Watch out. This is a very dangerous idea - dividing England in three.
It could lead to further division, such as making each township a
separate member of the Common Market. Of course that might lead to
making each small part of each member of the British Commonwealth a
member, or even each town a member, or maybe each person a distinct
and separate member, and expanding the CM to include more and more
until it includes everything. Good lord! That would mean that each
person was a member of something we could call the human race. And
there'd be no politicians! Oh my!
So watch out. This subdividing idea could prove very dangerous.
Jim
On Sep 15, 5:47 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is a feeling about that trust has collapsed in our societies.
> Polls conducted over 60 years tend to show our levels of trust have
> not, in fact declined, but that efficacy (meaning how effective we
> feel in the world) has collapsed. I don't like trust as a concept -
> we need rights. I feel almost completely let down in that we haven't
> produced viable and honest democracy - having long resisted the view
> that all politicians are the same version of self-interested scumbag,
> I have come to think this is the sensible view and we need to extend
> this view to a great deal more of of what happens in the day-today. I
> want to try to avoid nasty views of other people in this and instead
> see development in 'real time' public scrutiny and something worth
> believing in. I would generally go with the postmodern notion that
> grand-narratives of legitimation have collapsed. I think the notion
> of being led by good people who act in ethical ways is such a grand-
> narrative and flies in the face of what happens now and can been seen
> as repetition of grisly history. One can choose to be pessimistic or
> optimistic, yet this is really part of the problem of replacing
> rationality by passion.
> I think my contention is that trust in leadership is an anachronism
> and this holds us back from developing social capital that would make
> us less reliant on both the State we 'elect' and the Shadow State of
> money power that is out of even this limited control. What we need is
> a new understanding of freedom which allows us to act collectively in
> a collective that structures our very freedom as individuals able to
> act in better belief in what we know. I don't think we can afford
> perfectionism in this - generally expressed in our history as
> ideologies that sweep aside opposition in a means to ends philosophy
> in which we never get the ends, only more of the means excused by the
> 'dream'.
>
> I tend to think abstract thinking on such issues has been done and
> really only shows us we can chatter forever about them whilst
> remaining broadly feudal and clannish . We are still talking about
> banks needing capital and other such economic claptrap, rather than
> looking at how be resource a fairer society against a very different
> form of productivity - that of producing sustainable, resilient
> communities prepared to engage in mutual assurance - including how we
> form transparent control that includes a balanced representation of
> interests. My belief is we lack the faith needed to try to achieve
> this, finding it easier to believe in religious fables including
> current economic dogma - and most of this is about beating most of the
> people down most of the time because reason is far too connected to
> individual interest giving us no trust in outcomes supposedly based on
> it. Complex schemes of public choice theories explicitly state this,
> demanding we find ways to equate personal choice with public choice in
> acceptance of the selfishness of decision.
>
> Anyone feel they have something simpler, somehow more cutting? On
> offer to me, is being proud to be British, when I would rather we
> split the country into three within Europe, leaving the pound and
> bwanking to Greater London, and Greater Scotland to the oil and gas, a
> currency (the Euro) without pictures of a German Royal Family on it
> and the Midlands-Southwest to sensible farming and a Euro-based
> manufacturing economy. Both new regions, now autonomous within the
> Euro, would practice trade free of exploitation other than in the sale
> of water to the South-East 'Sterling Zone'.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
