: : : Lastly, as your debating friends would probably agree, we can't attack Marxist practice as it has never been put into place the way Marx defined it. We can, however attack capitalism, as we see the misery and poverty it causes every day, even in the land of the "free".: : Lastly, as your debating friends would probably agreem we can't attack Capitalist practice as it has never been put into place the way Adam Smitch, Hayek, Von Mises, Greenspan, and Rand defined it. We can, however, attack communism, as we see the misery and poverty it causes every day, even in the "workers paradise."
: Smith's writtings where so sympathetic to the workers he could have been a liberal socialist and his writtings could be used to criticise capitalism, Hayek is an insincere libertarian who is happier to defend political economy that advocate the improvement of the lot of the individual and promote human progress, Von Mises was an idiot who didn't know anything about socialism (making the characteristic error of believeing it was nothing more than state ownership and central planning, like to see his ideas work on a aggregate of co-operatives) and underestimated the capacity of the will and motivation, Greenspan and Rand where excentrics who gave the excuse to greedy that their theaving from the needy was honest.
: If your going to attack communism for the brutalism of governments and fanatics I hope your going to attack everything else that's equally guilty, not least capitalism.
But it always comes back to the number of corpses, doesn't it? The butchery of failed communist societies can never, never be negated. Calling Von Mises an idiot, even if he were one, will never compare with the deeds of Lenin, Stalin, ad infinitum.
That's your basic problem; how to get people to see the 'success' of Socialism without asking what that putrid odor is.
Lots of Luck, Comrade.
