Hi, Ed. Interesting post. Thanks. I think the message as you have summed it up is deeply misleading, though. Let me try to explain.
The model he uses sequences the utopian dream first, and them its 'consequences'. That seems logical enough, but it reflects the common mistake of not seeing the formulation of a dream as simply a part of the evolving condition of humankind. Gray accepts that an idea is the foundation point of a sequence of following events. I will suggest that the formulation is itself simply a part of that very sequence, and not intrinsically the 'starting point.' I'll offer an example of a sequence that I know well: that which led to the creation of Israel and what has happened since. Gray would, I think, see Theodor Herzl's publication of Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) in the last decade of the 19th century as the utopian plan that launched political Zionism. Motivated by this vision, Jews around Europe began the search for a place to create such a state. So far so good: a utopian vision appropriately gives rise to a movement to implement the vision. But then things started to go sour. A faction of the Zionist Organization decided that the place had to be Palestine, despite the fact that Palestine already was inhabited by a full population. Then things got worse: That faction took over the Zionist movement and decided that the Palestinians could be dismissed: they were bedouin, they were few, they were farmers, they didn't have a government, they were really Arabs who could resettle elsewhere, they were poor and uneducated and would welcome Jewish expertise and benevolence, etc. etc. The process of Zionist demonization of the Palestinians and whoever they are associated with -- Arabs, Muslims, Arabists, etc. was launched. And that led to Palestinian resistance, escalation, wars (of which Afghanistan and Iraq are only the two most recent phenomena), and now a growing anti-Semitism. OK, you may be thinking, doesn't this narrative simply bolster Gray's theory that utopian visions end in disasters and horror? I say that that would be a tempting but incorrect interpretation. Because Der Judenstat didn't come out of nowhere. Itself, it was a response to...horror and disaster. The anti-Semitic pogroms of Russia and Eastern Europe, The Dreyfus case (though popular history has exaggerated its impact on Herzl himself). So, from a simple logical point of view, one could as easily argue that real horrors produce a utopian vision, which then may or may not go on to trigger an effort to implement it. Here is a mind experiment: identify some political accomplishment that you admire and feel has been essentially beneficial. Now ask yourself: Was this created from a utopian vision? And then...ask yoursself what led to the creation of that utopian dream. Is it not some horror, some disaster? Mine safety regulations have saved hundreds of thousands of miners death, wounding, and ill-health (though we hear more about the times the regulations have been flaunted and men have died). Airbags save tens of thousands of people each year int he US alone. The United Nations provides peace keeping services in dozens of countries each year. The Red Cross and Red Crescent assist hundreds of thousands of people each year. The ACLU provides vital legal services to upholding individual rights in the face of government efforts to reduce them. Amnesty International protects people around the world who are oppressed by their governments. Medecins sans frontieres. Yes, all of these were launched on utopian visions -- but each of these visions were created out of the witnessing of horror and disaster. So blaming the vision for the eventual disappointments and faults and disasters that follow makes little sense. Let us recognize that the human condition allows for such disasters and horrors -- and why this is would make for a fascinating and enlightening discussion -- and that perhaps, as I see it -- the utopian vision like the yeast in bread provides a leavening to that condition. It provides a catalyst for change and improvement. Without the utopian vision mankind would have little chance of improvement and no chance at all of changing that basic programming or whatever it is that keeps generating horrors and disasters, even by, it sadly seems, people who we view as upstanding, as were some of the early Zionists utopians. I'm very interested in your thoughts on this.... Cheers, Lawry On Aug 4, 2010, at 8:11 AM, Ed Weick wrote: > One of the best books I've read on the theme of grand social dreams and what > happens because of them is John Gray's Black Mass. The simple words of > Christ led to huge persecutions; The Enlightenment led to chaos and the > choppings of many heads; the perceptions of Adam Smith justified the creation > of vast city slums; Marx's idea that workers should own the means of > production led to Stalinism; and the American dream of freedom and democracy > has thus far led to Iraq and Afghanistan. How we dream and how we behave > because of those dreams are two very different things. > > Ed > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sandwichman" <[email protected]> > To: "Keith Hudson" <[email protected]>; "RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME > DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 11:46 PM > Subject: [Futurework] In the name of charity > > > Keith wrote: "Every conceivable type of government cares about > > unemployment, and has done so throughout history if it wants to > > maintain power and sleep easy." > > > > The semi-official conventional wisdom on unemployment is that it > > doesn't exist. If it does exist, it is voluntary. If it is > > involuntary, it reflects moral defects of the unemployed themselves. > > If it exists, is involuntary and not the fault of the unemployed it > > will soon be eliminated through the equilibrium of the market. > > Therefore it doesn't REALLY exist. > > > > So why should every conceivable type of government "care" about > > unemployment? There are, of course, plenty of lucrative swindles that > > can be engineered in the name of charity. Ray Harrell and I met up > > yesterday afternoon and during our conversation Ray brought up Herman > > Melville's "The Confidence Man." Government's care about unemployment > > the way the confidence man cares about... well, *confidence*! > > > > As for the efficacy of gold as a "real" monetary standard, it reminds > > me of Schumacher's quote from Gandhi about "dreaming of systems so > > perfect that no one will need to be good." Schumacher cited those > > words in the context of a discussion of the ethical flaw in Keynes' > > ironical argument that the "economic possibilities for our > > grandchildren" somehow depended on us continuing, for a few decades > > more, to "pretend to ourselves... that fair is foul and foul is fair; > > for foul is useful and far is not." > > > > -- > > Sandwichman > > _______________________________________________ > > Futurework mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
