean. [Calling it "X" might
help you to realize that words don't come from a higher power.]
> > Strawman. Hitler and Stalin weren't the same. However, they were both
> > socialists, which was my point.
>
> But only by your personal definition, not by the one the rest of the
> world uses.
I am pretty sure that my daughter uses no definition, being only 7 months
old. Furthermore, I see no value in majority rule, and even less when it
comes to word definitions. Every man has his particular definition in mind
when he speaks about something. Communication is about sharing *concepts*,
not words - I still think about some of the issues I talk about here in my
native language, Romanian, and that doesn't prevent me from expressing the
concepts to you.
Mark
