Yep, that's where I see IT having accepted their position too.

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote:

> In point 11  *It *seems the corporations and the people who lead them are
> already social paths
> Allan
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:11 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What strikes me on public dialogue is that we get a lot of opposing
>> views put forward that are all based in ideology that can be stripped
>> so bare as to be embarrassing.  This holds true for political-economic
>> stuff and many factual programmes on history -we still get 'Kings and
>> Queens' and battles with little focus on how what democracy we have
>> came about - amazingly,given much focus on the rich, we get little
>> idea of how wealth is acquired and distributed.  Moral discussion
>> rarely gets in deep and there is massive bias towards received wisdom
>> and language.  Journalism is stuck in value from Victorian America on
>> 'objectivity' - frankly worlds away from what can be justified in
>> critical thought. In all their 'balance' they have failed to report on
>> debt and wage decimation for 20 years.  war reporting has been a
>> complete sell-out since The Falklands Fiasco.  In reporting the
>> closure of fifty UK pubs a week, no mention was made of the fact that
>> there was no longer any money in the hands of those who used to use
>> them - in 1980 the bottom 50% had 14% of the country's liquid assets -
>> now it's less than 1% - and clearly why businesses reliant on it have
>> shut.
>>
>> Given that the cost of manufacturing in most products we buy is 10-15%
>> it's hard to see the business case for much 'offshoring' and there has
>> never been a case of us to decimate manufacturing other than for the
>> ideological right wanting to kill off unions and gerrymander
>> electorates.
>>
>> The positives we need to get to include (tomorrow):
>> 1.bringing back manufacturing
>> 2.limited debt jubilee
>> 3. return to primitive banking
>> 4. new greener products - we should aim to cut all domestic energy
>> needs by 70%
>> 5. bring in international/national service for all across US and
>> Europe to abolish youth unemployment and long-term unemployment
>> 6. raise wages
>> 7. cap high earnings and bring in wealth taxes that ensure capital is
>> invested
>> 8.hang the next bankster who threatens the treason of selling out to
>> some tax haven
>> 9. insist on transparent accounting on a global basis (I teach the
>> stuff and can no longer make sense of balance sheets)
>> 10. no more derivatives
>> 11. start looking for massive efficiency savings in new ways that
>> don't turn corporations into sociopaths.
>> 12. establish world-wide quality of working life standards and give
>> the kind of support to all that leads to population control (which
>> includes stopping the fear your kids are so likely to die you need to
>> have loads).
>> 13. stop money controlling politics - partly by ensuring it isn't to
>> spare for this kind of influence.
>> 14. encourage genuine self-reliance through more work-based learning.
>> 15. make politicians meet in public (Internet broadcast) not in secret
>> - and get on with a genuine peace that will entail getting rid of
>> rougue states and medievalist clowns
>>
>> Whatever the list we need to decide it and  not allow the brush off
>> that we can't afford it.  We can.  What we can't afford is for it to
>> turn into some centralised communism or be taken over by current
>> centralised money.
>>
>> On Nov 7, 1:26 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I share Pat's 'tears'.  In science one can pull off the positive
>> > eliminations and work with what's left.  In the social this is hardly
>> > possible without moving into some solipsist fantasy as in Descartes or
>> > Ayn Rand's "objectivism".  The farce in logical positivism is that of
>> > the return of desire.  In attempting to extirpate system building
>> > (metaphysics) one is really building another.  7 books may have been
>> > written by Plato on how to stave off elite corruption - but of course
>> > he was crating an elite that would be corrupted as the Democracy was
>> > corrupted around him,nearly always at war.
>> > Inmy conception we are always working with the Undead memes of the
>> > past and a way forward is to bring them to light.I at least partly
>> > think my years in study (mostly teaching and research) have led to me
>> > some of the right places but one always faces the reality James
>> > explains a bit above.
>> > My frustration with philosophy is this - it relies on abilities few
>> > have and over time has become a pastime for these few.  Almost
>> > everything in academe turns to this.
>> > In one of those weird turns, had the new inheritance laws for royal
>> > succession just brought in been around 200 years ago, the world wars
>> > may not have happened because the king of England would have been
>> > Germany's Kaiser.  I suspect imperialism would have had its way
>> > anyway, but some odd turn may lead us away from the current abyss.
>> > OccupyX is at least getting at old left-right divides.
>> >
>> > On Nov 5, 8:59 pm, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Pat <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > On Oct 27, 6:43 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > >> The communist angle always makes me smirk Pat.  The original
>> written
>> > > >> form was elite (Plato) and aimed at cutting the temptations of
>> > > >> corruption,and the American anti-commie stuff always failed to
>> reflect
>> > > >> on itself as dire ideology.  These days we have 'loop theories'
>> that
>> > > >> relish both capitalism and communism in some kind of balance - but
>> in
>> > > >> the end I just think we are at a past sell by date on both.  I
>> worked
>> > > >> for Moldovan 'wages' (mostly food and board) when I lectured there
>> -
>> > > >> three weeks worth more or less paid my train fare from the
>> airport.  I
>> > > >> loved my days in the fields, mostly fixing machinery with parts
>> bought
>> > > >> with my university salary.  I'd be closer to Allan on the state of
>> > > >> play than Rigsy.  We have made casual labouring much more difficult
>> > > >> for our own people to do.  We could do something around such work,
>> but
>> > > >> the problem is it's so much cheaper to organise around migrant
>> labour.
>> >
>> > > > Cheaper, yes; exploitation, equally yes.  Doesn't the 'West' just
>> love
>> > > > to exploit those who it deems of less worth and then eke every last
>> > > > scrap of worth out of them?  Of course, all in the name of 'better'.
>> > > > Sometimes, it makes me feel phyisically ill to think I, in some
>> third-
>> > > > party manner, benefit from such ill use of human resources.  But one
>> > > > man can't stop it; it takes a mindset and paradigm shift to occur in
>> > > > the minds of, at least, 1% of the human population--and that's, now,
>> > > > roughly 70 million!!
>> >
>> > > Waste is quite a dilemma, on one hand you can propel industry capital
>> > > but on the other is negligent arrogance in taking for granted what
>> > > resources are consumed. Human beings seem to be regenerative, in we
>> > > strive to prosper, but also rationally degenerate in that we are
>> > > geared toward doing so in an authentic environment where leaders arise
>> > > by merit, what is deemed worthy of admiration and emulation. The
>> > > degenerate part comes into play where we are willing to suppress all
>> > > our instincts to persist in degenerate environments created leaders we
>> > > should use for one thing but fail to give the cold shoulder in other
>> > > matters. I would equate much of today's figureheads as ombudsmen
>> > > running the purchasing dept with no concept of TCO- run into Best Buy
>> > > and grab the flashiest piece of hardware with no reference to field
>> > > experts, reliability reviews, and barely a clue what the office needs
>> > > from a given product. It is obvious that popularity is not a marker of
>> > > a productive and healthy selection process. We need to devise
>> > > mechanisms for progress and eliminate the weak links, but this is no
>> > > easy task. What is it about the 1% that will get this off the ground I
>> > > wonder, because I've had similar strategic ideas but it always quickly
>> > > devolves in my mind into thousands of dilemmas. Unless of course they
>> > > know, understand and believe- but what- that is the question, no?
>> >
>> > > >> On Oct 27, 3:50 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > >> > On Oct 24, 7:37 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > >> > > There was philosophy once called logical positivism.  \\it's
>> people
>> > > >> > > were well-intentioned, like Russell and Carnap.  If you have a
>> few
>> > > >> > > hours to spare I could explain its basics - in the end it got
>> so
>> > > >> > > concerned with words they were all that was left.  Strangely
>> it was
>> > > >> > > accused of being crude in its use of brute fact.
>> >
>> > > >> > My sister was/is a fan of Logical Positivism.  It certainly
>> tried;
>> > > >> > but, as you say, it got caught up in terminology so much so that
>> it
>> > > >> > found that it didn't have the language to discuss its own topics.
>> > > >> > Thus, eventually becoming positively, logically negated.  Isn't
>> it
>> > > >> > ironic...don't you think?
>> >
>> > > >> > > The problem as I see it is that we want democracy but have not
>> found a
>> > > >> > > way to accept its biggest flaw - that of decisions made
>> through the
>> > > >> > > sway of ignorance, and further problems with the corruption of
>> > > >> > > representatives.  Attempts at a fix of this in perfection are
>> doomed
>> > > >> > > or the equivalent of fiddling while Rome burns.
>> >
>> > > >> > The answer there is, as it has always been: offering a REAL
>> education
>> > > >> > to the next generation.
>> >
>> > > >> > > One might try to produce communication free of ideology and
>> this let
>> > > >> > > Reason alone have power (Habermas) - but as far as I can see
>> this
>> > > >> > > never works - and Habermas only suggests his 'ideal speech
>> situation'
>> > > >> > > as an ideal type (following Weber).
>> >
>> > > >> > The problem there is that most people don't see their own biases
>> and,
>> > > >> > therefore, pass on those ideologies anyway--sometimes without
>> ever
>> > > >> > seeing that truth.
>> >
>> > > >> > > The best positive I can reach is that we could change our
>> material
>> > > >> > > conditions to produce less discontent.  To get to an
>> understanding of
>> > > >> > > this we need to agree on some basic facts - and the move
>> towards these
>> > > >> > > is critical.  People as old as Orn and myself can remember
>> when it was
>> > > >> > > possible for most in the West to get somewhere near this
>> because there
>> > > >> > > were plenty of well paid jobs about.  Oversimplifying a lot
>> this is
>> > > >> > > not now the case and we need to establish what the new
>> conditions are.
>> >
>> > > >> > The problem there is that there is a veritable army of
>> economists and
>> > > >> > historians trying to prevent you/us from discovering the truth
>> OF our
>> > > >> > situation out of THEIR fear that, once we discover the truth, we
>> will
>> > > >> > want, demand and deserve better leadership.  The result is
>> worldwide
>> > > >> > revolution, which, as we can all see, could get very bloody
>> indeed.
>> > > >> > But, do we hide behind ignorance or maintain ignorance in order
>> to
>> > > >> > avoid revolution out of the fear of bloodshed?  Revolution and
>> change
>> > > >> > require courage.  Is humanity Brave enough FOR a New World?
>> >
>> > > >> > > Productivity is vastly enhanced from the times in which our
>> work
>> > > >> > > ethics arose.  My guess is we could get by quite nicely on a
>> 30hr
>> > > >> > > working week and a 40 week year with retirement at 60 whilst
>> > > >> > > increasing current production.  I am only guessing, but the
>> reason I
>> > > >> > > have to guess is odd.  Why don't we know?  There are perhaps a
>> dozen
>> > > >> > > vital areas like this to which we have no accepted answers.
>> >
>> > > >> > I've even thought of changing to a 5-day week in which we work 3
>> days
>> > > >> > and are off 2 days.  365 is far more divisible by 5 than it is 7
>> and
>> > > >> > it is only a religious concept that binds us to a 7-day week.
>> >
>> > > >> > > The positive moves are all about establishing facts and the
>> first of
>> > > >> > > these has to be an explanation of why we are so bad at this and
>> > > >> > > whether new technology can help break the 'spell'.  Here, the
>> paradox
>> > > >> > > is we need the technology to start working to this end with
>> most
>> > > >> > > people not able to understand why and an existing situation in
>> which
>> > > >> > > dominant education and media will try to pervert any attempts.
>> >
>> > > >> > Yup. Well spotted!!  And not so easily avoided.  Especially when
>> there
>> > > >> > is a 'sea of troubles' to oppose before we could end them.
>> >
>> > > >> > > Many are discussing these issues in great detail.  I'm sure a
>> few of
>> > > >> > > us could put a '101' together from Internet sources.
>>  Semiotics is a
>> > > >> > > key discipline in the critique (Michael Betancourt), as is
>> > > >> > > environmental science (as opposed to the Kymer Vert) and most
>> > > >> > > economics that you don't get on Fox and the increasingly dumb
>> BBC
>> > > >> > > (Steve Keen)  One can even argue the Tea Party and OccupyX have
>> > > >> > > similar protest issues.  You can get a radical smear of this
>> on the
>> > > >> > > Keiser Report (courtesy on Russia Today).
>> >
>> > > >> > > The aim is already worked out - a return to economies with a
>> link
>> > > >> > > between toil (labour value) and reward and money in people's
>> hands,
>> > > >> > > not hoarded by an elite or subject to their looting- and
>> meaningful
>> > > >> > > democracy.
>> >
>> > > >> > AND making that not sound too much like the communism that it is.
>> > > >> > LOL!!  I only say that because of the massive fear of communism
>> by
>> > > >> > America due to its ignorance OF it.  People...
>> >
>> > read more ยป
>
>
>
>
> --
>  (
>   )
> |_D Allan
>
> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
>
>

Reply via email to