market has changed far more than for jobs to be freed-up by women
returning to the maternity ward and kitchen. I don't think its all
relative either either. This kind of underlying negativityprevents
change.
On Oct 24, 10:23 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Machines/technology are replacing human labor. Children might do
> better being educated via computer and leave socialization to play
> groups and sports. The military can effect as much damage via remote
> control. But- will women return to being stay-at-home moms/homemakers
> thus freeing up what jobs remain for the men? I doubt it - it has
> become an ego/security matter for Western women. There will always be
> cheats and thieves, Archytas, who cause as much monetary losses as the
> "elites"- it's all relative, depending on the number of zeros.
>
> On Oct 24, 1:37 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> > 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 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> > 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.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário