Democracy- and the reasons for its experiment in America- has been
highjacked. It is inextricably tied to capitalism and individualism,
rule of law and wise justice, various freedoms and a moderate society.
The '60's changed a great deal in the national character- spitting on
troops, calling cops "pigs", drugs, sex and rock and roll. Just think-
soon we will influence the entire planet to take this course of
development and call it "liberty"!
On Sep 19, 2:05 pm, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Heh okay I can see you didn't get my point.
>
> > I only mention the C word (Communisim) as an example of my words
> > privious to uttering it.
>
> Thanks for keeping true to it then Lee, I'll try to dig deeper. :) I
> take it you don't mean that Communism is the best example of a society
> geared toward the objectives I am proposing, nor that it is the only
> means to those ends. Should I take your meaning to be that Communism
> is a system undertaken to such social ends and proves people would
> rather sponge? I could agree with that perhaps, but I do not agree
> that people who are raised and a society that is built around
> effective means to promote those ends would necessarily look anything
> like what Communism has over the last 70 years. I may still be missing
> your point, if so please hit me with the blunt end of it. :D
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 19, 4:39 pm, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Heh James it is not hard to imagine what you see as unreasonable to be
> >> > the reality of the situation. As I said in my last post, let us look
> >> > at how Communisim has worked or not for us over the last 70 years or
> >> > so.
>
> >> Political ideology may be convenient for discourse on political theory
> >> but when it comes to solving social challenges I think it is ill
> >> equipped compared to, say, child psychology. Sure, communism sounds
> >> great on paper, but I think it is especially prone to corruption- who
> >> can be trusted with such power, it might be workable under a strong
> >> anarcho-syndicalistic population to keep it in check but then it
> >> wouldn't be Communism and lacking a large scale defense
> >> command&control infrastructure would be vulnerable to corruption and
> >> conquest from within and out. Sounds kinda pie-in-the-sky for today's
> >> world.
>
> >> > The problem is that we are all differant, what may seem sensable to
> >> > some will not seem so to others.
>
> >> Granted, this does not establish whichever negative effects are the
> >> result of social systems that encourage the 'sponging' behavior. What
> >> I am trying to identify is the context of humanity, the variables that
> >> encourage beneficial and desirable behaviors and also under what
> >> circumstances the negatives emerge so that they can be minimized.
>
> >> > What is you stance on the dealth penalty, as a view to an example of
> >> > how differantly we all think?
>
> >> Hm, too expensive to pursue proper justice, ineffective deterrent,
> >> provides little gain to society at large. Bout sums it up for me.
>
> >> For example one could argue beating kids and following the Bible
> >> examples is the only way to produce 'properly' behaved children, that
> >> doesn't fit with scientific knowledge on the subject of child rearing.
> >> I think there is helpful scientific knowledge on all these subjects
> >> you bring up and would like to see more of that in public discourse.
> >> As it stands progress is held to the beck and call of reaction-terms
> >> tossed at the public to produce reliable results (for the same people
> >> that aren't fixing things) rather than encouraging people to develop
> >> productive and intelligent discourse.
>
> >> Considering the level of ignorance promulgated in our political
> >> debates I find it amazing our (US) democracy works to the degree it
> >> has.
>
> >> > On Sep 16, 11:37 pm, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Well the more I think about this the less it sounds reasonable to
> >> >> assume that given the viable choice and reason to believe it wasn't a
> >> >> catch 22 that anyone capable of doing anything would choose a life of
> >> >> scraps over anything productive. In that case chronic welfare should
> >> >> come hitched with therapy, mandatory, to identify those who could
> >> >> really use some more psychological attention and keep people from
> >> >> falling between the cracks. Some may, and that is one's right, but a
> >> >> goal of societal health should be to facilitate productive lives my
> >> >> any means possible. The costs to society are too great otherwise and
> >> >> there is a huge amount of work to be done.
>
> >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > I do not belive all people would work for these things make sacrifices
> >> >> > and be likely to be happy at all.
>
> >> >> > We can see that so far Communism has not really worked.
>
> >> >> > I agree that we must as a society look after those less abelt o look
> >> >> > after themselves, but we need to be very carefull indeed that we do
> >> >> > not create a sociaty of spongers.
>
> >> >> > On Sep 16, 3:39 pm, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> I believe in cradle to the grave social securities, and that is
> >> >> >> something that should be on offer. People will work for these things,
> >> >> >> make sacrifices, and likely be happy about it if they have a sense of
> >> >> >> it helping to strengthen society. I think many people would work
> >> >> >> harder and even be willing to work smarter if there were tangible
> >> >> >> results, if that work pays into the social securities and societal
> >> >> >> infrastructure and benefits the individual at the same time- what more
> >> >> >> could one ask for? Of course one could ask for more, and that is why I
> >> >> >> think we should have a dual economy- we obviously cannot trust the
> >> >> >> politicians, lobbyists, and corporate interests to factor human beings
> >> >> >> and the well being of society into their bottom line we need something
> >> >> >> to compensate for this. We need a progressive social plan that
> >> >> >> tenaciously pursues social stability, security, sustainability, and
> >> >> >> excellence from the bottom to the top and across the board for near
> >> >> >> and long term objectives. It should be an option.
>
> >> >> >> I am playing out hundreds of scenarios trying to solve the hard
> >> >> >> questions like the one you have raised Rigsy and there is no easy way
> >> >> >> out. I'm not omniscient either, actually battling with mental tumult
> >> >> >> and exhaustion in the process. It brings up the inconvenient truths
> >> >> >> such as who makes the decisions, who benefits and who is at a loss- it
> >> >> >> boils down to representation- should it? Even by pursuing a principled
> >> >> >> hierarchial weighting system to benefit the maximum number to the
> >> >> >> maximum degree over a temporal timeline some will be disadvantaged
> >> >> >> (lest we throw everything we have at each person in line)- it is
> >> >> >> obvious any workable system would account for need and availability,
> >> >> >> after identifying those ends part of the second task would be
> >> >> >> identifying where the current system lies in those terms and creating
> >> >> >> a context shift. It may turn out that everyone could live a longer and
> >> >> >> more fulfilling life consuming half of the current resources (or less)
> >> >> >> but it will take some intelligence to identify how to make it a
> >> >> >> reality and the systems required to secure this future and eliminate
> >> >> >> the implicit wastes that siphon off our collective human potential.
> >> >> >> Though everything isn't clear to me, I've developed a strong belief
> >> >> >> that we can achieve these ends and that we must if we wish to survive
> >> >> >> the challenges in our indefinite future.
>
> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 6:51 AM, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> > So- are you for "death panels"? Some day you will wake up and not be
> >> >> >> > so "new" anymore.
>
> >> >> >> > On Sep 16, 1:40 am, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> My mother in law went to school with Mike, said he was a jerk or
> >> >> >> >> something like that. I thought it was a riot the way he showed our
> >> >> >> >> hometown, a highschooler then.
>
> >> >> >> >> Elsewhere, Archytas mentions this being the only game in town and I
> >> >> >> >> wonder facing the situational characterizations Moore lists what
> >> >> >> >> options does one have? I mean we either play their game or lose,
> >> >> >> >> period. Sure regions can begin to resist by conserving resources
> >> >> >> >> through internal trade and services but in the end everybody has to
> >> >> >> >> pay the tax man, tuition, fuel, etc. It makes me think we are all
> >> >> >> >> under the spell of a mass narcotic. I would like to see the rise of a
> >> >> >> >> dual economy come out of this disaster, one independent (the current
> >> >> >> >> model) and one social (remove gov't assistance from the old and apply
> >> >> >> >> to the new). The purpose of the social will be to fuel the improvement
> >> >> >> >> of society as a whole through massive public works projects like
> >> >> >> >> education, mentorship, health and care of those in need, removal of
> >> >> >> >> poverty and mitigation of its effects through quality individualized
> >> >> >> >> social reeducation programs beginning with relocation, therapeutic
> >> >> >> >> exercise (learning/gaining skills) and exposure to positive
> >> >> >> >> reinforcement. Sounds scary?
>
> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, ornamentalmind
>
> >> >> >> >> <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > Yes rigsy, the short lived US middle class is all but gone...and it is
> >> >> >> >> > no accident.
>
> >> >> >> >> >http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/08/06
>
> >> >> >> >> > Hyperbole, perhaps. Directly applicable?... absolutely!
>
> >> >> >> >> > On Aug 27, 6:29 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> The middle class is shrinking- the class that drives an economy.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> Greece is not a good example. Libya is a wealthy country- sweet crude,
> >> >> >> >> >> investments around the world=cash. Now the clean up crew will clean up
> >> >> >> >> >> with new oil contracts and rebuilding a ruined infrastructure all in
> >> >> >> >> >> the name of liberty and freedom as per the examples of Iraq and
> >> >> >> >> >> Afghanistan plus we have
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário