From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 14:55:34 BST
Dear Wim,
PH
> 'If you would please expand on how economic dependence is an instrument of
> conversation between society and biology. ... I take it you believe that
> communist ideology as espoused in the Communist Manifesto has merit. If so,
> please explain.'
WIM
> Economic dependence holds societies together (e.g. maintains the social
> patterns of value of international trade that hold together global society)
> that would otherwise disintegrate into smaller societies providing their
> members less freedom from biological restrictions.
Agree. But I don't understand where "conversation" comes in. Pirsig's
point was that you can't talk bio-criminals out of being bio-criminals.
You deal with them with the military and police. You've changed the ground
by referring to something you call "biological restrictions" which I take
to mean the biological necessities of human life--food, shelter, clothing.
But that's not what "conversation" in the MOQ is about. Further, it's
economic "interdependence," not "dependence" that holds societies
together. Naturally, a lot of conversation goes on in the marketplace.
> Communist ideology as
> espoused in the Communist Manifesto united labourers and those sympathizing
> with labourers who wanted freedom from what we now experience as primitive
> and dehumanizing labour conditions. It has merit compared to contemporary
> alternatives that defended those labour conditions. Under attack communist
> ideology developed variants (like Leninism) justifying excessive use of
> policemen, soldiers and guns to repress (what they perceive as) lower
> quality parts of their society (and what are in part attempts to reform
> their societies in a more moral direction). Those variants have less merit
> than alternatives propagating liberation from social restrictions by
> justifying higher quality instruments of conversation between 'society' and
> 'biology'.
I cannot think of a single society that has tried Marxist theory that
hasn't become totalitarian nor has come anywhere near equalling the
standard of living provided by free market capitalism. I cannot help but
wonder why, in view of history, you and others believe communism can ever
fulfill its ideals. Perhaps you can explain.
Best regards,
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 : Thu Jun 10 2004 - 14:53:54 BST