Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5g!hou5h!eagle!mhuxi!houxm!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!pollack
From: pollack@uicsl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Socialism - (nf)
Message-ID: <2865@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Sep-83 04:37:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.2865
Posted: Fri Sep 16 04:37:36 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Sep-83 15:16:41 EDT
Lines: 15

#R:bronze:-74600:uicsl:16300016:000:680
uicsl!pollack    Sep 16 01:38:00 1983

sorry, but your definition of "nationalization" does not coincide with
what happens under socialism, but what happens under extreme forms of
"statism". Somoza WAS the government in Nicaragua. By the time of his
fall, his family owned about 40% of all Nicaraguan Assets. By the time
that the Shah fell, his family also owned a respectable part of Iran.
(Have you ever flown "Marcos Airlines"?) These "Friendly Autocrats"
killed whoever resisted, and decided how to spend their "nationalized"
resources, usually on palaces.

Nicaragua distributed the already-nationalized Somoza land to landless
peasants in 50-acre chunks. Unfortunately, the revolution in Iran was
not socialist.