On 11/2/10 10:21 AM, humunculus wrote:
On Nov 2, 9:18 pm, "J. wrote:

But do you believe that robbing the rich will make the poor rich?

No, but I do believe that the playing field in a capitalist democratic
system is tilted in favor of the wealthy, and that its too easy for
them who have, to get more. Not 'robbing the rich', just putting a
governor on it.

Millions of English used to live and make their living on public lands.
The king decided his friends could become very rich if he privatized
these lands. Over two or three centuries, millions of displaced people
starved. Darwin called it survival of the fittest. Dickens called it
survival of the fattest. The cheap labor of the desperately poor made
the industrial revolution very profitable.

In America, most settlers were supposed to end up like slaves because
only corporations were to own land. The Indians thought that would ruin
the environment. By selling land to a corporation, Samoset got legal
recognition that Indians, not the king, were the owners. They used that
recognition to give or sell land to individual farmers. That's how
democracy took root among New England colonists.

George Washington and Henry Knox wanted to prevent democracy from
spreading. They came up with a scheme of calling Indian tribes nations.
It was illegal for a member of one of these "nations" to give a white
guy a break by giving or selling him land. Instead, the Army would be
called in to force a self-styled Indian leader to cede a bunch of land,
which would end up in the hands of powerful whites.