From: Dan Glover (daneglover@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jul 12 2004 - 06:56:51 BST
Hello everyone
>From: "ml" <mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Subject: Re: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise
>Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 22:35:46 -0600
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Arlo J. Bensinger" <ajb102@psu.edu>
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 6:21 PM
>Subject: Re: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise
>
>
> > All,
> >
> >> Let me reask the question in the extreme.
> >
> > Did the cotton plantations of the old south have value when they turned
>a
> > profit?
Hi Arlo
No, not intellectually. Socially low value. Biologically, yes. For the
owners. No for the slaves.
> >
>
>History looks diffrerent on either end...so, to the 1860's owner, it was
>the basis of all of his economic world--this years crop, in fact.
>Quality was lower from the enslaved workers point of view no doubt...
Hi Mel
No doubt.
>1880's I suspect the owners my have found lower social value and
>higher intellectual value (having to deal in a NEW WORLD)
>Share croppers may have similarly found a lower dynamic quality
>biologically as they were finding survival tough somewhere in that
>time, but social and intellectual quality was certainly higher, more
>dynamic, they even had participation in government for a short time.
I expect that until the law came along and mandated an equal playing field
that there were certain groups who received preferential treatment and
others who were on the losing end. The same thing happens today but it's
more covert than overt.
>
>Today, we see the old southern plantation as a straw man, rightly
>or wrongly. (from oversimplification)
Well it depends. There are still pockets in the south that are "old south"
but with the Interstate highways' homogenizing effects you're right.
>
>
>
> > By the current capitalist dialogue, and everything you have said thus
>far,
>they
> > maximized profit and contributed to many plantation owners "personal
>freedom".
> > It boosted the economy of the area, raised many whites out of poverty,
> > bolstered the foreign trade and brought work to many tangent business
> > operations (shipping and fabric dying).
Hmm, now. But it did so on the back of an oppressed people. You neglect to
mention that.
>
>Broad increase in economic wealth is surely higher quality in
>an "Aggregate Sense" (hate those generalizations...) than a
>general Decrease in economic wealth aggregately.
Enron.
>
> >The "immorality" or "morality" of
> > slavery is a static social issue, is it not?
No. Slavery would seem an affront to the intellect, social, and biological
slave. Slavery would seem to be an affront to the conscientious owner as
well, though perhaps only socially and intellectually. That biological drive
though...
>
>I was wrestling with that as well, but I think your next sentence
>shows us a way out of that 'trap'. If we take the intent, the
>impetus, behind the Constitution and Bill of Rights as a work
>of previously unequalled Intellectual Dynamism, then the part
>of that which was looking at personal freedom and all men
>being created equally, then slavery at that moment became
>an act of economic expediency and political compromise
>that is definitely also a low quality-static quality in both social
>and intellectual levels.
The Constitution was written by rich white men. Same with the Bill of
Rights. Luckily though, those men realized times change and so included
provisions in their documents for a more enlightened age.
>
>
>So imposing arbitrary "stifling"
> > social layers on the "personal freedom" of "honest traders going about
>their
> > business in the marketplace" by regulating slavery should be something
>you
>are
> > against, correct? Just wondering...
If the MOQ is against slavery then any attempt at regulating it other than
abolition is meaningless. It's immoral. Period.
> >
>The levels are at war, but the higher intellectual quality seems to
>make slavery a lower level dominating a higher one. bye-bye
>slavery
Indeed.
Thanks for your comments,
Dan
_________________________________________________________________
Check out the latest news, polls and tools in the MSN 2004 Election Guide!
http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx
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 Jul 12 2004 - 06:58:34 BST