To the Squad:
I know I (Roger) will regret this , but I am a total believer in freedom, and
I totally fear the slavery of EGALITARIANISM………So, here are my thoughts over
the past week’s posts: Just to lighten it up I put it into the form of a
dialogue. By the way, every quote is in chronological order except the last.
BO: <<<<,I must stress again that the essence of Intellectual value is the
individual as the most valuable entity and the countless derivatives from it;
democracy and human rights the chief issues here>>>>>
ROGER: We are off to a good start! What do you think DROSE ?
DROSE:<< The problems in the U.S. go back to the demise of the Victorian
social codes. They are not the fault of the capitalist/republican system. In
fact, the U.S. system is based on very strong morals.>>>
ROGER: Tell me more!
DROSE: <<<<People make their own chains. No one is really totally free. They
have some duty to perform. Earning money, producing food, hunting & gathering
food, etc. to feed and clothe and shelter yourself and your family are
necessary and proper activities. If you, your family and society are to
survive, then you must undertake some economic activity. Better a system that
makes allowance for satisfaction of self-interest and allows some freedom for
growth than one that does not. Someone has to own the means of production,
whether individual or state. The state is not the best way to manage
production. That has been proved over and over again. Do not mistake me -
capitalism without some representative government oversight is not going to
work either. It is an economic system, not a social system.>>>>>>
ROGER: Exactly! Don’t you agree Fintan?
FINTAN: <<<Any non-productive class will eventually usurp ALL power. All
political systems are inherently dictatorial.>>>>
ROGER: That’s why we need a system that requires everyone to be productive!
FINTAN:<<<<Furthermore, our system positively ENCOURAGES self-interest to the
detriment of Arete/Duty.>>>>>
ROGER: Self interest is wrong? Your duty sounds like slavery.
FINTAN:. <<<Each individual should control their own means of production.>>>
ROGER: That’s how it works. Every person is born with God’s gift, a brain, a
pair of arms and two legs. These are our means of production. The free
enterprise system is all about doing something of value with them. Value to
whom? To others. You give them something of value and they trade it freely
for something back. Both benefit freely. It is about morality….
JONATHAN: <<<<Communism starts with a moral value (the equal value of each
individual) and uses the intellect to run an economic system based on this
value.>>>>>>
ROGER: You are right Jonathan, Communism starts by saying all individuals are
WORTHLESS. The society is everything. Individuals are slaves to society.
JONATHAN: <<<<The system fails if it can't provide the minimum human
conditions<>>>>>
ROGER: And the richest society of all time is……… Cuba right?
JONATHAN:<<<<Capitalism is an amoral economic system which itself knows no
obligation>>>>
ROGER: It says the economic value of a person is determined by the economic
benefit given to others. They trade and exchange freely.
JONATHAN:<<<Socio-economic systems should be morally judged on their ability
to provide good living to the world's people. Currently, there isn't a system
offering that.>>>>>>
ROGER: There isn’t? The poorest in the US have a higher standard of living
than the wealthiest did when Marx picked up his quill. Longer life span.
Better education…assuming they would value it. The average "poor" owns a
home……a car…….2 TV’s……a VCR……and their major health threat is OBESITY.
Yea……these folks are sufferin" I wonder what Socialism has to offer…..Let’s
ask Lithien…..
LITHIEN: <<<<<<Cuba is being run like a Medieval city. Everything has
regressed
many years into the past. The hygiene and the standard of living of the
country is terrible and if you define Quality as Freedom, then you can
definitely sense the same lack of Quality that abounded in Russia and caused
their change into Capitalism which despite all their present problems
adjusting to the market system is still better than what they used to have.
Conversely, living in the United States, in spite of its many problems caused
by the very freedoms that make it great, does have quality to it. We are free
to choose our way of life to a certain degree but to a larger degree that
anywhere else in the world...and i have traveled a lot.>>>>>>>
GENE: <<<<<Thank you Lithien. I myself spent most of my life in the former
USSR and am too close to the topic to let myself jump into the discussion.
That is why I am so grateful for the way you expressed my feelings.>>>>>>
ROGER: Gene! Please, we need you! Don’t let the others make the same mistake
again……
MAGNUS:<<<<<< Perhaps Jonathan's suggestion that conflicts within a level are
resolved at a higher level is applicable here. Marxism and capitalism are both
intellectual patterns, so a morality battle between them must be resolved at a
higher level, and I haven't seen one yet.>>>>>>>>
ROGER: I disagree. Conflicts are judged or even mediated on a higher level.
Same level conflicts are resolved same level all the time. Lion and gazelle.
Cowboys and Indians. Socialism and the free enterprise system. These last
two are intellectual patterns. The value patterns are FREEDOM and PROVEN
SUCCESS and REPLICABILITY ……Hmmmmm, which system does this describe? Let’s
ask our friend Fintan……
FINTAN:<<<<<What I do say though is that Marx's original examination of the
flaws of capitalism contains many pertinent observations that well bear
examination. What others then went on to do with that analysis was a terrible
mistake.>>>>>>
GENE (to Fintan’s quote):<<<<<<You’re absolutely right, and such examinations
were made by the best capitalists which lead to today's capitalism with a
'human face'. As soon as Marx & Engels made their social observations public,
the society changed and the observations became obsolete. Which should not
diminish their value, something good did come out of that analysis. In social
studies, like in quantum physics, it is impossible for a scientist not to
affect the very subject of his/her science.>>>>>>>>
ROGER: Gene speaks out. Yes!
DROSE: <<<<<<One of the questions that I have been mulling over the last few
days is the cultural relativity problem. Saying that only a higher level can
adjudicate an intra level conflict is not an answer. That presupposes a 5th
level - spiritual?>>>>>>
ROGER: See my thoughts above.
DIANA:<<<<< At the time communism was introduced in China it was the dynamic
thing to do, and in spite of all the later problems, initially it did do some
good:>>>>>>>>
ROGER: I agree . Feudalism to freedom is a very big step.
DIANA: <<<<<<<And if all the communists had continued to hold to these ideals
and conscientiously build that society then that brave new world might have
been achieved. But of course they got selfish and greedy and they let go of
the Dynamic Quality that had initially inspired them, and then it all went
wrong.>>>>>
ROGER: Nope. They maxed it out . They took it as far as it would go.
DIANA: <<<<<<I realize that Pirsig's official line does not credit communism
with any dynamic quality and that he casts his vote for capitalism, but IMHO
he got it wrong. Any endeavor exercised with care and love can be dynamic and
I see no reason why the creation of an egalitarian society should be an
exception to that.>>>>>
ROGER: Egalitarianism requires you to cut the tall down to size. Care and
love aren’t how you decide intellectual truth. Though I agree they are needed
too. How do you propose we force the strong to serve society as slaves
lovingly?
DIANA: <<<<The immorality of the Chinese situation is that they didn't create
their system with care.>>>>>>
ROGER: Exactly. See Bo and DROSE’s comments at the beginning. The key to
getting people to do something is to design the system so that they benefit.
That is how free enterprise works. When Fintan started this thread, I wrote
that socialism is a great idea for social insects like ants and termites. It
is useless for selfish descendants of apes. It doesn’t work. Any system
designed with care would include recognition of the beings within that system.
Hey I am not saying that the there aren’t problems to be addressed—pollution,
resource depletion, moral vacuums, etc., but it is a good start. Don’t you
agree Lithien?
LITHIEN:<<< It is not that there is an absolute truth to what I’m saying or to
what any one of you is saying but that "one seeks instead the highest quality
intellectual explanation of things with the knowledge that if the past is any
guide to the future this explanation must be taken provisionally; as useful
until something better comes along.">>>>>>>>>
ROGER: Diana was right when she recently commented that we aren’t ready to
compare MOQ to other philosophies until we understand it better ourselves.
Be Good All
Roger
"Comedy is the devil catching sight of himself in a mirror" (FMD)
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:39 BST