"Scarcity is the real problem" - JIT Justin, scarcity of what?
On Aug 28, 12:08 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > Well then why do you rely on them for the military or for maintaining > streets or administering justice? > > Why do you always substitute questions for answers? > > Your argument has the obvious structure of the false dilemma either > charities or government... ignoring the rather obvious possibility of > charities and government. > > The real question is how an unexamined life can lead to political > conservatism and how, once that avoidance is established, can an > interest be rekindled or the willfulness that is at the center of the > will to power can be tempered by its own actual desires. The answer, > of course, is art. I hope, and in fact believe, that the young or > maybe even yet to be born will rekindle artistic expression and once > again show the world how to live. They are never rich when they start > out. As they say, harder for a rich man to ..... > > But to answer most directly - because I have my vote and I can do what > I want with it. I can foster my own interests by ensuring that there > is a safety net. In government, properly structured as a democracy, a > man has a single vote independent of his wealth. This provides a check > to economic power. If however, the government controls the economy > completely the check provided by wealth on the government is not > provided and you have the opposite problem. > > The real problem is how to check the desire for domination carried out > either through unfettered greed and its eventual control of all > aspects of everyone’s lives or through the direct implementation of > concentrated power in governmental hands achieving the same thing. > > Focault has important insights into how we can, acting together as > "the masses" impair the attainment of totalitarianism achieved either > through economic domination or political domination. It all comes down > to privacy. What is necessary is to strip away the ability of those in > power to remain private. To have laws for example - eventually – that > establish that those in power are not allowed to meet or even talk > except through a technical means that allows everyone to see. Before > that however we need to establish international voting rights, with > direct election of our representatives and wholly new and orders of > magnitude greater constraints on power. > > There is a limit to what either charity of government can do in > someone’s life to promote their benefit. Sooner or latter, if they > truly are to be ok, then they need to be independent and contributory > sources of their own benefit and - for their sake- and not only the > sake of those that they will benefit - they need to be contributory > sources of the benefit of others. But that does not mean that private > charity or government can make no contribution. And there is the > problem of the children of those who for whatever reason fail to > provide for them. > > You might reflect your question back on yourself and ask why you are > not doing more instead of writing in this news group if you are so > concerned. > > If the answer is that you believe insights into foundation are needed > right now and you are sincere in attempting to form them then that is > great. If however, you are one of these hacks whose only purpose is to > drive a wedge between people and their own political interests, to > separate them from their vote in a sense, in order to marshal those > votes in favor of those whose considerable economic power chafes at > the idea of any limit being imposed on their power and for whom > freedom itself, freedom ultimately from their own desires vice freedom > in order to genuinely pursue their desires, is the only value, and a > value that so conceived is as empty of content as a mirror reflecting > on itself. If you’re one of those deeply despairing kind, for whom the > only pleasure when they eat a steak in a very expensive restaurant is > that they can eat it there and others cannot, and the fact that the > cow was slaughtered for them vice they for the cow, if you are one of > those angry despairing kind (you can hear it both Marxism and those > that have elevated Rand to stature) then you simply must be defeated > politically. > > There is plenty of room for a more reasoned approach. The real > question is how to check all forms of human organization that are > pyramidical. Governmental, business, religious, and non-govermental > organizations to include all forms both legal and non-legal. What is > needed is a comprehensive look at power and how it exercises itself in > pyramids. Your idea that it is the single man against the government > is severely flawed. It is the single man against any form of > domination including the government. The false dilemma underneath your > post has been successfully used to drive a wedge between people and > their interests. > > You can see the attack on teachers, lawyers, government, all those > that check economic might, as a fairly good thing as long as the > teachers lawyers and government wage their own propaganda campaign to > fight it and things stay in relative balance. This is needed until the > will to power can ultimately be resolved in a genuine discovery of its > emptiness that comes with enlightenment. > > Lately, it has been too little government, not too much. Globalization > of markets has succeeded but globalization of the labor market and > political democracy has not. I look forward to the time when all basic > needs are covered, no one is allowed to starve, everyone has a place > to sleep and when they are sick they are cared for. Then the artists > can compete to keep us entertained. Scarcity is the real problem but > we must not skew the economy by disenfranchising legitimate > governmental use as a component of a necessary check on the political > power of the rich. > > On Aug 27, 11:43 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What is interesting to me is how those of you who keep going back to > > “we are helping those in need” prefer not to do it all yourselves but > > rather turn it over to the state, which is an external entity composed > > of bureaucrats. It is almost as if you are saying ”I can’t decide > > how to do it best myself, I don’t even want to choose where to put my > > helping money, I can’t organize a group or a charity, (even though > > they use mostly volunteers, which are WAY more cost effective, FREE in > > fact.) No, I would rather you the State just did everything and I can > > still have that helping the needy feeling and not have to choose” > > States do not use volunteers very often. They have to pay them > > exceptional wages and benefits, thus diluting the effectiveness. What > > you seem to be saying is “they know better than I do” That is OK with > > me, it just seems like giving away yourself to the state, which is the > > thing I am against. If you believe so strongly in helping the needy, > > why not just do it without the state? I would like to choose the > > areas I think need the most help. Governments that take most of your > > money don’t let you do that. > > > Doctors without Borders is an amazing group, (who need MONEY for > > some reason, I don‘t know why. ) They didn’t wait around for some > > bureaucrat to do something, they just did it themselves. > > > And when the State sends troops to Afghanistan or does something > > else you don‘t like? In the name of “helping and protecting?” Too > > late, you handed your money and your control over to “them” already. > > It is always “them” who get to choose. You think you are choosing, > > but it is clear that you are not. You can make a fuss, but it did not > > stop them did it? > > > You know what the ULTIMATE in “voting” is? Capitalism. Every > > single dollar you spend is a vote. A vote that will be counted too! > > Can’t be taken away from you. Everything you choose to spend money on > > is a vote for it. Think about that the next time you spend your > > money, what you have left of it, you already voted to give most of > > your choices away already. You don’t approve of something? Don’t buy > > it. There is no more powerful message, and it is your direct vote. > > > I believe in personal choice. If you don’t, that is OK with me. > > > On Aug 27, 7:44 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I do like Kunkel's take on capitalistic ventures and time. "Not the > > > least way that Marxism is opposed to capitalism is in its relationship > > > to time. Capitalist culture approaches a pure instantaneousness: no > > > future, no past". > > > Sure it's true that the culture of capitalism sees the now and > > > disregards the ramifications, such as issues of environmental > > > destruction, causal poverty and overall degradation of the extended > > > life cycle. So we do have profits in the hundreds of billions while > > > little attention is paid to the imperative which then leads to the > > > death of ducks. > > > Overall I don't think there is anything new when viewing the annals of > > > human history, the deaths of many for the ideals of the few. I think > > > it's a great topic which hopefully can elevate the group perspective > > > and focus. Thanks Chris! > > > > On Aug 27, 10:12 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > From > > > > here:http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/08/24/what-we-are-not-emb... > > > > > " > > > > > Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to > > > > have > > > > been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx. > > > > > The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number > > > > of > > > > human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack > > > > ought to > > > > be decisive, but I’m afraid it won’t get you far with the multitude of > > > > highly-self-regarded thinkers influenced by Karl Marx. Fact is, > > > > commitment > > > > to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used to > > > > be > > > > mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there’s something glamorous in > > > > the > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
