Jim Quinton wrote:
What has been superior to capitalism over the long run?
>> Oh, yeah--and soil.
>The problem with that statement is that it presumes a definition that in fact
>does not exist. Any valid politico-economic system begins by acknowledging
>the lack of perfection found in any system yet devised to date, and adds the
>desire to do better - to look for a better way. The "capitalism" referred to
>is a sealed black box which can only serve to sustain the present degree of
>ignorance regarding real alternatives not yet fully implemented. No two
>countrie's systems are alike, in any case.
>And life itself invaribly involves some aspects that are by nature personal
>and private, while others are by nature unquestionably public and still other
>loan themselves equally well to soluctions originating in either (and
>preferably both - so that choices exist) sectors.
>A truly intuitive, healthy and fully grounded response. When
>politico-economic systems approach the efficiency and honesty of biological
>ones, it can then be said that progress has been made. (My own belief is
>biology is only all encompassing paradigm anyway, and the sooner we [humans]
>learn to emulate it in our social affairs, the closer to resolving our own
>problems we will be.
I don't think of politico-economic systems moving toward biological ones as
a progressive development because I think there's more to life than
biological activity (eating, reproducing, etc.). Politico-economic systems
exist only as thought. Thought is not biological in my opinion. I get the
feeling some of this discussion is just "head game" and not very meaningful
(helpful) thought, at that.
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command