Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
Small economies of 200 or less people function in communes reasonably well, only because of the degree of social authority exercised on the individuals within. Look at the high degree of rules on a kibbutz or Hutterite colony, if you don't follow them, you are asked to leave.
We are talking about free liberal democracy as our common assumption for the morals and ethics of a state. We assume that it is right for individuals to have the highest degree of freedom. Socialists don't make that assumption. In fact, if you read any of the socialist authors you will a very high degree of acceptance in authoritarian or dictatorship government.
|
You're going to have to back that one up with examples.
I'll spin this a little: What about Sweden? Finland? They have extremely socialist governments and yet they seem to be able to function quite well. Are they more prone to supporting dictatorships? Is the only reasons their societies are staying in line is because of the threat of coercion from authority? Last time I checked they are both really peaceful countries whose societies are based a lot more on reciprocity than NA.
They have economic issues that are substantial, but then again look at the United States.