No modern society is capable of functioning without a good deal of socialism. Therefore, we obviously would need liberalism, if Martin's defintion were correct (which it is not).

People who are afraid of "socialism" think of it in all-or-nothing terms....meaning...they thing that to have socialism means that EVERYTHING must be socialized. Not so! Most (if not all) societies mix socialism and capitalism, letting each do what it does best.

Socialism is needed when: you have a situation that is not necessarily profitable and attractive to private investors in itself, but...it needs to be done ANYWAY! You then do it through public funding, paying the workers with government salaries. You raise funds through taxes, rather than through sales or advertising.

Thus, we have socialism to provide an armed forces, police forces, educational systems, environmental protection systems, various medical systems, courts and justice systems, and so on, and so on.

In a system where absolutely NOTHING is done unless there is a profit to be made from it, you abandon society to robber barons and you consign a great many people to lives of unspeakable misery. Consider the Five Points district in New York City, as depicted in the movie "Gangs of New York". That was a spectacular example of what happens to a lot of wretched people in a society so completely lacking in wisdom as to have, basically, NO socialism. (or almost none)

To assume that "socialism" means: EVERYTHING must be socialist is as dumb as to assume "capitalism" means: EVERYTHING must be capitalist.

Wrong in both cases. A modern society that works well is a combination of the two. Capitalism drives activities that are, by their nature, profitable. Socialism safeguards people in areas that are NOT by their nature profitable.

One more example: We have many privately-owned radio stations in Canada. On them you get to hear the mass-produced commercial music that is pushed by the main music industry. Fine. That's their job. We have a socialized radio station in Canada, called CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). Because the CBC is publicly funded and not subject to ONLY the profit motive in its decision-making you get to hear Canadian folk music, interesting talk shows, and other highly intelligent and wonderful stuff that you will NEVER get to hear on private radio stations, because they can't sell 125 million dollars worth of CD's of that stuff!

Anyone who can't see the tremendous advantage to Canadians in having a national radio station that is funded through socialism is...number one: ignorant...and number two: probably suffering from some sort of mental delusions about the "evils of socialism".

If you get scared at the thought of one socialist radio station existing alongside hundreds and hundreds of privately run radio stations, then you are probably scared of your own shadow too, I'd say.

Long live Canada, and long live socialism alongside capitalism!