Hi Sam and others,
Pirsig tells us in LILA (p. 255 Bantam dec 92):
It seems as though any static mechanism that is open to Dynamic Quality
must also be open to degeneracy - to falling back to lower forms of quality.
In my eyes Pim Fortuyn had a lot of Dynamic Quality. More and more people in
The Netherlands did see him as a savior. Especially since the political
(static) majority tried to prevent him peacefully to become a majority.
But (p.256),
How do you tell the saviors from the degenerates?
.The problem is that you can't really say whether a specific change is
evolutionary at the time it occurs.
We are all Zuņi priests.
Willem
----- Original Message -----
From: Elizaphanian <Elizaphanian@btinternet.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 12:26 PM
Subject: MD Pim Fortuyn
> Hi all (especially Wim),
>
> This might be a controversial post....
>
> I knew little about Pim Fortuyn prior to his recent assassination, and the
> 'far-right' is not an area that I spend much time researching. However, in
> the recent coverage of his policies in England, one of his attitudes
seemed
> reasonable, and I was wondering if it was defensible in MoQ terms. Or
> rather, it seemed to chime with something I had recently written here
> myself, so I thought I would flag it up and focus on it, to see if it was
> defensible or not.
>
> According to one biography I have read of Fortuyn, "He wanted to halt
> immigration from Muslim countries because he feared that Muslims would
erode
> the country's tolerance of homosexuals."
>
> I wrote recently (in the MoQ and the Middle East thread):
>
> "If you see that there is a higher value than the nation, the doctrine of
> human rights, then you will accept that there are times when it is
necessary
> to go against your own nation in pursuit of that higher value. It also
means
> that you need to work to reconstruct your own nation so that it is geared
> around support of those rights, that it is criticised when it breaches
those
> rights, but also that it is defended from other nations that may be less
> likely to respect those rights themselves."
>
> So, if you accept that tolerance for homosexuality is part of a more
general
> respect for human rights (as seems to be the settled will of Dutch
society)
> then acting against a potential threat to that (immigration of people
> opposed to that settled will) seems reasonable, and "high quality" in MoQ
> terms - it is the defence of an intellectual level value against a social
> level value.
>
> [Of course, it doesn't have to be a ban on immigration per se that
achieves
> that result. A system such as operates in the United States, where all
> immigrants must swear allegiance to the US constitution, would seem to
> accomplish the same thing. And I am ignoring for the moment the question
of
> whether Islam is or is not intrinsically intolerant of homosexuality.]
>
> I would be very interested to read other people's views on this.
>
> Sam
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:15 BST