> I'm still mystified by what is meant by the "seeds" and "soil" responses.
> If Doug Hinds answered it, I either didn't understand his any better or I
> just plain didn't see it roll through this medium.... Is there a "repeat"
> button on your response, Doug?
You bet. There's nothing wrong with capitalism or any other ism, except that they
don't define reality. What happens in practice is always a mixture and ANY flavor
of true believer is a dangerous thing - probably THE most dangerous thing.
As for the isms: Underwear, toothbrushes and one's children are by nature
personal, private things (not withstanding that when even a parent fails to
respect & instead abuses a child's nature, it can became a public matter - but
those are exceptions, anatural situations). On the other hand, air, water and
land - at LEAST as far as ROADS are concerned, are by nature public; and things
like schools, transportation systems and package delivery services can very well
be both - and should be. (There is a real & legitimate need for collective
versions of all three - without constituting a public OR private monopoly).
All the isms provide for varying degrees of private, public and multifacted
things, but the possibilities far outway the grasp of the politicians and even the
theorists (except maybe one - and I welcome being corrected).
Which leads me to my main point: Don't, please don't close the door to the future
- there is a big difference between looking for a better way, acknowledging that
not answers aren't all in yet, that's there's still work to do (JFK said this is
an experiment in democracy - therefore it's open ended, not authoritarian;
responsive, not insensitive); while some other leaders were more likely to state
something like: This is the greatest nation that has ever been and will ever be.
The assumption is, the show's over it's all done and there's nothing left for YOU
- you missed the boat - you don't get any, cause it's all been parceled out.
That kind of ism breeds counter isms, but they're two sides of the same coin, and
MY path takes me through clearer, fresher pastures, forests and maybe some day,
even city streets. You don't even have to understand, Jim; just BELIEVE! Want
it! And take it, cause it's your's.
Now for the koan's, the sound of one hand clapping and all that noise. The one I
liked isn't even a koan, it's an image: A tiger chased a man to a cliff and the
man (or woman) crawled down the cliff face a ways while the tiger waited above,
ready to eat him. The man sustained his position by holding on to a small shrub,
the roots of which were about to pull out of the soil. The man saw a berry vine
growing there too and it had a ripe berry - how sweet it was.
That's it. Bull fighters do it, but they take on unnecessary risks and probably
do it for the glory, with less less freedom. Seize the moment and get what you
can out of it. After that, we can go back to the rest of what we're doing, cause
there's no tiger up there anyway, just a pussy cat.
Let me know it you require any further clarification and I'll be happy to oblige.
> Jim Quinton wrote:
> What has been superior to capitalism over the long run?
> >> Seeds.
> >> Oh, yeah--and soil.
> >> peace
> >> misha
> >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.
-- DouglasHinds e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg". To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".