Re: MD Cooperation, Profit and Some Thoughts

From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 24 2005 - 19:10:38 BST

  • Next message: David M: "Re: MD Rhetoric"

    [Arlo previously]
    Yep, a "reality" that denigrated Quality in production and consumption to a
    "stylized veneer" overlaid on objects. Quality, Pirsig points out, begins
    with the connection of the craftsman to his/her labor, and the object of
    that labor. The cycle is complete with a consumer base capable of seeing
    that Quality as something more than "style syrup".

    [Platt]
    Do I detect Marxism waiting in the wings to be brought on stage when the
    moment is right?

    [Arlo]
    I make no bones about seeing a parallel in thought between Pirsig and Marx
    on labor and Quality in production and consumption, and how the last
    century of amoral SOM has effected the production and consumption of goods.
     From craftsmanship and identification with the object of one's labor, and
    power over the "flow" of decisions, to the building-in of this cultural
    defect "into the products" (as Pirsig demonstrated) to a marketplace
    overloaded with "junk", and no means for a cultural recognition of the
    problem (SOMist language restrictions). The "funeral procession of the
    Interstates", as Pirsig discusses in ZMM, is a funeral procession of
    alienated labor, which is a natural part of the larger disconnect caused by
    an inability to recognize Quality in the cultural language, itself the
    SOMist problem of the last century*.

    * I say the last century, because although Aristotelian SOM dates back to
    the ancient Greeks, until this century social morality (religion mostly)
    did offer a "Good". When that was overturned by Intellect, the value-free
    SOM was given charge of society. Hence, although the SOMist problem dates
    back centuries (as discussed in ZMM), it is magnified drastically in this
    last century. All the defects discussed in ZMM and Lila focus on the last
    century as one where an absence of Quality has become critically profound.

    [Platt on the Joys of Unfettered Capitalism in Bringing Freedoms to Tijuana
    that We In Our Socialized State Lack]
     From Wikipedia: "Due to Tijuana's proximity to the USA and its cheap
    labor, it is an attractive city for companies to establish extensive
    industrial parks comprised of maquiladoras, factories situated near the
    border to produce for export. Foreign and domestic companies employ
    thousands in these plants, usually in assembly related labor. Such jobs
    are demanding and ill-paid by first-world standards, but quite attractive
    to many Mexicans.

    [Arlo]
    If this is so much better, why don't many "first-world" people demand to be
    like them?

    [Platt continues]
    This makes Tijuana a popular city for poor migrant workers from other parts
    of Mexico, as well as other countries to the south."

    [Arlo]
    That near-abject poverty and servitude to corporations providing sub-first
    world standards is better than abject poverty is missing the point. If your
    theory (that returning to an 1890s workplace is higher Quality) is correct,
    then they should be doing better than us, not existing by standards that no
    "American" would want to live under.

    The point is, if this "deregulation" provides a better world, and more
    freedoms for more people, than Tij

    > >From Wikipedia: "Due to Tijuana's proximity to the USA and its cheap
    >labor, it is an attractive city for companies to establish extensive
    >industrial parks comprised of maquiladoras, factories situated near the
    >border to produce for export. Foreign and domestic companies employ
    >thousands in these plants, usually in assembly related labor. Such jobs
    >are demanding and ill-paid by first-world standards, but quite attractive
    >to many Mexicans. This makes Tijuana a popular city for poor migrant
    >workers from other parts of Mexico, as well as other countries to the
    >south."
    >
    > > [Arlo previously]
    > > Are drug lords enriching the culture? Is "enrichment" relative, like you
    > > seem to indicate?
    > >
    > > [Platt]
    > > Well, I guess to some they are. To me, no.
    > >
    > > [Arlo]
    > > So, relativism is relative? If "enriching the culture" is relative, then I
    > > take it pretty much everybody enriches the culture. Which makes it
    > > meaningless. Pirsig is no better than a drug lord in this respect. Well, to
    > > you maybe, but since its all relative, that doesn't say much.
    >
    >Those out to "enrich the culture" bear watching. They usually carry a gun
    >behind their back.
    >
    >According to Pirsig, drugs are bad because they are biological. They make
    >you feel good, but destroy social patterns. To some here (which is why I
    >said "some" above), drugs are not only the key to nirvana but would actually
    >improve social relations. In any case, I say legalize drugs. That would put
    >your despised drug lords out of business. Would you consider that cultural
    >enrichment?
    >
    > > [Arlo previously]
    > > So, Pirsig defied human nature with his decision to author and publish
    > > outside of money and fame profit? Let me ask you straight-out, since you've
    > > avoid the question every other way. Was whatever motivated Pirsig unnatural
    > > or natural?
    > >
    > > [Platt]
    > > Unnatural in the sense that most people work to make money. I presume
    > > Pirsig also needs money. I presume you do, too. Are you suggesting there's
    > > something immoral about that?
    > >
    > > [Arlo]
    > > I know how much you'd like to sidetrack the question, but I'm not going to
    > > bite. If Pirsig acted unnaturally in authoring and publishing ZMM, how did
    > > he come to this unnatural act? Genes? Social upbringing? Culture?
    >
    >I have no idea. I don't pretend to know what motivates people to do
    >things. Why do you ask? And why did you ignore my question about making
    >money?
    >
    > > [Platt]
    > > As I said, the free market is self-correcting in that products and
    > > services not wanted don't survive. To you there may be a lot of junk on the
    > > market that you wouldn't buy. Same for me. But to believe that somehow you,
    > > or I or Pirsig ought to step in and eliminate what we consider to be junk
    > > would be a step away from freedom -- the highest good in the MOQ.
    > >
    > > [Arlo]
    > > Hehe, now you're just yankin' my chain. No one said he, nor I, nor you,
    > > should "step in an eliminate" anything. But, like Pirsig, I think that
    > > people need a better language, one that sees Quality, to correct the amount
    > > of junk in both production and consumption.
    >
    >Good. Glad to know you don't want to interfere in the free market.
    >That is what I call "Quality-sight enabled." :-)
    >
    >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

    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 : Mon Oct 24 2005 - 21:38:41 BST