[Platt quotes Pirsig]
"What the Metaphysics of Quality indicates is that the
twentieth-century intellectual faith in man's basic goodness as
spontaneous and natural is
disastrously naive. The ideal of a harmonious society in which
everyone without coercion cooperates happily with everyone else for
the mutual good of all is a devastating fiction." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila, 24.
[Arlo]
"Studies of bones left by the cavemen indicate that cannibalism, not
cooperation, was a pre-society norm." (Pirsig, shortly thereafter)
This quote points out that pre-social "humans" live according to the
same biological-driven quality as other animals. No argument from me
here. This is something I've been saying for quite some time.
So, we agree that prior to assimilation of culture, in a "pre-social"
state, "man" is a biological creature who acts similarly to, say,
other apes or primates. Okay? Good.
But Pirsig also goes on. "If man is basically good, then maybe it is
man's basic goodness which invented social institutions to repress
this kind of biological savagery in the first place." (Pirsig)
I think Pirsig is a little off here, but his sentiment is spot on.
Nonetheless, social patterns ("cooperation", from his above quote),
are a higher moral level than biological savagery. Again, no
disagreement from me here.
And certainly to neither of these points would Marx disagree, which
I'm guessing was your point since you posted this in response to
comments made about Marxist thinking and co-operative work ethics.
I see no evidence that Marx envisioned some utopic "harmonious"
society without turbulence, crime or threats by those seeking power.
What he envisioned was that local communities, sharing in the
production and stability of their social networks, would be better to
deal with "disharmony" than a capistorcratic few wielding power over
the disenfranchised many.
In other words, "suffrage" was only an issue in a "elite" despotism
where a few had the power to silence the voices of many. In a world
where local communes tended to their own stability, no one would have
the power to deny "blacks" or "women" the "right" to representation.
Indeed, such "power" was the goal of despotic systems, and Marx would
argue was "normalized" by those systems as a means of reification.
At 09:54 AM 4/22/2010, you wrote:
On 22 Apr 2010 at 8:51, Andre Broersen wrote:
> Arlo:
>
> The Communist Manifesto was a treatise arguing for freedom from
an enslaving
> capistocracy.
>
> Andre:
> Excellent summary Arlo. Just to pick up on one point: fortunately
we see signs of some enlightened enterpreneurs extending the idea
of (political) democracy to the economic sector with the
establishment of cooperatives, joint ownership ventures, joint
decision making processes, sharing the profits equitably, etc etc.
I guess this would be considered blasphemy by Platt and his neo-con-nians.
>
> I remember one of Anthony's post (in the archives) dealing with
this issue. Three guesses to whom the post was directed.
>
> Andre
"What the Metaphysics of Quality indicates is that the twentieth-century
intellectual faith in man's basic goodness as spontaneous and natural is
disastrously naive. The ideal of a harmonious society in which everyone
without coercion cooperates happily with everyone else for the mutual
good of all is a devastating fiction." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila, 24.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
