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!hcrvx2!jimr
From: jimr@hcrvx2.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Apology for EXPO posting.- actually S.A., Soviets, & Socialists
Message-ID: <2375@hcrvx2.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Aug-86 17:33:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: hcrvx2.2375
Posted: Thu Aug 14 17:33:47 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Aug-86 07:43:30 EDT
References: <225@mdivax1.UUCP> <334@ubc-cs.UUCP> <2368@hcrvx2.UUCP> <353@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimr@hcrvx2.UUCP (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Human Computing Resources, Toronto
Lines: 65
Summary: 

In article <353@ubc-cs.UUCP> andrews@ubc-cs.UUCP (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>[Don't worry about Jim Robinson, he and I are sparring-partners from way
> back and he's mostly harmless. :-)]

Harmless, eh? Good thing we're separated by the Rockies. :-)

>In article <2368@hcrvx2.UUCP> jimr@hcrvx2.UUCP (Jim Robinson) writes:
>>Not only do they sell South African wines, but also Russian vodka!!!!
>>When will these horrors cease :-)?
>
>     I would believe JBR's comments along these lines (of which he's made
>many before) if he truly believed in doing anything about *either* South
>Africa *or* Russia.  In fact he uses this feeble line of argument to
>support taking no action at all.

Not true. I merely find it ironic that after watching the Soviet Union
treat its 275 million citizens in a decidedly undemocratic manner for 
decades, I am suddenly supposed to get all worked up over 25 million 
South Africans. If Canada is going to impose economic sanctions against
S.A. because Apartheid is wrong, then it has a moral obligation to do
likewise with the S.U. To claim that that the Soviet system is any less
repugnant is to insult those who were:
a) killed in the 1956 Hungary uprising
b) killed trying to cross the Berlin Wall
c) sent to asylums for the insane because they did not voice the "correct"
   ideology.
d) etc, etc, etc.

Ontario no longer sells S.A. wine, but, it still imports S.A. manganese.
Why this hypocritical situation? Because, by refusing to sell S.A. wine
the gov't gives the appearance of doing something about S.A. *and* gets
to help the local wine industry to boot; manganese, on the other
hand, is needed by the Ontario steel industry and would thus actually
cause some economic pain if no longer imported. When push comes to
shove votes are the only things that count - even in Ontario.

So, to put it bluntly, what is the justification for a ban on S.A.
wines but allowing Russian vodka free run of the liquor stores? 

[While we're on a role here, why don't we impose sanctions against
 those countries in the Middle East that treat women only somewhat
 better than furniture? - that's actually just a trick question since
 we all know what the answer is]

>>Actually, there is something to be said for keeping the socialists (note 
>>the lack of quotation marks) out. Also, in my opinion it would be more
>>fair to compare the NDP (Canada's socialist party) to Britain's Labour
>>party. If for no other reason than both parties are basically the political
>>arms of the labour unions.
>
>     Which shows that JBR has not much understanding of either the NDP or
>Britain's Labour party.  We can excuse this since he's basically an American.
>Most NDPers say they're "social democrats".  What's ironic is that the
>coalition of right-wing opportunists which is now in government calls
>itself the "Social Credit" ("Socred") party.

And I have heard/read many NDPers describe themselves as socialists.
Just out of curiosity how do the NDP and Britain's labour party differ.
Are both not beholden to the labour unions? Are both not non-militaristic
to the point of pacificism? Do both not believe in the nationalization
of the major industries of their respective countries? Do both not strongly
disdain capitalism?

J.B. Robinson