On 4 Jun 2010 at 8:05, John Carl wrote: Platt and Adrie,
I believe in community, which you might think puts me on the opposite side of you on this debate, but I'm actually opposed to national social programs of control. The only appropriate socialism is local - people of the same discrete biome taking care of themselves and their families and their neighbors. Why should people all across America pay taxes so Californians can have the highest welfare benefits in the country? The inherent unfairness of liberalism actually promotes local individual autonomy. What happens when some disaster strikes and the neighbors all have to pitch in together? Warm feelings of connection and community arise and they last a long time. Then the FEMA trucks arrive and people stop looking at their neighbors as helpers in the face of adversity, and start looking at them as competitors standing in line to get the goodies from the mommy-state. Sibling rivalry replaces communal cooperation. My one criticism of you Platt is that you rail against liberalism and praise individualism, but individualism IS a creation of liberalism. What we need is a back-to-the-land neofeudalism, where the regulations are lifted that keep landowners from creating wealth with the wise management of their property. As Bruce Mollison and Masanobu Fukuoka have discovered, the main limit on productivity is people. The land has much more carrying capacity and wealth-producing potential than we realize. With the arrival of the ubiquitous information network, encouraging experimentation and spread of good practice, we could have a nation of proud and independent communities again. Its high time for the dot communism revolution to take hold. When the Giant dies, butterflies arise. John the micro-utopian dreamer Hi John C, I'm with you in spirit if not in practice as I cannot imagine anything worse than living in a hippie commune where everyone strives mightily to be one big happy family while tilling the community soil. Rather give me my little patch, you yours and the person over there hers and let us each strive to respond to DQ, keep the results of our work, trade freely and pursue happiness. As for individualism being a creation of liberalism, you're right if you're referring to the original meaning of "liberalism" -- a political and social philosophy advocating individual freedom and protection of civil liberties, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom to assemble, etc. Since it's beginning the word has come to mean "progressivism," i.e., socialism/communism. One of the best of Pirsig's metaphors is the "Giant" who represents the "system" that treats individuals like fodder for its own purposes. No need to elaborate here since the nature of the Giant is fully described in Lila. But, it's out-of-anyone's-control presence stands as a constant threat to all who value individual liberty. On that, I think we agree. Platt 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
