> DMB WOULD REALLY HATE TO BE STUCK UP PIGS and other concerns,....
>
> ROGER REPLIES THAT SOCIAL DARWINISTS
> SOUND LIKE A BUNCH OF STUCK-UP, UPPER
> CLASS VICTORIAN PIGS
>
>
> ROGER:
> If the keys to Social Darwinism involve mistaking wealth for virtue
> and
> supporting aggression and some type of 'prosperity theology' then it
> does not
> fall under my view of Free Enterprise. Free enterprise does involve
> evolution, though. Entities (Corporations, entrepeneurs, etc.
> competing and
> collaborating to provide value to other entities.) Those most
> successful
> thrive and grow and prosper, those less successful are absorbed back
> into the
> system. The shop owner can't compete with the place down the street,
> so she
> closes her store and instead becomes a consultant or a beautician
> or.....
>
> DMB:
> Absorbed back into the system? Thrive and grow? I think you can see
> how the Darwinesque biological language just sort of creeps back in.
> Maybe its hard to talk about free enterprise in any other terms? Hmmm.
> In spite of your distaste for the theological aspect, your description
> seems to be based on an assumption that competition is part of some
> natural order and that it is the source of Dynamism and evolution. I'm
> not sure about that connection. But this could easily be dismissed as
> just a matter of style. Its true that a Dynamic economy is much better
> than a static one, but it's also true that an economy based on
> intellectual principles and ideas is better and more moral than social
> level Victorian economics. I think we agree that the Robert's Rules
> analogy works well here. We want a stable, static situation, hopefully
> based on intellecual level values, where DQ can work its magic. We
> certainly have to keep the "free" part of free enterprize and
> competition is good, but I don't know if there is anything sacred
> about it. Help me out here. How is it not a Darwinistic notion? How is
> it moral? How is it MOQ? As you like to say, I could be wrong, but
> "competition" doesn't strike me as a principle or an idea at all.
> Conflict. Hmmmm. Pirsig has lots to say about conflict....
>
> ROGER;
> The evolutionary influence is crucial to free enterprise. It drives
> it and
> makes it work. It is the negative face of quality. But it is not
> Social
> Darwinism.....
>
> DMB:
> You lost me a little there. The evolutionary influence is crucial to
> everything, so it certainly applies to the economy. It drives
> everything. But the factr that there is a negative face to quality
> shouldn't be used as an excuse to tolerate injustice or abuse. You
> know? I think we have to be careful about making distinctions between
> the natural pain of living and injuries inflicted on people's lives.
> You know? The rules of the game have to be smarter than just fighting
> it out all the time. Sometimes its just wasted energy.
>
> David, are we on the same page?
>
> DMB:
> Yes, we're clearly talking about the same thing, even if we don't
> agree completely. See, I think a lot of the ideas are sound. The
> upstarts and inventors really do keep things moving, I'm absolutely in
> favor of a free-market economy, but I think the reality on the ground
> is far different than many people imagine. I mean the theory is a long
> way from the actual state of affairs. The truth is, corporations run
> the world. Of the 200 largest economic entities on earth, a majority
> of them are not nations, but corporations. These institutions are good
> and necessary, but they've grown too powerful. They've corrupted
> politics and squeezed out the other voices of this democracy. The
> media virtually controls what we desire and think about. The structure
> of these "Giants" is hardly free or democratic. And in general I think
> there is a great discrepancy between price and value.
>
> How can Jerry Springer get rich while most brilliant physicist can
> only make a tiny fraction of that pay. Whay are football players rich
> and artists poor? Why does America spend a billion dollars a year on
> pro-wrestling? Why is Gates a Gazillionaire while the man who invented
> the web remains relatively middle class? I could list the dissed all
> day. There must be an intelligent way to soften these discrepancies
> while keeping the whole thing free and open to DQ.
>
> A free economy, yes. But with some smart rules to keep it that way.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
>
> MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:16 BST