From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Jan 29 2005 - 17:21:17 GMT
Arlo:
> My world is not painted "conservative" and "liberal", Platt. I disagree,
> and am critical of, anything that places ideology over DQ.
>
> Point: Dan Rather placed ideological motivations, which sought power
> entrenchment, over DQ. The MRC does so as well. As does Guerrilla News. I
> do not dismiss, nor uncritically accept any report by any of these agencies
> based soley on ideological affiliation.
I agree.
> As Mark and Ant have also stated,
> the key is to look for corroboration, primary sources, open disclosures of
> data used, etc (I won't belabor this point).
Someday I hope this site will belabor the point of how to establish truth.
> Point: I have repeatedly stated criticisms of the "liberal orthodoxy",
> recently so much as providing you with "parties" I've supported, and why
> I've been more concerned with supporting principles rather than ideologies.
Let me ask if you favor of world government in lieu of nation-states,
national health insurance, affirmative action, gun control, minimum wage
laws, and the Kyoto treaty -- and are against capital punishment, laissez
fair capitalism, lower taxes and the war in Iraq? If you answer yes to all
or most of these ideas, I'd say you're on the left side of the political
spectrum. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
> >Do you consider left-wing bias a problem? If not, why not? As for bias, we
> >all are to some extent, but some are more so than others. Those who admit
> >their bias often and openly are more credible to me than those who don't,
> >like Rather, Jennings, Woodruff and others in the mainstream media.
> Sure I do. You're trying to run me in dialectical circles here. Again, for
> the record, any attempt to place ideological motivations (power
> entrenchment) over DQ is immoral. Whether done by Rather or Rove.
An ideology of capitalism that attempts to prevent the spread of the
ideology of socialism is moral because, as Pirsig says, capitalism permits
more openness to DQ.
> Since bias indicates factual manipulation to suit ideological ends, it is
> interesting that you'd find someone "admitting" this as "more credible" a
> source.
All "facts" are manipulated to suit ideological ends as everyone is biased
to one degree or another. Those who try to hide their bias (Dan Rather)
are being dishonest. I find those who admit it more trustworthy for that
reason.
> >Once again we see conservatives compared to Nazis. (And they criticize
> >blame me for associating leftists with Commies!) This is a sure sign to me
> >that one has exhausted all claim to "critical thinking."
>
> Nice try, Platt. My comparison was to tactics, not ideologies. Can't deny
> the comparative tactics, can you? You call this "exhausting critical
> thinking"? Fair enough, if you feel my reasoning in this comparison is off,
> please show me where?
You seem to believe propaganda was invented by the Nazis and thus whenever
it appears you feel justified in calling it a Nazi technique, thus
smearing the user. Correct me if I'm wrong but rhetoric (persuasive
technique) was being taught in classical Greece. I don't deny that
Republicans, Democrats, Green Partyites, and all other political groups
employ propaganda. The repeated discrediting of anyone who challenges
global warming is a case in point, as in discrediting anyone who suggests
men and women are different, as is discrediting the administration for
lying about WMD's, etc., etc.
> So I am glad you've never made use of ANY safety net, nor has anyone in
> your family. Kudos to you.
Thanks.
> As for the "safety net" being the huge percentage of your taxes, can you
> send me links to government reports on this? I've tried to locate any, but
> have had no luck. But, if I recall, last I heard the military budget alone
> was five times that of social security. But its been a while, and I could
> be mistaken.
Check www. kowaldesign.com/budget/percentages.html. I think you'll find
welfare consuming 41% of the U.S. budget compared to 18% for defense.
> > > As those interested in the MOQ, we should agree (I hope) that it should
> > > be a chosen desire for a society to maximize its citizenry's exposure
> > > to, and participation in, DQ.
> >Pirsig made it clear that the capitalist system of free markets beats
> >socialism in making DQ available to all. That, at root, is what the
> >argument is about.
> No, business markets are only one part of a society's concerns in
> maximizing its citizenry's exposure to, and participation in, DQ. For
> example, this exposure increases with mobility. Providing an infrastructure
> maximizing mobility is a concern in this regard. Sufficient leisure time is
> another consideration. Access to knowledge, such as a public library, is
> another. No matter how many times you repeat it, Platt, it's not all about
> the money.
Don't all those things you mention require people earning money by being
productive in providing goods and services others will buy from them?
> Plus, I hardly think that all those folks at the turn of the century,
> dealing with unregulated "free markets", would indicate a maximized social
> orientation to exposure to DQ.
Debatable, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.
> > > Ideological labels are meaningless, and often detract
> > > from progress towards this end, as it implies (wrongly) that DQ is a
> > > function of an ideology. It is not. Once we are here, we can rightly
> > > criticize attempts by ideology to subvert the dialogue to favor itself
> > > over DQ. When the MRC, or Rather, uses their media power to subvert the
> > > dialogue to favor its chosen ideology over exposing itself to the
> > > possibility of disenfranchisement by allowing DQ to "flow where it
> > > may", this is what is at point here. When the MRC, or Rather, fabricate
> > > results or stories to further their own power-entrencment, and in doing
> > > so prevent from entering into the discourse DQ led inquires that
> > > threaten this power, the should-be chosen goal of maximizing exposure
> > > for its citizens to DQ is broken. And we end up arguing over static
> > > social patterns.
> >See comment above.
> Calling to "free markets" ignores this point entirely.
Free markets encourage responses to DQ which is your desired outcome is it
not?
> >"Leftist" and "liberal" are pejoratives? That's news to me. I have no
> >concern at all being labelled a "conservative." In fact, I'm proud of it.
> Well, I think you use them as pejoratives, whether or not other people take
> them as such is not really tellable.
No. I use them to point to a set of political views certain people believe
in, as suggested in my questions to you above.
> > > > Also, how do you propose to correct the faults of the "commercial"
> > > > media other than by calling on the government gun power structure?
> > > That's the point of the thread, is it not? Mark's already given some
> > > good possibilities. More on this tomorrow...
> >He has? Like listener-paid TV networks? I have no objection to that
> >whatsoever. I look forward to your proposals.
> Still putting this together, but another suggestion along these lines is to
> move more bandwidth into the public domain. Do not regulate or privitize
> this bandwidth, and let people use it as they'd like (think along the lines
> of opening up more bandwidth to shortwave or open radio). As it is, your
> "conservative" government is leading the charge in commericalizing these
> frequencies, to the point where public domain frequencies will be
> nonexistant in the short term future.
I admit to being ignorant of the ins and outs of broadcast bandwidths, so
I can't say much for or against. I'm in favor of less regulation but hope
an expanded bandwidth wouldn't be taxpayer funded. But how you would keep
an expanded bandwidth from becoming a tower of babel I don't know.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 29 2005 - 18:18:08 GMT