Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hou3c.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ihnp4!clyde!burl!hou3c!ka From: ka@hou3c.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics,net.followup Subject: Re: Stalin and slavery Message-ID: <144@hou3c.UUCP> Date: Sat, 17-Dec-83 21:10:12 EST Article-I.D.: hou3c.144 Posted: Sat Dec 17 21:10:12 1983 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Dec-83 09:13:11 EST References: <399@reed.UUCP>, <5535@mcvax.UUCP> <3401@utzoo.UUCP> <5551@mcvax.UUCP> <4381@umcp-cs.UUCP> <313@abnjRe: Stalin and Lines: 57 slavery <705@minn-ua.UUCP> <609@ihuxx.UUCP> Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ Lines: 53 Let me make clear at the outset that I am not fond of the Soviet Union. I do not like repressive governments, and I would classify the Soviet government as repressive. However, there are degrees of repressive- ness, and the Soviet government is not all that repressive as repres- sive governments go. I agree with Bob Switzer that there is little political freedom in the Soviet Union. For example, in the Soviet Union you are not allowed to vote for the candidate of your choice. How important is this to the average Soviet citizen? Well, the average American citizen does not consider voting to be worth the effort of driving to the polls, and that's in a country with a strong tradition of representative govern- ment. The Soviets are repressive in other ways, but again I'm not sure these are a problem for the average Soviet citizen. I believe that if you are walking down the streets of Moscow you are no more likely to be harassed by police than you are in New York city. The difference is that in New York you are likely to be mugged. (Of course the Soviet Union has social problems too.) I don't want to minimize the flaws of the Soviet Union, but I don't want to overstate them either. Ronald Reagan's claim that the Soviet Union is the worst violator of human rights in the world is simply false. I hope that Reagan's understand of the Soviet Union is greater than his speeches indicate. Dave claims that "the people" can make a difference in the United States whereas they cannot in the Soviet Union. This is pretty much true, but I don't believe that the Soviet government ignores public opinion completely. The U. S. government is heavily influenced by PACs which represent some of the people but certainly not all. Dave mentions the difficulty of finding out what is going on in the Soviet Union. The problem is not just a lack of information (in fact a quite a bit of information on the Soviet Union is available), but the amount of misinformation. The Soviet government puts out a lot of misinformation, but it seems like the anti-Soviet misinformation is more likely to be believed. I can't let Dave's claim that the American people voted for missiles in Europe pass. The book Change and Continuity in the 1980 Elections concludes that: In short, the position issues, while clearly related to voter choice, do not support the argument that Reagan received a mandate in favor of his particular policies. Instead, many people had quite mixed views and only slightly favored Reagan's policies over Cater's. Moreover, positional issues provide only one determinant of voter choice. Why then did Reagan win so handily in 1980? ... Regardless of what the incumbent promised to do if returned to office, voters felt he had not done a good job of managing policy during his incumbency. The fact that people didn't like Carter doesn't mean they approved of Reagan. Kenneth Almquist