If we call ourselves human beings, we must act accordingly.  Being human means giving, and wanting to give.  Having too much when one's neighbor is starving is inhuman, immoral, and, ideally, illegal.

This type of argument, applied to the question of immigration, implies that citizenship confers legal privileges, but no moral ones.  As Canadians, we have a right to keep others out of this country.  As human beings, though, we have no such right.

The line one usually hears these days is: "There was some form of socialism in the Soviet Union because there was nationalized property.  But now has been capitalist restoration, and the nationalized property is more or less gone.  Now we have to wait and hope that through some process the nationalized property will be restored."

Doesn't this line of argument put the cart before the horse, in that it stresses the forces of production at the expense of the relations of production?  Wouldn't it be appropriate to move away from this non-dialectical form of thinking, and towards a more Hegelian form that revolves around class struggle and relations of production?  Such as line of thought would see the Russian situation as a dialectical development.  In other words, it would see the current state of matter as a continuation, not of reversal, of the social developments in Russia during the 20th Century.  plane MOIS show during the 20th century.  It could be based on the idea that forces of production are almost an epiphenomenon of the relations of production.  In other words, the condition of the forces of production is a response to changes in the relations of production, and therefore that the "defeat" of socialism in Russia may in fact indicate an accelerated phase of development in the relations of production, and not the reverse.  Such a seemingly farfetched idea can be defended if one remembers that that in the relations between capital and labour, labour is the reality and capital the epiphenomenon.  In other words, whatever action capital takes is a reaction, not an action, and therefore when it takes a really drastic step, such as dismantling a social system, this may be taken as a sign of the strength and vitality of class struggle at that conjuncture.