Since there are at least two Eds on this list, would contributors be so kind
as to use an initial to indicate which Ed is at issue - e.g. "Ed G." and "Ed
W." I keep seeing stuff attributed to "Ed" and wondering when I said that.
And remember: Two Eds are better than one!
Ed W.
>Dear List members,
>Greetings and well wishes.
>
>> The cross-posts between Ed and Jack Cole have arrived a a sort of
>> consensus about capitalism in the two (2) snips below:
>> =====From Ed
>
>> Dictionary definitions of capitalism highlight two essential features
>of the
>> capitalist system. They are: Firstly that the factors (means and
>modes of production)
>>necessary for the production of the necessities for human life, are in
>private ownership; (an
>historical development),
>>and secondly; That these means and modes of production - privately
>owned - are used for
>>the production of a private benefit (defined, in modern economic terms,
>as private profit) - a contemporary fact).
>
>> ======from Jack
>
>> Maybe a new formulation (is required (my addition)), starting from
>scratch, or somewhere less convoluted than the outcomes of two centuries
>of
>tortured philosophy. Start with the concept of value and a concept of
>value transaction.
>>Commerce, capital, common good, public and private, the information
>> environment, and purposes of human interaction. See what you can
>build from those building blocks.
>
>========fromWilliam
>
>> I've been carrying around this statement about - society - since it
>seems
>that we need to define the matrix in order to understand those parts
>which
>> Jack has referred to as 'building blocks':
>> ...snip...
>> "What is society, whatever its form may be? Nothing more in conscious
>terms than
>>the product of men and women's reciprocal action.
>>But are men and women free to choose this or
>>that form of society? I think not. Assume a particular state of
>>development in the productive faculties of humankind and you will get a
>>particular form of commerce and consumption. Assume particular stages
>of
>>development in production, commerce, and consumption, and you will have
>>a corresponding social Constitution, a corresponding organisation of
>>the family, of particular social orders (regulation etc), and of
>classes.
>>In a word: a corresponding civil society.
>>Assume a particular civil society and you will get
>>particular political conditions which are only the offical expression
>of those
>>class efforts exherted in the production of cohesion of a civil
>society
>>at a particular stage of the evolution of what has
>>become that particular idea of the modern democratic state (in modern
>times).
>>In no less a way did Greek civil society believe that they were, then,
>>the founders of a civil democracy."
>> ===
>If anyone can source this for me I would greatly appreciate it!
>Regards, William
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
