I would like to ask Meryl at what cost will the world suffer if the west bombs Iran? You might be secure in the fact that someone, probably Israel, will take the mad man off line. I wonder what the consequences will be.

I appreciate your gracious answers to my comments regarding the last show, and I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, but I just want to clarify things a bit further.

 

Non-Europeans (or at least Americans) do, indeed, associate “socialist” with failed regimes that never managed to feed their people. But that’s only a measure the ignorance of many Americans, who really don’t have a clue about social systems.

Please remember that the choice isn’t between a totally free market and a centrally managed system. There are plenty of shades of grey in between, mainly coming under the heading of “welfare states.” Those “Socialists” who ran Eastern bloc countries after the Second World War did fail to provide a decent living standard for their populations. But those democratic “socialists” who after the war governed West Germany, the Scandinavian countries, Holland, France, Austria, and Britain, did a splendid job of promoting terrific growth and rising living standards.

Those Western European socialists, or social democrats, respected the market, but knew that the terrible inequities generated by capitalism could not go on unaddressed.

 

There is certainly a place for the market, for “man’s genius for commerce,” in free societies. Societies could hardly be free without it. But it’s a question of parameters. It’s one thing to say that the market has an important, critical role to play in society; it’s another to say that the market should be the ultimate mechanism for all of society, which seems to be the mantra here in the States. That same “genius for commerce” that helps create free and prosperous societies will also, if allowed, create societies with deep class divisions; unequal opportunities for health, housing and education; corrupt government; and horrid working conditions. Even the most rough-and-tumble sports, after all, require rules and referees.

Actually, all developed countries have mixed economies, with both a private and public sector. It’s a question of where to put the boundary between the two. And that’s something that every country must determine for itself, in any given time. It’s largely a question of degree.

If you have too much of a state-regulated society, you’ll limit the freedom of most citizens. But if you have unrestrained, unregulated capitalism with no protections, you’ll also effectively limit the freedom of most citizens.

OK, enough said. I won’t dwell on this anymore. I promise.

Regarding Che, there's a terrific article written a few years ago in Slate by American journalist Paul Berman. It’s ostensibly a review of the movie Motorcycle Diaries, but it’s really about Che and how ill-conceived his cult is. He mentions that Che founded Cuba’s gulag-style prison system, and that he ordered lots of executions, including those of revolutionaries who didn’t sufficiently follow the party line.

Here’s the link:

http://www.slate.com/id/2107100/

By the way, what’s interesting here is that Paul Berman is a man of the left, though more like a Euston Manifesto sort of Left. Take a look at his book Terrorism and Liberalism. He is associated with the journal Dissent, which is democratic socialist in orientation. Oops, I’m sorry, I wasn’t going to bring that up again.

 

Babs, I really can't tell you what the cost to the world will be. But I can tell you what the cost to the world won't be: There will be no nuclear-armed Iran.

However, that wasn't what my segment was about. My point is that Israel has had existential threats before, as have the Jews, throughout the generations. Yet, we survive.

I don't believe that is an accident.