Hi Marco:
I'm amazed and somewhat amused by the vehemence of your defense
of European-style socialism. And, you seem to take personal offense
at any interpretation of the MOQ that violates your conception of social
morality. I sense almost a religious fervor in your reaction to my
challenges, and I'm truly puzzled as to why that's so. Am I an ogre to be
packed off to Siberia in your new Utopia?
If I understand your basic objection to a free market it is that it
disregards human rights. So let's see what the MOQ says about
human rights. From Lila, Chp. 24:
"What passed for morality within this crowd was a kind of vague,
amorphous soup of sentiments known as "human rights." You were
also supposed to be "reasonable." What these terms really meant was
never spelled out in any way that Phaedrus had ever heard. You were
just supposed to cheer for them.
"He knew now that the reason nobody ever spelled them out was
nobody ever could. In a subject-object understanding of the world
these terms have no meaning. There is no such thing as "human
rights." There is no such thing as moral reasonableness. There are
subjects and objects and nothing else.
"This soup of sentiments about logically nonexistent entities can be
straightened out by the Metaphysics of Quality. It says that what is
meant by "human rights" is usually the moral code of intellect-vs. -
society, the moral right of intellect to be free of social control. Freedom
of speech; freedom of assembly, of travel; trial by jury; habeas corpus;
government by consent�these "human rights" are all intellect-vs.-
society issues. According to the Metaphysics of Quality these "human
rights" have not just a sentimental basis, but a rational, metaphysical
basis. They are essential to the evolution of a higher level of life from a
lower level of life. They are for real."
Now nowhere do I see in this description a right to "bread and roses."
Nor a right for Hispanic immigrant cleaning the floor of skyscraper to
earn a salary equal to the architect of the building. Nor for Pakistani
children to earn the Italian minimum wage. Nor for the monetary value
of gold in Africa to be distributed equally to every native. Nor that
someone's need gives him the right to appropriate the property of
another.
What I do see, however, is the human right to be free from social
(government) control of intellectual expression, intellect being a higher
level of morality than society. In other words, society should not stand
in the way of individual's free exercise of his reason which he must use
to live and pursue happiness. Nor should any individual be penalized
for the irrational decisions of another.
If you can find something else in the MOQ about human rights, please
cite chapter and verse. But it seems to me like the rights you suggest
(but do not spell out in detail) are what Pirsig calls a "soup of
sentiments."
Of course, I could be wrong. I await your manifesto for Utopia.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
