[Preechr]

Ok... Got that?

To sum up:

(c)ommunism is the half of natural, human nature that is interested in taking care of our closest friends and family, based in an ethic of "To each according to his ability, From each according to his need"

(c)apitalism is the other 50% of natural, human nature that represents our viewpoint in the workplace, where we compete against other humans for our share of the financial pie in order to finance our (c)ommunist home lives.

(C)ommunism is the political form of government that seeks to deny the (c)apitialistic animals that exist in each of us. Some folks believe it would be the best idea for everybody to utilize the awesome power of government to eliminate competition altogether and run the whole world like one, big, happy family.

(C)apitalism is the other form of government that hopes to reshape human nature in such a way as to purge familial instincts from our nature, reducing all of life to what can be easily monitored on a P&L statement.

Both the forms of government mentioned above acknowledge only one half of each of us. (L)ibertarianism is a political movement, and just about as flawed as any other political party or any other large structure involving people, where (l)ibertarianism is a philosophy based in economic conservatism and social liberalism, each in the classical senses of the terms. I will get back to this later on...

I hope we have now completely delineated the differences between Capitalism and capitalism as well as those between Communism and communism. Let's talk for a moment about what those differences mean, though...

Other than the inherent capitalization of the word, what else might change when we adopt one half of our everyday nature as the explicit policy of our government? Remember, whichever way you go, you are forming a tool for the use of your society. By opting for either of these policies for our governments, we are seeking to deny fully one half of our genetic impulses. Your government is one of the three pillars that suspend your society above basic existence. Your government is as much it's proposed citizens' collective conception of the perfect future as it is the practical mechanism you guys will be using to govern your disagreements with each other. Big Stuff here...

To say that we are Communists is to say that we reject the capitalistic side of our own nature as being needful of repression. Likewise, to capitalize Capitalism is to pick the kinder, gentler side of all of us as an enemy. Capitalism... the government form... is attacked by it's opponents as being "against the family," and probably righly so to a degree, while Communism is portrayed by Capitalists as against the excellence that is the goal of competition.

For this part of our program, I would like to suggest that we can indeed have our cake and eat it too...

If we naturally operate as I have suggested here when we function as individual units, doesn't it seem just a bit dumb to adopt a government that rejects 50% of our own human nature? Could we ever hope to feel more than half-satisfied with something like this?

Kahl, I just received a vision of your response to this section. You are planning to argue that (C)ommunism must result in naturally stronger family values in Communist countries where (C)apitalistic countries would inherently benefit economically because of their individual focus on one part of human nature... You are half-wrong.. Once again, you aren't thinking things through to completion, so you don't know why you are on the right track... so I'm not giving you credit.

See, you are thinking that each country has freedom of choice to decide on what they should place their focus. It's just not that easy. If you are negligent in the maintainance of your vehicle, and as a result it smokes and knocks yet actually will make it to the store intact, running on 3 out of 6 cylinders and a whole lot of luck, you should not be happy that it at least runs at all. It just needs to be fixed so it can function as best it can. A car is one thing, but we are talking about systems of government, and governments are the single most dangerous and powerful human invention ever conceived. Governents kill people moreso than anything else ever created by man, and our goal here is to find a form for this deadly but necessary function from which we receive the maximum benefit with the least amount of carnage possible.

It is simply wrong to base governmental philosophy in the partial repression of our own nature. A truly healthy government accepts us as we are and benefits from our natural function on every point. This type pf government is totally possible to conceive, and has even been practiced once upon a time: Here. We just don't do things that way anymore, though.

Do you guys see yet why I kept saying this would be a long, drawn out conversation? I am having to sit here and work my butt off just to get you through the basic building block fundamentals of government to even begin to discuss economics with you! I am gonna break here again so any comments or questions you might have can be easily referenced.