Ray, I have been convinced, for many decades now, that Marx and some that followed him were correct when they argued that, in a capitalistic system, where the labor of individuals is bought and sold, those individuals thereby become commodities that are bought and sold. In such a society the general consciousness becomes one of people being commodities and therefore, the kind of connection you are talking about and the spirituality I have been talking about are not possible.
I am thinking, in particular, of Erich Fromm's arguments in *To Have or To Be*. Selma Ray wrote: > Selma, I don't believe that profits are obscene except that profits that > are clearly hundreds of times the pay of the workers are an obscenity > because ultimately they are inefficient and counterproductive. I think > most systems run by moral and wise people who believe > 1.) in the value of individuals and > 2.) in the necessity for every individual's contribution in the development > of a society > 3.) as well as the opportunity to achieve happiness through the success and > fulfillment of their talents and potential and > 4.) the development of a social consciousness as a higher good > > will probably be made to work as a result of an enlightened wisdom. > > There have been enlightened Aristocracies, Capitalists societies, > Traditional Societies, Democratic Socialist Societies, Theocracies, > Communist Societies and even benevolent Dictatorships, etc. etc. and there > have been horrible examples of all of the above. How do you control such > horrors? I've heard Golden Eras proposed by Keith and Harry and by others > on this list at various times. I don't believe in Golden Eras. Not > even in the Bel Canto which has an impressive set of artifacts left behind. > If we had a chance to observe through a time capsule then we would probably > find that all societies are temporal and struggle in similar fashions within > their systems. That being said, I think the enemy here is not systems > but ignorance, intolerance and a mind numbing insensitivity to the empathy > that makes us all hurt when another individual is harmed, demeaned or > destroyed. What brings us all together to experience not only the empathy > but then, as Brad said beautifully sometime ago, to progress to sympathy > which gives both distance and genuine non enslaving help towards healing and > growth. > > So, for me it is interesting to find why certain systems work one way and > others another. How we can never lose sight of the humanity and the > necessity for growth as well as our need for each other's contributions. > Also to remember that renewal itself can be stolen by the likes of dictators > who are ruined and destroyed minds and who believe they would gain their > healing through other's losses. The will to power, the will to money, the > will to security through horror. We are individuals and that is all we > are given except we are also beings that can connect and become greater than > we are through that connection. There are times when each individual must > lead and each individual must relinquish that leadership or the whole will > fail. The maturity to be able to accept our path and be given the ability > to "work it" successfully in a meaningful way for our life's journey makes > what we do less an issue of choice than of discovery and acceptance. Such > acceptance can only come from within for without it our creativity that is > the birthright of every human is not available and the society has failed. > Failure is individual and social. It is a synchronicity. > > Ray Evans Harrell > > > > Just for purposes of discussion- can we try to think 'outside the box' of > > capitalism as it exists today, especially in the U.S. > > > > Would most of you agree :-) (I don't know the symbol for tongue-in-cheek) > > that, with all due respect to Harry, it might be possibleto control > > capitalism so that it works for the good of the general public, including > > the capitalists? No, they would not be able to make their obscene profits > > and salaries; but could there be incentives such that creativity would be > > encouraged, especially since the risks would be reduced? > > > > > > > Selma said, > > > > is it possible to have an economic system in which labor is paid for > the > > > > value of what that labor produces? > > > > > > I'm going out on a limb and say that isn't the contract with labor. > > They > > > are the hired hands and don't create or capitalize the work. America > > has > > > made the choice to not provide benefits through the government so those > > have > > > to be negotiated with private companies who assume all the risk. I > think > > > it is more than a little nuts but Americans are into "control" and have > a > > > "God" complex that makes them unable to cooperate much with each other > > > and you would believe King George still lived in Washington by the way > > they > > > demean their representatives. Perhaps it is not tyranny but just > > > insensitivity > > > that we all feel and thus the necessity to brutally yell when talking to > a > > > Senator or Representative. Like that Missouri Mule you have to get > > their > > > attention first. > > > > > > The theory is that those who take the risk "deserve" a profit, within > > > reason, for their investment and risk. Of course a worker risks > > whenever > > > they take one job over another. That is solved by making jobs scarce > in > > > my business. > > > > > > The argument is on how much profit the investors, owners and > > > management deserve. And in how much they can take from a society > > without > > > having the society go through the boom/bust constant revolution cycle > that > > > the Chinese Communists were touting at the end of Mao tse Tung's life. > > > China has many languages and cultures but they basically ARE Chinese and > > > conceive of themselves as such. The US elite group today in the US > > > cares only about being American if it is convenient and doesn't cost > them > > > money. They border on if not cross that border into obscenity with > > their > > > high salaries and perks beyond what even the Beethoven or Einstein's of > > the > > > world could ever imagine. This is IMHO obscene in the profit taking > > > practices with no social responsibility and a very aggressive "winner > take > > > all" attitude. > > > > > > That is why my language, which is always tit for tat, has been bordering > > on > > > "Turret's Syndrome" these days. I believe that tit for tat is the only > > > possible > > > game scheme that does not destroy the house but they seem content to > > > echo the old ghetto mentality in Washington when the Blacks burned > > > down their own houses to protest the death of their leader. It is > the > > > old "Better Dead than Red" mentality that would destroy the world if > > > they didn't get what they wanted. Or justifying the shooting of > > children > > > with the statement "Nits make Lice." That is the Wealthy Republican > > > "Capitalist" stance today on work. > > > > > > Today we also have a confusion in that the Stockholders are considered > the > > > owner/capitalists and that is the way that it is sold. Look at all of > > > those Ads on TV about someone being an owner because they own stock. > > > I think that is a stupid metaphor since they are more like citizens in a > > > private club than owners. The only true owner is the one with 51% of > > the > > > stock. > > > > > > If no one has that then it is a Feudal government structure with > > > an Aristocracy and citizens. The small shareholders are the citizens > > > while the workers are the peasants. That is why the Democratic > > Government > > > must be strong enough to control these small corporate countries or the > > > whole system will revert as happened prior to WW II when Hitler who was > a > > > Socialist Emperor (How's that for an oxymoron? in spite of his refusing > > to > > > take the title Kaiser) convinced the most intelligent private citizen on > > the > > > planet to sell out and buy into genocide, just like the Americans had in > > > the 19th century but without the intelligence. That should tell you > > some- > > > thing about the worth of "intelligence" but we still scream that the > > > children > > > don't have it and blame the schools. Were the Beatles intelligent? > No > > > but they were rich, they didn't murder people and were on the side of > > > the angels in the social issues and the broke the Knight barrier without > > > selling out. So much for intelligence. > > > > > > Well I have to go teach opera singers. And if I hear another American > > > say to my face that I could only do that in America or owe it to > American > > > private enterprise then they are in danger of this 61 year old man > > punching > > > them in the face. Oops that Turret's is tough stuff. > > > > > > REH > > > >> > > > I didn't mention that, in the midst of all this wonderful mutual > respect > > > and > > > > employee loyalty and 'fairness',etc. these employees were being > > > > systematically exploited with very low wages, extremely hazardous > > working > > > > conditions, absolutely no retirement benefits of any kind-they worked > > > until > > > > they could no longer work and then were left with nothing. > > > > > > > > They were grateful for the opportunity to feed their families and have > > > > protection from the elements. > > > > > > > > Now here we come, again, to my perpetual question of Harry and Arthur > > and > > > > the rest of you: > > > > > > > > > is it possible to have an economic system in which labor is paid for > > the > > > > value of what that labor produces? > > > > > > > I would love to have some of you tell me how you interpret that > > question. > > > > > > > > Selma > > > > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
