Hello everyone,
I would like to make a couple of comments about marxism and common sense
etc.
First of all I am not a marxist, even so I share a lot of the same
values that most marxists I've come across have. One reason I do not think
that I will ever be a marxist is that I simply don't understand what you are
talking about sometimes. Also, as Tom was saying, I sometimes get a sense of
arrogance, that seems to shut the door on any alternative views on the
matter.
I realize that on this list we are supposedly discussing the crash and
what kind of societal structures we need to cope with, prevent, or lessen
such an occurrence[ at least I think that's what we are doing, if I'm wrong
or missing something please tell me]. So we are definetly not writing to
convince the public at large, as of yet. However, if we are to change the
world, so to speak, we must at some point be able to express our views to a
much wider audience and be convincing to that audience. Now I'm certainly
not the most educated or well read, or most intelligent person around. But I
do spend an inordinate amount of time,compared to the average person,
thinking and reading about our society and its problems and how I would like
to see things be instead, and how maybe that could be done. What I'm saying
is, that if I find your arguments hard to follow and I spend the kind of
time I do on this type of thing, how on earth are you going to be able to
communicate with the average person who works 8-12hrs a day and has kids to
deal with, along with many other things. These people are going to tune you
out almost immediately unless you [we] are able to speak in clear and
straight forward terms that does not also deteriorate into mere slogans.
Please don't think I'm attacking anyone in particular, this has just been
something I've noticed with marxists on several lists, as well as in person.
I've also found this among economists, who like to refer to statistical
models in the tenth dimension which only 10 other people in the world can
understand. Of course most economists are happy with the status quo so it
suites their needs to speak in impenetrable terms. That way no one is
qualified to dispute them. Since we on this list are not here defending the
status quo, it would benefit us to make our arguments more accessible.
I guess I simply am venting some of my frustration at what I see as
fairly simple arguments being wrapped up in language that has no other
purpose than to make the writer feel intelligent and the rest of us feel
confused or dumb or both. Until recently I thought this was mainly the
domain of post modernists.
Sincerely, Aaron.
>
>Tahir we each of us start from such different viewpoints that in order to
>move the discussion along I am prepared to accept provisionally that
>EVERYTHING is linked to capitalism, and nothing is independent of it, if it
>will make you happy. Okay?
>
>From now on if I use some argument that implies no linkage to capitalism,
>please accept that I am aware of the caveat you insist upon, and that I am
>speaking from under the umbrella where EVERYTHING is linked to capitalism,
>and I am just arguing degree and emphasis. Can you accept that some things
>are less linked to capitalism than others? Or does it not matter in your
>scheme? If EVERYTHING is linked to capitalism ALL the time, without
>differentiation, then there is not much point to further discussion, is
>there? We could just agree to disagree. Perhaps we should.
>
>>As I said before, you
>>shouldn't talk down to people when you are arguing on the
>>basis of such uncritically accepted common sense (i.e.
>>hackneyed, remember?) notions as this.
>
>Who is talking down to whom?
>
>When I see "BS" and "bullshit" hurled toward my arguments and those of
>others, I feel no compunction about letting a little air out of those
>bubbles of arrogance, PARTICULARLY when the arrogance is indeed
>"uncritically accepted" and "hackneyed" itself. YOU should feel the same
>way
>and support a common ground of tolerance, adding a word now and then when
>your colleagues slide into their nastiness. I ask you to do so, ... now.
>
>Second, much of what I wrote is not JUST "uncritically accepted common
>sense," but to be sure it is supported by scholarship that you obviously
>don't accept. That being the case, I insist upon having the same right to
>make assertions that the rest of you allow yourselves without typing an
>hour's worth of footnotes. If in all cases you want me to present critical
>reviews of MY arguments, YOU must be prepared to do the same. So please
>quit
>belittling my "common sense" just because you disagree with it.
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
