Thanks, Arthur. I should have read the post more carefully. Cheers, Lawry
On Jul 22, 2012, at 5:48 PM, Arthur Cordell wrote: > Ayn Rand (play /ˈaɪn ˈrænd/;[1] born Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum, February 2 > [O.S. January 20] 1905 – March 6, 1982) was a Russian-American novelist, > philosopher,[2] playwright, and screenwriter. She is known for her two > best-selling novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged and for developing a > philosophical system she called Objectivism. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence > Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 2:03 PM > To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION > Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and the > Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism > > I'm greatly enjoying this discussion. Thanks to all. > > Who is the Alice you refer to, Ray? > > Cheers, > Lawry > On Jul 22, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Ray Harrell wrote: > >> Arthur, if corporations are individuals then what kind of individuals are >> they? I would also point out as the late Louis Castaldi president of IBM >> world in the 1960s said to me. "IBM is a socialist organization." >> Lou was speaking as to the system of all corporations as governing >> structures. He >> didn't see a corporation as an individual but as a type of government. I >> said to Lou, "why is it not a feudal government?" He said: "Look around >> you, they are into community." He was speaking of the beautiful atrium >> with the string quartet that all of the management and employees were >> sharing. Lou was the last of the CEOs to make under a million dollars a >> year. After he retired all hell broke loose and the angry Jewish girl from >> Russia that had lost everything and escaped to America began to >> justify her anger and her need to fight to live. Alice became Ayn Rand and >> being >> selfish was the highest good. She was the antithesis to Karl Marx. Not >> one tenth as smart but perfect for a nation of wounded souls and scars. >> Lou had been a partisan in the Italian underground during WWII and he >> too had lost everything but somehow the scars only made him a realist. >> Perhaps >> it was the Italian culture. Alice's culture had been taken over by a group >> that venerated a Jewish Messiah (Marx) but that didn't like individual Jews. >> What a strange world it has been these 2000 years with people blaming >> others for what they themselves then choose to do as they make excuses for >> their >> bad behavior. Unfortunately greed is addictive and most of Rand's wealthy >> followers are like an anorexic looking at their bank account and screaming >> that their ideal is never enough. Whether skinny or billionaire it is >> still a pscho-pathology that has wounds and sin at its root. >> >> REH >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur >> Cordell >> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:33 AM >> To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'; >> [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and >> the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism >> >> We may be seeing an indication of technology and economic development. >> Economic development, it seems, may be --in some ways--about moving >> away from community to the individual. And in this case, without >> other institutions that develop trust, development may be at odds with >> social cohesion. >> >> arthur >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael >> gurstein >> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:17 AM >> To: [email protected]; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, >> EDUCATION' >> Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and >> the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism >> >> Thanks Mike, you've carried the argument forward into some interesting >> and unexpected areas... >> >> Macpherson's discussion was based on a deep analysis and critique of >> the foundation documents of political "liberalism" (whiggery)... >> Locke, Hume, Hobbes, although it linked into and closely paralleled >> the somewhat earlier discussions (Maine, Toennies, Durkheim... >> describing the fall of medieval society and the rise of modern "contract" >> based social relations. >> >> The Sociologists however, were focusing at the "social" level and >> Macpherson and the Anglo's were discussing individuals and individual >> rights. They were basically arguing the same thing but Macpherson >> seems somehow more appropriate in this context since he (and those he >> discusses) aren't beginning from the notion of a decline but rather >> are looking at the role that individual property rights played in the >> broader social (and political) transformation. >> >> (The underlying notion I'm trying to present in the blogpost is the >> highly corrosive role that individualized and property defined >> information (as determined through mobile communication) will likely >> play in many currently somewhat "communally" structured rural >> environments.) >> >> Best, >> >> M >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike >> Spencer >> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 11:07 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Futurework] Re: FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and >> the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism >> >> >> Mike G. wrote: >> >>> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/the-mobile-revolution-and-th >>> e >>> -rise- >>> and-rise-of-possessive-individualism/ >> >> and in the referenced paper wrote: >> >> An example, in a recent excursion here in Ghana I happened to notice >> that the local artisanal in-shore fishery consists largely of boats >> with up to a dozen fishermen. When it comes time to haul in the nets >> up to 30 or so villagers may be involved. These folks don't need to >> know as individuals what the local price of fish might be in a >> particular market (they aren't selling the fish as individuals).... >> >> .... >> >> So, in the vast majority of instances (and the design of both the >> mobile systems and the individual applications almost require this) >> the information is made available only on a one-to-one (individual to >> individual) basis. Any follow-on as for example through the sharing of >> this information with others say in the village is solely at the >> discretion (and the responsibility) of the individual without there >> being any formal or informal (let alone technical) structures to >> support this (in fact community radio often becomes a means for >> "community"integration of mobile communication but that is a subject >> for another blogpost). >> >> In a village there's no privacy. So if Cousin Alice sends word to Bob >> that fish prices are better up-town than down-town, everybody in the >> village knows Bob had a visitor. They probably know from whom the >> message comes and what it's about. In fact, the messenger may deliver the >> message in public. >> >> So getting private info on the fish market will require deviousness >> and subterfuge which will themselves be noticed by other villagers. >> >> Now Alice calls Bob on his mobile. No one knows what he learned and >> probably can't guess who the call was from. >> >> Taking the Devil's Advocate role here, if the *possibility* of private >> information leads to individuals abandoning communitarian behavior in >> favor of maximizing personal gain, shouldn't we assume that >> "possessive individualism" is the natural thing a la Friedman -- that >> communal behavior was the result of surveillance, not of any deeply >> felt commitment to community? If there were such a commitment, Bob >> would immediately go tell Claire & Dennis the news and pretty soon everybody >> would know. >> >> So is the moral here that privacy enables deviance and a local but >> distributed panopticon ensures conformity to community values? >> >> Well, I haven't read Macpherson (whom you cite [1]) but perhaps I >> should. I did read the cited Wikipedia page: >> >> WikiP> For Friedman, economic freedom needed to be protected because >> WikiP> it ensured political freedom.[9] Friedman appeals to historical >> WikiP> examples that demonstrate where the largest amount of political >> WikiP> freedom is found the economic model has been capitalist. In >> WikiP> Friedman's words, "history suggests...that capitalism is a >> WikiP> necessary condition for political freedom."[10] Macpherson >> WikiP> counters that the 19th-century examples that Friedman uses >> WikiP> actually show that political freedom came first and those who >> WikiP> gained this freedom, mainly property owning elites, used this >> WikiP> new political freedom for their own best interests which meant >> WikiP> to open the doors to unrestrained capitalism. It follows then, >> WikiP> that capitalism will only be maintained as long as those who >> WikiP> have political freedom deem it worthwhile. As the 19th century >> WikiP> progressed and suffrage was expanded, there were corresponding >> WikiP> restraints placed upon capitalism which indicates that >> WikiP> political freedom and capitalism are at odds with one another. >> WikiP> "At any rate", Macpherson contends, this "historical >> WikiP> correlation scarcely suggests that capitalism is a necessary >> WikiP> condition for political freedom. >> >> which makes sense to me as do the rest of the ideas attribute to him. >> [2] >> >> Is the village panopticon a necessary political constraint on economic >> activity? How does it scale to modern nation states and transnational >> corporations? >> >> OTOH, how do the tangible, best-case benefits of ICT in the village >> context scale to help we'uns sitting alone at our computers and >> already more or less wedged in possessive-individualism mode? >> >> - Mike >> >> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._B._Macpherson >> >> [2] Except for two sentences that I can't parse. >> >> -- >> Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~. >> /V\ >> [email protected] /( )\ >> http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ ^^-^^ >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
