Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hcrvx2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hcradm!hcrvx2!jimr
From: jimr@hcrvx2.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.politics
Subject: Re: Air raid on Libya
Message-ID: <2325@hcrvx2.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-May-86 20:15:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: hcrvx2.2325
Posted: Mon May 12 20:15:56 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 13-May-86 03:38:14 EDT
References: <157@unido.UUCP> <720@ark.UUCP> <122@paisley.ac.uk> <755@kontron.UUCP> <1144@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <778@kontron.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimr@hcrvx2.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Human Computing Resources, Toronto
Lines: 52
Keywords: communism, socialism, democracy, bogoism
Summary: 

In article <778@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>> I agreed with everything said in the article except this:
>> 
>> >
>> >Not likely (because of their ties to Kaddaffi), but a 
>> >Labour Party government in England at this point can't 
>> >be distinguished from a Communist government by any
>> >reasonable measure.
>> 
>> Don't be stupid. I voted Conservative, but I would have to admit that 
>> very few members of the Labour Party can be described as Communists, no
>> matter how misguided their policies. They are 'Socialist', that much they
>> confess themselves.
>
>Didn't the last Labour Party platform include declaring Britain a nuclear-
>free zone?  Removal of US bases from Britain?  How long do you think 
>Britain would remain in NATO if the Labour Party won the next election?
>
>Clayton E. Cramer

Unless I am mistaken the Labour Party espouses *democratic* socialism.
I.e. they have no intention of suspending the democratic process that
would eventually lead to their downfall (as eventually  happens with *all* 
governments in  *all* democracies) should they gain power. In this respect
one could not by any stretch of the imagination place them in the
same league as the communists who not only do not believe in the
democratic process, as best exemplified by elections, but also are willing
to commit  even the vilest of acts in order to retain the power
that they have so ruthlessly achieved.

Just for the record I'm about as fiscally conservative as they come and
thus consider the British Labour Party's policies (as well as those of our 
own home grown socialist party here in Canada) to be based on an 
inaccurate model of human behaviour. However, when I see someone 
advocating a view that is incorrectly held by a not insignificant 
percentage of Americans I feel compelled to put in my two cents  worth.

If Canada's socialists ever got into power (at the federal level) I
would expect quite a bit of economic damage to be done. However, I do
not for a minute think that rather than lose an election they'd
whip out the AK-47s that some would presume are neatly stashed under their
beds and commence shooting.

J.B. Robinson

PS In the interest of fostering a greater understanding of democratic
   socialism by our neighbours to the South, I am hereby offering,
   by the powers vested in me by no one in particular, to *give*, totally
   free of charge, to the USA nine tenths of all of our socialists. 
   Since the US's population is about 9 to 10 times Canada's I would deem
   the division to be fair. However, with only a modicum of persuasion
   I'm sure I'd been willing to let go of all of them. :-)