I'm old enough to worry about the towel boy running away with my girl Chris! I have to say my teaching of economics has always been reluctant as I think it's all piss and only fit for ridicule. Richardo pointed out that competition leads to monopoly and the current position is generally one of monopoly masked as joint venture. The game is Dr. Strangelove's Game and the basic con is that you can use apparently complex maths to get the edge. In fact, this is always just a cover for something very simple - insider trading. Like you (I suspect in a very similar way) I like the notion of level playing fields and competition - particularly innovation - but I'm not even sure our 'free' systems are any better at that. I'll explain sometime, but Jared Diamond has done quite a good job. I thought he wrote boring prose (a real pain when you agree with someone) until Orn turned up some absolute goonball physicist in another thread. I think all the systems we have tried have been miserable failures and have tended to ecocide. In terms of practising what you preach, Machiavelli cautioned against this and stated that the true Prince would not act like this, just pretend to. Since the 70s, Argyris and Schon have often argued that you need to find the theories-in-use to understand what is going on, not the espoused theories. I go a bit further and say we need to understand organisations are not competence but incompetent - though others like Chris Argyris have said many people become skilled incompetents. I can't tell you how many conferences at which I peddled your line about making money from comfortable sinecures. The cunt treatment of my best mate because he is blind often came from equality officers and the like - utter turds. Michael Moore undoubtedly saw a market and went for it. Gore is a dick. The real question is why we have no arguments and only the vapid factionings? Many of these people, including low-level academics are gatekeepers, broadly recruiting gang members. It's piss. I met Sue at a Socialist Workers Party meeting - one of my last jobs undercover as a cop. I was more left wing in reality than most of the posers and deadbeats there! Trotsky wrote plenty about using the tools of the oppressors and it's always been common for union men to go sweetheart. The eventual line is means to ends. One of the biggest laughs we need to turn to ridicule is that of the media gimp sucking up to Mr. Super Success to get him to reveal his secrets of success. This should lead us to rush for the exits howling in paroxysms of laughter, preferably as some group kicks both of them to death for attempting such a brazen cheat, both trying to sell us magic beans. I agree with you that lying shits have made it almost impossible to believe anything, but it ain't as simple as 'honesty is the best policy'. I now feel our 'anti-humbug' satire is now humbug - but we can go on like this forever if we aren't careful.
On 1 Dec, 18:12, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Really, Orn? Care to give an example where I didn't address the specifics of > my argument? I make a point to note the salient points of my positions. The > devil is in the details. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > As to the “Nuh-uh” school, we could bash each other forever Chris. > > > I anxiously await your argument in favor of hypocrisy surgery. > > > On Dec 1, 10:03 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Oh, Orn, your telepathic powers are remarkable! Or is this actually a pot > > > calling a kettle black? I do believe it is. You presume to do that which > > you > > > accuse me of. Classic. > > > > Of course, here one finds some of the worst type of bifurcation > > > > > exemplifying the hypocrisy of one who lauds the wonders of not using > > > > fallacies. > > > > Your statement does not make it so. I am not hypocritical in my approach, > > > and your response is an example of the bifurcation you accuse me of. > > > > > Further, such argument by dismissal does not address that which > > > > Chomsky points out and appears to be more of a veiled argument to the > > > > man and/or selective observation. Such non sequitur criticism is easy > > > > to expose for what it is. > > > > The facts remain the facts. I have not approached from an ad hominem > > > perspective, but rather from a practice what you preach perspective. It > > > seems to me from a logical standpoint that if his opinions regarding this > > > system were as strong as they purport to be, he would not be engaging so > > > actively within this system, including somewhat ethically questionable > > uses > > > of the system. > > > > > On the personal side, I can only guess that seeing one’s emperor > > > > without cloths can drive one to madness. > > > > More projection! I have no emperor. I have only played Devil's Advocate, > > and > > > have not made a positive stand towards any viewpoint. In fact, I've > > espoused > > > some M.O.R. ideologies which are in direct conflict to those you falsely > > > baselessly assume to be my emperor. Is your use of that which you accuse > > me > > > of ironic? Because if it's sincere, it's truly sad. > > > > > “…Chomsky strikes me as one of those guys you see all too often in the > > > > GOP: A > > > > flaming right winger who rants on the evils of homosexuality, making > > > > every > > > > move to block legislation guaranteeing equality for gays, and then > > > > secretly > > > > getting sucked off by a towel boy at the country club. It's all > > > > bullshit.” – Chris > > > > > Numerous problems with the analogy Christ as I’m sure you know. > > > > However, your “It’s all bullshit.”, comment is what is most telling to > > > > me. I can only guess that your primary argument is based on a dislike > > > > of apparent hypocrisy. Correct? > > > > No problems whatsoever with my analogy, and another example of your > > > "argument by dismissal", which unlike mine, didn't actually include any > > > salient points. You seem to be satisfied with a "Nuh-uh, that's not the > > way > > > it is!" Poor form, old chap. If you think there are problems with my > > > analogy, why don't you spell them out? > > > > You should be clearly able to understand that my argument is SPECIFICALLY > > > against hypocrisy, as I've said that numerous times. > > > > > An argument by you and perhaps even Neil for removing hypocrisy from > > > > the human race and/or even selective people would be of great > > > > interest. > > > > I'm all for that. > > > > > On Dec 1, 7:00 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > This is what has always irked me about Noam. If the system is as > > horrible > > > > as > > > > > he decries, then his aggressive use of it is either: > > > > > > A. blatant hypocrisy which undermines his rantings on the topic. > > > > > B. a conscious decision to profit from a system he believes to be > > evil, > > > > thus > > > > > calling into question his personal morals and ethics. > > > > > C. a combination of the two. > > > > > > Chomsky strikes me as one of those guys you see all too often in the > > GOP: > > > > A > > > > > flaming right winger who rants on the evils of homosexuality, making > > > > every > > > > > move to block legislation guaranteeing equality for gays, and then > > > > secretly > > > > > getting sucked off by a towel boy at the country club. It's all > > bullshit. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Heh quite something that huh. > > > > > > > Still I can't help but think that he is only taking advantage of > > the > > > > > > schemes open to one of his wealth in order to keep it, as the rest > > of > > > > > > his ilke do I guess. That it is incredibly hard to live a life > > bound > > > > > > by ones morality when all others in a similar situation to you take > > > > > > advantage of the system, and that if fair laws were intruduced and > > > > > > things like these tax havens simply did not exist so that a rich > > man > > > > > > paid his tax burden like the rest of us, then he would be more able > > to > > > > > > live live in an un-hypocritical way. > > > > > > > Although it is a good point well made, bloody hypocrit! Heh then > > > > > > again, point me out just one person who truely practices what they > > > > > > preach 100% of the time. > > > > > > > On 1 Dec, 13:17, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Noam certainly knows something about wealth and capitalism... > > > > > > > >http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/2912626.html > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:39 AM, ornamentalmind < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > An interview with Noam that includes a deeper analysis of > > wealth, > > > > > > > > distribution and government than that found on corporate news: > > > > > > > > >http://anarchismtoday.org/News/article/sid=74.html > > > > > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > > > “I’m concerned that students not become passive acceptors of > > the > > > > > > > > official doctrine that’s handed down to them from the White > > House, > > > > the > > > > > > > > media, textbooks, teachers and preachers” – Howard Zinn > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 7:47 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Brilliant Don! I concur, ditto. > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 3:48 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > More wealth redistribution ideologuery. If the man knew > > about > > > > > > feeding > > > > > > > > > > the needy he wouldn't spout such non-sense. Meals on > > Wheels > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > nothing to do with Social Security. Community service, by > > > > > > definition, > > > > > > > > > > is local and supported by local businesses and private > > donors. > > > > SS > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > nothing but an enormous Ponzi scheme that soon will fail > > unless > > > > > > > > > > massive amounts of money are pumped into it. It is > > consumed by > > > > > > fraud > > > > > > > > > > and waste. This is what happens to enormous federal > > entities. > > > > > > > > > > Proponents of single payer HC should sit up and take > > notice. > > > > > > > > > > > Community service isn't subversive it is being phased out > > by > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > federal government. Our earnings are increasingly being > > > > > > confiscated > > > > > > > > > > and we have less to help our local citizens out. The money > > is > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > used to fund politicians pet projects and as bribes to get > > new > > > > > > > > > > colossal spending bills passed. See the New Louisiana > > > > Purchase. > > > > > > Mr. > > > > > > > > > > Chomsky has it backwards and I think he probably knows it. > > > > > > > > > > > -Don > > > > > > > > > > > n Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 10:20 AM, ornamentalmind > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Other than the obvious irony, how would you criticize > > this > > > > recent > > > > > > > > > > > quote by Noam? > > > > > > > > > > > > "Social Security is based on an extremely dangerous > > > > principle: > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > you should care whether the disabled widow across town > > has > > > > food > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > eat. The Social Security "reformers" would rather have > > you > > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > > > > on maximizing your own consumption of goods and > > subordinating > > > > > > > > yourself > > > > > > > > > > > to power. That's life. Caring for other people, and > > taking > > > > > > community > > > > > > > > > > > responsibility for things like health and retirement — > > that's > > > > > > just > > > > > > > > > > > deeply subversive." – Noam Chomsky > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.zcommunications.org/zquotes/2600 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > 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]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > > > > > > > .com> > > <minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > <minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > <minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > > > > > > > > groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.- 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]. > > ... > > read more » -- 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.
