For Andy Fox and Chris Alger

Now the USA is run by organized criminals, and offshore anonymous fly by night shell banks are legitimate buinessmen.


I can't figure out if you are a communist, or just flat insane. I think it's closer to Maoist

communism than anything else. Mao is out, even in china.

I wish more people were as articulate about the lies and deceptions that the US has offered in citizenry as rationalization to dominate others for the sake of private property. My second wish was that these people's ideas about different ways of social and economic organization were given the validity they deserve by those who might disagree with them. Then we could have some real, open debate our world outside of the rhetoric of demonization, dehuminization and deception that makes everyone with a different idea seem like a threat to national security. The only result from this cycle is less debate, the most undemocratic result imaginable.


KJS

I really don't believe that the free enterprise system, and free access to goods and markets, is about aggrandizement of wealth for the benefits of few and the detriments of many, as you put it.


I believe it primarily produces benefits, not detriments, for many, although it does produce even greater benefits for few.

Well let's hope the debate spreads to communist China, where such internet discussions can land the participants in jail.

Mao is out, but much of the evil he set in motion still remains. It's actually too bad Mao wasn't "taken out" before he managed to murder millions of his own countrymen in the greatest engineered famine in history in 1961. Strange how communism and totalitarianism always seem to go hand in hand.

I agree with you. It's strange that the heaviest critics of the USA never offer any superior system.

U.S. foreign policy isn't about maintaining free enterprise (you would hardly call enterprise in the PRC "free"), it's about maintaining the property rights and privileges of the dominent actors, the ones that fund the political selection process. It makes little difference to "free enterprise" or the average consumer as to who these actors are, but it makes a huge difference to the corporations, banks, insurance companies and the like that comprise them. For example, when the U.S. toppled the Guatemalan democracy at the direct behest of the United Fruit Company, the travails of this company made no difference at all to fruit-consuming Americans, the fruit would have been sold for what the market could bear regardless of who the middleman was. When the U.S. threatened trade sanctions against Thailand in retalliation for the Thai's efforts at limiting cigarette imports to cope with their lung cancer epidemic, the interests of typical Americans were barely implicated, but the tobacco companies had a great deal at stake. So when I say the benefits of a few, I mean very, very few.