Re the article below: That's capitalism. As everyone knows, or should know, the thesis of capitalism and its dominion over all other modes of valuing, has the advantage of being completely amoral and unencumbered by a-priori conditions. If you've got the money, you've got what it takes to acquire (at least in principle). Money is the great leveler. It respects nothing but itself. There are a few conditions -- none of them inherent -- where money is not good enough to acquire what it measures. I mentioned that some big-time dealers rank collectors by means in addition to money; money is not sufficient to obtain, say, the latest Jeff Koons. I'm sure there are similar situations across the board: Real estate, sports tickets, etc. If money was not the great equalizer of values, what would take its place? Religion? An aristocracy? A divine-rights king? I'm by no means a winner in the capitalist game but I don't know of anything that works better. After all, the world is a mess and it ain't heaven. All we can do is try to alleviate the pain and make it easier for any one of us to survive a little better. The evil of capitalism in my view (my socialist tendency) is that it pools in tight circles -- money begets money -- and needs to be spread out as a countermeasure to invigorate the widest possible field. Only a government can effect enough authority to spread out pooled capital. Philanthropy helps, too, but nothing guarantees it or hedges whim and erratic power grabs. But how much should government be involved in spreading out pooled money? The current state of things in America suggest that the pools of great wealth are now too deep and contained. It's not the need for 'equality' of condition that's needed but a better balance between the pools of wealth, their depth, and the large, parched areas of little wealth all around them. Every system needs its checks and balances. wc
----- Original Message ---- From: joseph berg <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, January 8, 2012 12:57:46 AM Subject: "It has seen all other ideas of value in our society (aesthetic values, moral values, environmental values, political values) bow down before money as the ultimate definition of what is valuable." This recent article says: "It has seen all other ideas of value in our society (aesthetic values, moral values, environmental values, political values) bow down before money as the ultimate definition of what is valuable." http://artthreat.net/2012/01/nscad-crisis-art-school/
