Hi platt and wim,
the questions of effort and reward raised in this thread are, i believe, not
central to utopian questions. Central to marxian thought is the idea
supported wholeheartedly by the MoQ, this idea is work as an ends in itself
and not a means. Work as an ends becomes the exploration of Quality itself,
rather than symbols such as money or social standing. I think it is not
distribution of goods but the freedom for individuals to pursue Quality both
in work and in free time that defines the next stage of human civilization.
My problem with Wim's effort model is this (added to Platt's questions): If
someone puts in amazing effort for thier entire lives in a job which they
despise for the attainment of material wealth, are they the happiest the can
be? is this how a utopian society would function? If the drive to attain
commodities is not addressed before world wide wealth is made available,
then what we have is the most dispicable advancement of One Dimensional
society: the worl becomes a well greased machine of production and
consumption functioning for social purposes rather than intellectual ones.
The problem is not with the distribution of the pie but in the quest for pie
itself rather than Qulaity. The revolution then is an intellectual one, one
of individual need structures, not of the social structure. Freedom and
happiness imposed by a system is not true freedom (nor dare i say, true
happiness).
Attempts to acieve utopia through social structures have been outright
failures ranging from Lenin's vanguard party to the slaughters of Pol Pot.
Even in Cuba, if material wealth could be achieved by a large portion of the
population, would not the population follow the same pattern of consumerism
which their leader follows? then effort, profit and loss remain the static
SOM mode of operation. In MoQ, without subjects and objests, what is there
to gain? Just keep the biological level strong, the social broad enough to
support a dynamic intellect and let the intellect pursue Quality. This is
not enough space to say all i really want, When Horse posts my essay on this
subject (revolution) then perhaps the idea will be more clear. The ideal
society is in a few words, one where men are free to pursue their personal
goals, not one where commodities are evenly distributed.
"It took Britain half the resources of the planet to achieve its prosperity;
how many planets will a country like India require?" --(Mahatma Gandhi on
the question whether India would reach Britain's standard of living after
independence)
Also, in the effort model, what if technology makes human effort to provide
for needs such as food and electricity almost nil? Do we make people work
unnessicarily so that they may continue to recieve paychecks so the economy
doesnt collapse? Do we produce way more then we need so that everyone has
an arbitrary job to fulfill? There are only so many things that need to be
done to keep the biological and the social running, and rather than do more
than the minimum shouldn't we allow for freedom to pursue personal projects?
"demand the impossible" (Paris '68 graffiti),
Elliot
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
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 - 16:02:16 BST