William 已針對您的文章「Privatization is another form of Capitalism」留下新意見：
Leechard,
I understand what your argument means :The so called privatization is only another form of Capitalism, which can go nowhere but down turn. It is a saying by many socialists, most notably the Labour politician Aneurin Bevan this in 1950s. Bevan in his resignation speech in 1950, proclaimed that Britain “assumed the moral leadership of world.”, “There is one hope for mankind for mankind, and that hope still remains in this island.”, “It is from here we tell the world where to go and how to go there, but we must not follow behind the anarchy of American competitive capitalism which is unable to restrain itself at all.” But neither he nor Thatcher had given us the vision, and suggested the feasible ways to solve this problem out. Bevan, with his Labour party, led Britain to a state close to bankruptcy, that gave the opportunity in 1951 election for Winston Churchill and Conservatives to go back to government and implement their pro-capitalist policies
Surely, my utterances, and the utterances of many people, that on the brink of communism, or capitalism is of no useful service to solve the downward-turn problem of the century, but rather making us more partisan, and more biased towards a particular view. This is why i think that Roy Jenkins, another famous British politican, perspective in 1980s is perhaps the best of all. Roy Jenkins in his famous Home thought from Abroad speech in 1979 , said: “Yet when they-conservatives and labours-are seeking power there is often a shrill and unconvincing attempt to portray other side as either a fool or a knave”. However the history is, Thatcher, not Jenkins, would come to the counsels of sovereign, and had the power to command the state to move in capitalist direction. Jenkins, the leader of liberal democratic party at that time, would only go into opposition in parliament. It seems to me, and to other observers that the Thatcherite economy, rather than the Jenkins words, that was more impressed by British public, as what taokit has suggested.
After adopting your perspectives, I may say, the greatest leader in 1990 should not be Reagan, Thatcher, but Havel, the Czech leader in 1990s. In his first inauguration speech on 27 December 1989, he said Let us teach ourselves and others that politics should be an expression of an desire to contribute to happiness of society rather than of a need to cheat or rape the community. This is very close to what you said recently on the real nature of politics, and I think, as we would adopt a great historic perspective, we would see how great Havel is his times.
All the above words from these great people can be found from a book named as The Penguin book of Twentieth Century Speeches. I am looking forward to hearing your comments on that.
Best wishes,
william
Dear William,
I do hope you can have your own opinion. People tend to use classification method to replace their thinking power. Socialist? or Capitalist? Once classified, everything is settled. The downward trend? So and So had said it long ago. But the point is whether we can see into the ture picture of all this. Did you see how people suffer? Did you see we are actually going nowhere?
And, the trend can not be limited in a few words. It is the trend of the external focus of things, it is the trend of the left brain, it is the trend of greed and cowardice.
The 20th century is a century of war.
The 21st century, may be a century of disasters.....
Hope we can have courage enough to study more.
Leechard
