Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site mtuxn.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtuxn!gdf
From: gdf@mtuxn.UUCP (G.FERRAIOLO)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Criticism of America :re to critics
Message-ID: <718@mtuxn.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 13:39:13 EST
Article-I.D.: mtuxn.718
Posted: Mon Mar 10 13:39:13 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Mar-86 19:26:53 EST
References: <1691@bbncca.ARPA> <536@whuts.UUCP> <1636@ihlpg.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 61

>> I would just like to thank Bill for taking the time to make the point 
>> that comparing the human rights situation in the US to that of the
>> USSR is a 'big lie'.  I am totally weary of the attempts to make the
>> two situations SEEM the same.  
 
>I *never* claimed that the US and USSR were equivalent.  I have
>enormous admiration for our freedoms and defense of people's human
>rights in this country.  What I *AM* concerned about is concentrations
>of power which threaten such freedoms and human rights and threaten
>to make our country more and more like the Soviet Union.  I have
>stated this again and again - apparently however any criticism of
>disturbing trends in our own country is not tolerated by some people.

Never explictly claimed?  Yes.  Tend to give unbalanced presentations
that imply that?  I think so.  Perhaps I'm not alone in this perception
 
>More disturbing is the following:
>> 
>> Just joking Tim, we all know that you REALLY post all these articles
>> to stimulate discussion.  Right?  You really don't think that if
>> the Communists take over the world (excepting the vile part know -
>> in a typically ethnocentric way - as America), right Tim?
>> 

>This is an age-old tactic: any criticism  of one's own country is
>labelled as "consorting with the enemy".  This tactic *is* one which
>is used in many countries, the USSR as well as the US.  The difference
>as has been properly pointed out is the degree to which such attacks
>result in actual repression.  In the Soviet Union one can be sent to
>a Gulag for repeated dissent branded as "unpatriotic".  In the US
>one may be sent to jail for a short legally defined term.  Unless
>one is in a stage of right-wing hysteria such as McCarthyism during 
>the 50's when people were systematically blacklisted for years.
>Even then this is obviously better than being lined up before a
>firing squad as happened in the Stalinist purges.  But is either
>behavior to be condoned? I hardly think so.
>Does anyone on the net?
 
>     tim sevener  whuxn!orb

Not actually.  I _was_ hoping that you would say that you do not think that
the Communists should take over the world except for the US.  The reason I
exclude the US is that very few people in the US are willing to
say that they think the US should have a Marxist-Leninist form of government.
There is a group of people who seem to think that Communisim is fine for
the rest of the world. Try saying it Tim.  That's right, 
don't discuss McCarthyism (just exactly what is that, anyway?), just say
that you DON'T WANT THE COMMUNISTS TO WIN.  Try to keep criticisms of the 
US out of the paragraph in which you (hopefully) do this.  Once this is done
we can discuss what reasonable steps can be taken to prevent our little
red friends from 'building socialism" all over the place.  Incidentally, 
my posting compared the possible penalties for trespassing to the penalties
for 'slandering the Soviet state'.  Of course, _criticising_ the US will not
get you put in jail at all, not even for "short legally defined term".
My understanding of the 'blacklisting' issue is that people were denied
employment on political grounds.  This is not the same as a prison term.
Also, can you think of any period of 'left-wing hysteria', or is it only 
right-wingers who are subject to this form of mental disturbance?

guy