I consider poverty and hunger to be a form of warfare. Humanity at its
lowest rung.

On Dec 9, 5:26 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
> True. One fundamental is : enough among us need to be capable of
> better decision - making on moment - to - moment basis, day after day,
> wherever we are, however placed and situated.
>
> Demonstrable Eligibility :  To be doing the least harm to himself, his
> family, his society ;  capability to add significantly through
> practise of one profession or another is preferred.
>
> Strong Ineligibility :  Excessive subscription to nationality, race,
> religion, caste or creed, lineage or clique, or to any one way of
> life, culture or thought, to the exclusion of others.
>
> Organisation :  Oneself.
>
> Which is where I see we might be failing, severely. Proof :  we have
> so much unclear, incompetence, and so much * to criticise ! *
>
> Much is happening, I guess. There are organisations galore, but no
> organisation can make us take better decisions. For many of us, by
> choice, there are no real organisations to look up to.
>
> On Dec 9, 2:42 pm, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Theoretically, it's all so easy, isn't it? I have no doubt that our
> > present global productivity and resources are sufficient to supply
> > even our oversized population with secure subsistence; as Neil defines
> > it, "enough to eat, shelter, warmth, collectivity,
> > education, health care, honest policing and legal protection." The
> > current contrast between useless superfluity and want is often
> > obscene.http://www.manetti.it/web/eng/edible/bin/
>
> > The problem is getting from here to there.
>
> > Francis
>
> > On 9 Dez., 09:46, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the concept of karma is
> > > not valid. Otherwise all those people would already have
> > > metamorphosised into cockroaches. Or perhaps they have, on the
> > > inside ... not Gabby, but from a Guardian blog.
> > > I have seen a lot of material over the years on getting rid of
> > > poverty.  'Critical Perspectives in Accounting' has produced a few,
> > > including a penny on income tax as enough (a Foucauldian perspective).
> > > There is a critical side to this kind of dream and I wouldn't engage
> > > with it to knock the dream.  The first horrible fact is that
> > > interventions have produced a great many more people in poverty simply
> > > through the use of medicine, decent water supply (not always so
> > > decent) and improved agriculture.  It would have been more sensible to
> > > cap the population back in the 1950s.  We haven't grasped this nettle
> > > even now.
> > > Our general notion of improving matters is more of the same through
> > > consuming capitalism - this means our thinking is that of idiots.
> > > I like the idea of enough to eat, shelter, warmth, collectivity,
> > > education, health care, honest policing and legal protection - and
> > > that these should come 'free'.  They should be free in the sense of us
> > > contributing what we can to all this as a 'responsibility' (all of us,
> > > with no exceptions - this raising problems with disability, but not
> > > insurmountable ones).  Freeriding should not be possible either by
> > > scrotes or through wealth.  This should be national (international)
> > > service - something we all do (do, not just pay for).
> > > What we do that is more than this should not wreck the world.
>
> > > Even at this stage there are many objections that can be raised.  What
> > > would motivation be in such a society, what grim bureaucracies might
> > > make things worse, what sadness might we cause for those wanting
> > > massive numbers of children and so on?  Would we crush the very
> > > creativity we need or create more space for it?  I'd want to limit any
> > > earnings or establish a potlach to allow personal kudos in
> > > accumulation, but one that comes to a collective end.  Would this
> > > destroy the world because bweankers (this sort of describes bean
> > > counting and the onamism of bankers) could not be bothered to do
> > > anything without motivational bonuses?
>
> > > On 9 Dec, 07:57, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > This is the position we need to be working from Orn.  I was at a
> > > > session for self-employed people yesterday and BS aside you could feel
> > > > that people present wanted to contribute not just scrabble for cash.
> > > > Yet sadly this was what the session was about.  My own desire not to
> > > > work for anyone else is driven by a desire not to be part of quite
> > > > dreadful conditions in employment that deny my integrity (flawed as I
> > > > accept it is) and almost any chance to be human.  I sort of want
> > > > something a bit like the 'free table' of Plato or Aristotle, though am
> > > > nauseated by any thought of a slavery base for this.  I like Kibbutz
> > > > ideas.  There are deeper, wider issues though.
> > > > I feel privileged when you bring matters such as this to our table
> > > > mate.  And when Chris brings reminders that there is an industry of
> > > > such.  By the time I've done my thinking on the ideal, I recognise
> > > > there is much organisation to be done and that we do not reach an
> > > > ideal.  Sooner or later issues like population control enter and one
> > > > realises the ideal brings practical responsibilities.  This should not
> > > > stop us.
>
> > > > On 8 Dec, 14:18, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > A very interesting view:
>
> > > > > ...
> > > > > MUHAMMAD YUNUS: I believe that, totally, poverty is not part of human
> > > > > being, that is my first premise, so if it not part of human being the
> > > > > real human being will emerge some day, it is the stupidity of human
> > > > > being that created poverty, so stupidity can not go on, the real
> > > > > creativity of human being will take over the stupidity and it will
> > > > > completely eliminate it and this is the century when it will happen.
> > > > > And it can be done, it's not a, a kind of a pipe dream or some
> > > > > fantastic thing, it's possible because it's us who make the difference
> > > > > and if we can create the structures to do that; people will raise
> > > > > themselves out of poverty, just like that. Human beings created to do
> > > > > much bigger things than struggle with food and clothes and some tiny
> > > > > little thing. These are matters of past, these are pre-historic thing.
> > > > > Real history will begin when there are no such things.
> > > > > ...
>
> > > > > The entire interview is 
> > > > > at:http://www.abc.net.au/tv/elders/transcripts/s2757468.htm-Hide 
> > > > > quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- 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.


Reply via email to