Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ea.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!mhuxj!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm From: mwm@ea.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: Obituary Message-ID: <22400063@ea.UUCP> Date: Thu, 13-Dec-84 13:43:00 EST Article-I.D.: ea.22400063 Posted: Thu Dec 13 13:43:00 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 17-Dec-84 04:06:55 EST References: <658@sjuvax.UUCP> Lines: 55 Nf-ID: #R:sjuvax:-65800:ea:22400063:000:2248 Nf-From: ea!mwm Dec 13 12:43:00 1984 In response to my question about how to recognize a socialist state from the outside, Frank Adrian writes: /***** ea:net.politics / hercules!franka / 6:39 pm Dec 10, 1984 */ Socialists believe in state ownership in the name of the people. Facists be- lieve in state ownership as a means of protecting property for those who run the government. Frank Adrian uucp: {decvax,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!tektronix!teklds!franka /* ---------- */ Sounds to me like a socialist is someone who does what you approve of with the state property, whereas fascists do something that you don't approve of with the property. If I were one of the "people", it would seem that that distinction was right by definition. However, I'm on the outside (and presumably can't ask the people what they think), so that doesn't apply - and I *still* have no means of telling the difference. Laura, on the other hand, writes: /***** ea:net.politics / utzoo!laura / 1:06 pm Dec 11, 1984 */ I missed mwm's commentary on his original posting. i can tell you the difference between fascism and socialism, though. Socialism espouses government *ownership* and *control* of resources (supposedly for the sake of the collective). Fascism espouses private *ownership* and government *control* of resources (for a whole host of reasons, but generally involving either the good of the state or ``national security''). Laura Creighton utzoo!laura /* ---------- */ This definition I can use from the outside: A Fascist state will maintain a facade that property is privately owned. Laura, unfortunately, isn't a socialist, and I have a suspicion that no socialist will concur with her definition (though a few fascists might :-). Does any socialist care to step in and fill the void? This also raises another question. Consider the following array: Ownership State Private ----------------------- State | Socialist Fascist Control | Private | ????? Libertarian (There are other names that could go in the Libertarian slot, but leave it for now). The question is, what name fills the "?????" slot? I've been thinking of such a state as a "Libertarian Socialist" (A.K.A. "Communitarianist") state. Is there a name that I don't know that better fills it?