>From free market capitalism springs oligarchical corporate agriculture, and
>from that springs many unwholesome forms of exploitive agriculture. To
>understand the lies upon which corporate agriculture is based is paramount
>to changing the system.
Agree or disagree, it is all so reminiscent of the
politico-intellectual blather that I had to endure when in university
in the mid-1960s. And equally effective.
>So please endure these postings relating to governing paradigms, as
>worthwhile background information.
If they *were* worthwhile background you'd have a point.
>Others may not have the understanding of these fundamental concepts and find
>them very enlightning.
The operative fundamental concept is that like it or not, in a
representative democracy most people get more or less what they want.
Whether any of us agree or disagree is irrelevant. Stop by any WalMart
Super Center on a Saturday afternoon and you will see that Larry
Lunchbucket, Joe Sixpack, and Mr. & Mrs. Frontporch are quite content
with the food system as it is currently structured. Their food costs
them less and less (at the till, and as a percentage of their
disposable income), and it's more and more convenient for them, every
Given their contentment with the system, rambling philosophical
discussions (particularly on *this* list) give them no reason to change
their eating habits, leave alone go out and vote for a substantial
change in our economic system and form of government.
Covey highlights the fundamental difference between our 'Circle of
Influence' and our 'Circle of Concern.' Governmental systems *may*
fall within some people's Circle of Concern. This list, however, should
generally concentrate on those areas in which we have some reasonable
expectation of influence within a tolerable time frame.
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: