Is this my cell phone or a voting ballot. Although citizenry may be as
uninformed as they currently are - instead of debate and vote in
parliament, citizen vote in the street. Or it could awaken a desire for
more inclusion in societal affairs and governance.
D.
On 25/07/2012 8:55 AM, Keith Hudson wrote:
At 14:32 25/07/2012, Arthur wrote:
Until a better way is found we need one House or the other to govern
in some fashion. The alternative might be worse than what either
House has to offer.
Yes, I agree. But now that the world economy is becoming more
specialized we need to develop appropriate election/selection methods
that enable us to assess more directly the power groups that actually
take the decisions and not, as now, allow the existence of the various
hidden and partially hidden groups that actually subvert the agendas
of elected representatives.
Keith
arthu
*From:* [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Keith
Hudson
*Sent:* Tuesday, July 24, 2012 11:22 PM
*To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, , EDUCATION
*Subject:* [Futurework] A Plague on Both Houses
The rapidly accumulating evidence of the modern human sciences is now
telling us with increasing clarity that the fundamental assumptions
of both left- and right-politics are fallacious. Even the wonders of
a "mixed economy" or a "third way" -- as individually promoted by
both Labour and Conservative prime ministers in this country in the
last 20 years -- have proved to be risible. Differences of poverty,
opportunity and political power remain much the same as always in any
advanced country whatever type of government, sometimes slightly
reducing when great effort and spending is made under a socialist
government, more usually expanding when eyes are taken off the ball
in so-called free-enterprise government..
The whole debate can be reduced to a simple example in which the
observations, large-scale surveys and lab researches of
educationalists, psychologists, anthropologists, neuroscientists,
geneticists and evolutionary biologists are all in almost total
agreement. It is that, at the time of puberty, the adolescent is the
*/recipient/* of his or her personality and potential skills. He or
she is hardly at all the creator of those specifications. The
individual has had very little to do with laying down those
specifications nor, apart from luck, the way that those
specifications subsequently play themselves out and largely determine
the experiences and happiness in the remainder of his or her lifetime.
Excluding the luck of a lottery draw or inheriting a million from an
unknown relative, there are three main lucks in life. They're all
interlinked but are sufficiently different in their effects that they
can be discussed separately. The first is the emotional,
informational and cultural environments mainly imparted by parents
but also influenced by school-teachers in the early years of
childhood. By the age of puberty, any social or intellectual skills
not laid down by then will never be fully recoverable in later life,
no matter how hard one tries.
The second luck is the nature and abilities of one's post-puberty
peer group to whom the individual now devotes much more attention as,
together, they approach adulthood. It is in this period that the
individual can now develop and enhance the comparative advantage of
his or her best skills, testing them against others in the peer group
and finding a role within it. As the prospect of adult life draws
closer, friends made in this period are usually friends for life.
The third luck is the nature and abilities of, usually, just one or
two patrons (often one's parents) who have a sufficient span of like
social contacts which enable a young adult to finally find an initial
lodgement in an adult group which, to a greater or lesser extent, is
normally protective of entry by any young hopeful. This third luck
also includes the size of the income made available in a particular
group, or the intrinsic interest of a job, and also whether that
particular specialization continues to be favoured by the changing
economic environment.
To summarize:
1. Unless a socialist government interferes in the intimate family
life of every child from his or her earliest months and years in the
hope of equalizing opportunities then inequalities of personalities
and abilities are broadly set by the age of puberty. No amount of
good intent by governments can change this.
2. A right-wing government cannot make claims of virtue for its
apparent heroes. Those individuals are the product of good luck just
as an African child working and dying in a diamond or gold mine is
the product of bad luck.
Politics is already in a bad way. It's not likely to get any better
in the coming years as we try to work off the immense private,
corporate and governmental debts that the policies of both left-wing
and right-wing governments have lumbered us with. The modern human
sciences are telling us quite radical things about what we really are
like. The new politics will probably be concerned with how power can
be confined */within/* groups -- where it is more accessible to be
pulled down if necessary -- rather than */between/* groups as now. I
can take this no further. For now, until the findings of the human
sciences spread around for a generation or two, I would join the
refrain of an increasing number of the young. It's not very
constructive, I'm afraid: A Plague on Both Houses!
Keith
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com
<http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/>
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com
<http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/>
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
