Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#101 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 12 June 2003 - 09:45 PM

<Equal wealth is utopia and it is also undesired.>

ABSOLUTE EQUALITY may not be realistic, but LESS INEQUALITY is, as all developed countries--except America--have demonstrated.

<Unequal wealth serves as a motivator for people to strive and this is benificial to society, because thats what stimulate the supply of labour, innovation, progress ect. Without it there will be a tendency for people to work less. You receive your share regardless of your input and hence less input will yield a higher "profit". Some will work less because they want to yield this higher benefit and some because they feel cheated by the others.>

Not so, just look at Scandinavia. Actually they feel more motivated by any method other than the whip.

"Neoclassical economists use to argue that the high taxations in the Nordic countries must lead to high unemployment, low productivity, low rates of investments and too little incentives to work and innovate. Now and then these arguments are presented in s.c.n., and regularly the following will be presented:

The Nordic experience shows that 50% taxation is not too high to keep most people from working. In the 80s there was full employment despite high taxes and an extensive social security system. People still prefer work to unemployment. Sweden could maintain full employment until 1990s, but now the open unemployment is higher than in the US, although the criteria of the statistics differ.

The Nordic model worked well till the 90'ies economic depression, but it may have gotten into trouble in some of the countries now. On the other hand, one could argue that thanks to this model the recession in the beginning of the 90'ies became moderated in a very favorable way, compared for instance to the development in the United Kingdom.

It's often noted that the level of investments in Finland only some 5-10 years ago was very high, maybe too high, and that Sweden has a trade surplus (i.e. producing to a higher value than they consume) whereas USA has a trade deficit.

Productivity is relatively high in Norden. Social security does not lower productivity. In fact U.S. style low pay employment does not have as great incentives to high productivity as the Nordic union negotiated pay model.

Among the positive sides of this high-taxation system, one can note:

almost no poverty or starvation, as is the case in American ghettos
virtually no homelessness problem
very little crime
equal opportunity to education & health care, regardless of the wallets

Another example is that if a US worker is forced to have an expensive car and drive for two hours each way to get to work, spending money burning gasoline, that shows up as a bigger contribution to GDP than that of the Finnish worker who lives in a comfortable cogeneratively heated house out in K?pyl?, doesn't need a car, and rides an inexpensive tram in to work."

more...

http://www.lysator.l.../scn/faq28.html

Besides I think it's about time that the machines take place of some human labor and the work week is reduced accordingly.

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#102 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 June 2003 - 07:10 PM

<Though they think of themselves as prosperous, Swedes as a group are actually worse off than black Americans, according to a Swedish study by two HUI economists (Bergstrom and Gidehag).>

I bet you these guys never wander off too far from the beautiful world of their fortified citadels...

If they did they would find the 'other world,' the world of the ghetto...

They have 40 *BILLION* dollars for the "War on Drugs" next year.

New prisons in almost every state, several new prisons in a few states. And,
they get high in jail.
Dope is as easy to buy in jail as it is out here. All you need is money. WTF
are these people thinking???

40 *BILLION* dollars to continue a losing battle that is killing the youth
of our country. Trying to get ahead in this society after having been
convicted of a drug crime is a real bleak future. I have a bud, an old Navy
diver, who cant get a job driving a ****ing truck, because he has a felony
conviction for growing marijuana that goes back to 1974. The guy is a 10
year Navy veteran, made one simple mistake *26* years ago, has been in *no*
trouble since, and cant get a ****ing job that he can support himself on. We
should be ashamed. Then, *******s like Clinton and Bush want us to give
*them* understanding and a little slack???? NO ****ING WAY!!! Clinton should
be shot at dawn. More dirt on Bush is out there, they are simply keeping a
lid on it (like with Willy) till after the election. If they had anything on
Gore, we would have heard it by now.

Do people realize that the population in 20 years is going to made up of a
*significant* number of convicted felons? Who *cant* vote? And, who are
going to be pissed off, and tired of being under the
Big Brother thumb? Tired of a life of poverty because they made a mistake in
their youth, and have been made to pay for it for their entire lives.
Prisons are now being run at a profit, by private corporations. So, if they
keep it up, they are creating a future labor force of cheap, disposable,
drone's who have been stripped of all rights, hope and dignity. Act right,
do the job we give you, or sit in a cage.

Look at it this way: I was in basic with a black kid from Detroit. About 6
weeks in they found he had a heart murmur, and were going to discharge him
as unfit. He was a model recruit, squared away and trying real hard to be a
Marine. When he got the news, he told me "I aint going back home, man."
Later that night, he drank a half a can of Brasso.

For him, life in America offered two choices:
Be a Detroit Ghetto Black man, and spend your life in shit (like his dad and
everyone he knows), or be a Marine (none of the other branches would take
him). When he lost the option of getting out of Detroit, no matter the cost,
he chose death rather than go home. Until that moment, I never realized how
bad *some* children in this country have it. Grow up in a place where you
never see anything but pigeons, dogs and cats. Never seen a cow. Since that
moment, I have never forgot. If I grew up like most kids in the ghetto's of
America, I would be a gun totin, dope selling, white man hating, cop
shooting MF too, hoping to make that one big score, and get out (its either
dream, or work at McDonalds). Our prisons are full of them.

2 *MILLION* people in prison in the US right now, more than Russia or China,
1/2 of those for dope.

We should, every last flag waving one of us, be ashamed of our failure.

Scott

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote


__________________
"What worries me is not the violence of the few, but the indifference of the many" -M.L. King
  • 0

#103 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 June 2003 - 11:25 PM

<America has many millions of Scandanavian citizens, and they are damn good citizens! (My Daughter married one! A wonderful husband, father, and businessman!)>

I'm sure they are. But they are mostly the grandchildren who left Sweden and Norway when there was poverty over there. Actually Sweden expressly copied the American system about a century ago, and was able to surpass it in a couple of decades. America got stuck...

<Most Americans like the life they are living in America, as do the people of Europe. Pointing our fingers at each other is a silly pasttime. If you like, and enjoy, your country, enjoy it. Ditto for Americans.>

I guess that can be said of any other priviledged people around the world. 800 million people going hungry is after all a minority and is not the concern of most. And they judge life by their own, and think that such injustice is never going to catch up with them.

We have scientists that study in detail possible life in other planets, but turn a blind eye toward life in the ghetto a few blocks away from the fortified compound where they live...

HOW THE LION BENEFITS FROM THE LITTLE ANIMALS' POVERTY

One day all the little animals went up to the King of the Jungle and complained about their poverty, and in particular about the fact that every time, during the dry season, they had to travel long distances to drink the precious fluid, and demanded a water well be built for them... They cited how the resources that they contributed to the kingdom were wasted in wars and fancy projects to the tastes of the King... He, however, replied with all kinds of excuses: the lack of resources, that it wasn't a matter of him not wanting it, but that it was a matter of priorities --which was one of his favorite words...

Meanwhile, an Owl --who had very good eyes-- had been observing life in the jungle, and thought this way: "Every time there's a dry season the little animals must come to the little dirty waterhole where the Lion waits for them... Had they been well fed and strong, he would have had to run after them and even risk resistance..."

And that's how the Owl landed an important --and well paid-- post in the brand new Astronomy Department created by the King of the Jungle... to the effect of exploring life in other planets...

<Criticize my America? Sure, we're too involved in the problems of the rest of the world!>

That's the irony of it...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#104 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 14 June 2003 - 05:08 PM

Hi don,bader, mach. like what dont had said. taming the lion would save the small animals. i do not think the lion would be hard to tame, at the same time requires tremondous courage from all the small animals, as the combined number of small animals are definitely more than lions, BUT most importantly the small animals must use their intellects to excecute. there are two ways, fast or slow. the fast way: it will be chaotic, sacrifices of small animals, and pretty hard for general public to accept. the slow way: orderly, peaceful, and embraced with much ease or even fully embraced. which one do you guys prefer?

and, humans have been living blindly for the since the start of industrial age. everyone knows we are destroying our mother land,earth, but only a small number of people are seriously trying their best to send the message. it's time we should open our eyes and see clearly what is truly good and bad for us. we have the knowleges and intellect to change and make the world a better place for present and future. some people in some parts of the world are living life in the best interest for the living things in earth and earth itself. we should try our best to start from each individual home. let's do our best.
  • 0

#105 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 June 2003 - 06:54 PM

<Hi don,bader, mach. like what dont had said. taming the lion would save the small animals. i do not think the lion would be hard to tame, at the same time requires tremondous courage from all the small animals, as the combined number of small animals are definitely more than lions, BUT most importantly the small animals must use their intellects to excecute. there are two ways, fast or slow. the fast way: it will be chaotic, sacrifices of small animals, and pretty hard for general public to accept. the slow way: orderly, peaceful, and embraced with much ease or even fully embraced. which one do you guys prefer?>

Hi Marquis, all

The fact that the Scandinavian and Swiss lions are not roaring that much proves that the lions can be tamed. However the taming doesn't have to take a long time, particularly when our cousins the 'belligerent monkeys'--of whom we disaprove because they threaten the little animals as well as the lion--are bent on getting even with the lion as soon as possible.

The situation is like this: The 'pacifist monkeys'--us-- trying to tame the lion; the 'belligerent monkeys'--terrorism--trying to blow up the lion--and, in the process, the little animals--and the stupid, hungry lion trying to defend the jungle, from which he benefits so much. So everybody would be a winner in taming him.

<and, humans have been living blindly for the since the start of industrial age. everyone knows we are destroying our mother land,earth, but only a small number of people are seriously trying their best to send the message. it's time we should open our eyes and see clearly what is truly good and bad for us. we have the knowleges and intellect to change and make the world a better place for present and future. some people in some parts of the world are living life in the best interest for the living things in earth and earth itself. we should try our best to start from each individual home. let's do our best.>

Even every little effort you may try to do is resisted or crushed by the lion. Say you choose to ride a bicycle around, you'll find the harsh reality of an Asphalt Jungle where the Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles roam. You got no space, no security, no respect. The stupid hungry lion got it all...

A couple of opinions about the book 'Natural Capitalism'...

A realistic environmental society
Ian Crosher on 1999-12-03 04:30:06-06

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't quite finished the book yet, but it has already changed my thinking towards what type of future we might have. It paints a picture of a world that i want to realate to and live within, not a backwards looking environmental society. Conventional capitalisim has never done that. It has changed my image of where change can be sought, far from being confrontational by trying to prevent environmental distruction here is a blue print to work with people for a soiety we all may want.
I love challenging my views and thinking here is a book that has built on ideas brought them together to do just that. Thank you.

Are these new ideas too late?
Diane Wills on 2000-01-04 11:36:57-06

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have just started reading this book, and just finished reading "Ecology of Commerce".

No I don't think it is a watershed text. Business is just too set in its ways and won't change, and the US Government is also set in its old ways and won't make laws to change things. I do believe the ideas in this book and in "Ecology of Commerce" are great ideas, but most people I know don't know of these books or the ideas in them and are in love with "business as usual", that is the dot com craze, biotech, etc. They haven't a clue as to the problems with "business as usual".

With the recent reports of drastic climate change this winter (spring temperatures in the Midwest and New England all winter, dying coastal forests in Florida), I think its too late. Sorry for my pessimistic view but I think the train is moving in the wrong direction and there is just too much momentum, and I don't see things changing.

I do want to re-iterate that I do much appreciate Paul Hawken's, Amory & Hunter Lovin's efforts in trying to show the US and the world a new way and don't mean to discount them. They did what they could and should get credit for that. They also have great ideas. It is just that the "powers that be" are not ready to listen.

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#106 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 15 June 2003 - 04:55 AM

How can we make a clean break? One essential is re-education.
Usually through publications etc outside mainstream media which are controlled and/or reflect popular (money making) demand by the masses who are indiferent or haven't got to the stage of
wanting to know why things aren't getting better (because they aren't starting to hurt).
The want-to-know people, who start before they hurt personally,
usually make ground in various ways and publish in some form what they have achieved- found out. Much also comes through people writing the truth that has been hidden by mainstream
and want to tell. The want-to-know people naturally "collect"
these bits and pieces as they go along and after a while a pattern
starts to emurge and writings of others start to make more sense.
People learn to discern and evaluate and see patterns and see
through methods etc. As someone recently said, you can't borrow it or study how to get it, you have to develop it over time,
the time you put into it. The wwnet makes this easier and will accelerate re-education. Watch for the excuses they will try and
bring it under control.
Then one can re-evaluate all the cultural, political, tools methods,structures and systems and discover what is working for the indivdual (towards freedom) and what is working for an elite
(towards control/collectivism) and make changes accordingly.
Once ones mind has escaped the conditioning, the next thing is to get the numbers (who have also escaped the conditioning)
to gain the power to change the rules (tools etc ) So people publish their breakthroughs to help others escape the
institutions. Sure many aren't perfect and some drive off the road
into the ditch, doesn't mean one throws the road part away
with the ditch part. Learn to discern what to pick up and what to
leave aside for further evaluation. It never ends.
The concern about human survival hasn't been given the exposure it deserves probably because it might alarm too many people who
just may awaken to their democratic responsibilities and get in the way of the agendas sanctioned by the elite. But the
Biodiversity treaty needs to wipe out two thirds of those currently
living today.
Getting back to the common denominator of history, Machl-H, I referred to in the Book of Daniel the statue in the dream of the King of Babylon which the Prophet Daniel interpreted represented his kingdom down through the ages
in various forms was to finally be destroyed by a stone made without hands- meaning not by human design- but divine intervention. So Bible prophesy says we wont solve it all by ourselves.
Some may then ask well why should we bother to try and work it out or fight the systems etc.
Every day we vote for the system when we repeat its doctrines and lies. We vote for their political parties, we vote for their
cultural traites when we support them etc etc. We can do better
with our "vote", same as when we spend our money we vote
for what we want by putting money towards certain products and services just as when we make donations and subscriptions etc. (just as an aside, bear in mind that when large sections of a society have little money outside of the basics for survival they have little freedom or voting power -influence, the broader social sense)
One other reason is to be on the winning side.
Its easier to discover what's wrong than how should things be done and we move onto the second part as we become more confident we have identified why it is wrong. This is the common
road of the pilgrim which are we and Donqui's material reflects this. Then we educate the next generation (our offspring) just as
Donqu. is by his own style. Natural instinct and a sense of responsibility reflected here are another reason not to give up.
Another reason we don't give up is because history has numerous
samples of breakthroughs from time to time.
I haven't thought of you being pessimistic Macl-H, just maybe lacking confidence yet in what you see or others see. It gets better.
  • 0

#107 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 15 June 2003 - 06:13 AM

Hi don, your views are contradictory here. i don't quite get you. so do we tame or not tame the lion,and - my main issue - is how are we going to tame the lion?

I totally agree with bader on re-education and the main obstacle is to over the elites. that is a question mark on how are we, the little animals, going to overcome the lion.

I'm still reading the book "Natural capitalism" and i find it really good, though i have only read a few chapters. This book just tell us that we,humans, have not been using common sense. the greediness in everyone of us are taking the best out of our individual little soul. we have the technology since 19th century and we didnt make good use of it. arent we stupid greedy creatures.

As far as i have known and seen, new zealand is one place that protect it's environment with due care and dilligence. asia still have plenty to catch up. for the rest of world, your informations have been valuable.

To be honest, i do have a pessimistic view that the world would change and, if it does, it is going to take a long time. But, im still hanging onto it because of hope. im still searching for a solution for a change, hopefully, and in a peaceful manner.
  • 0

#108 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 June 2003 - 07:26 PM

<Hi don, your views are contradictory here. i don't quite get you. so do we tame or not tame the lion,and - my main issue - is how are we going to tame the lion?>

Hi Marquis

I haven't said at any point that we shouln't tame the lion. We must tame it or else!

How? Well, I got my own theory. We got to get the 'proles' on board by telling them in a single language what's the problem with the stupid lion, and presenting them a solution, the cards on the table. I can tell you this much: I've put together the stories--in my first webpage--on one side of a flyer, and the solution--at the start of this thread--on the other, and THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE LITTLE PEOPLE would go for it. Moreover, there's the party, the VICTORY PARTY that we intend to throw, and people, naturally, want to party... :)

http://webspawer.com/users/donquijote9

(This is only the tip of the iceberg of what we got in Spanish. If you don't get a hang of it, let me know. But I think a 'Marquis the Sades' will understand.) :)

<I totally agree with bader on re-education and the main obstacle is to over the elites. that is a question mark on how are we, the little animals, going to overcome the lion. >

EDUCATION IS THE KEY, but that's why the little people is constantly bombarded with trash news and culture. They don't have a chance to self educate when the stupid lion got the control over the media...

"Karl Marx held that history is shaped by control over the means of production. In our times, history is shaped by control over the means of communication" -Arthur Schlesinger, Jr

<I'm still reading the book "Natural capitalism" and i find it really good, though i have only read a few chapters. This book just tell us that we,humans, have not been using common sense. the greediness in everyone of us are taking the best out of our individual little soul. we have the technology since 19th century and we didnt make good use of it. arent we stupid greedy creatures.>

Well, part of that greediness may be human nature, but clearly THAT'S BEING EXPLOITED BY A SYSTEM whose only motivation is greed even at the expense of a catastrophe via the savage attack on the environment or via wars over unnecessary resources.

Hey, are you reading the book?

<As far as i have known and seen, new zealand is one place that protect it's environment with due care and dilligence. asia still have plenty to catch up. for the rest of world, your informations have been valuable. >

Also Iceland promised to do away with fossil fuels and Norway--the country I know--is pretty exemplary and the Netherlands have very advanced environmental policies--not to mention the fact that you can get around by bicycle, not by a stupid SUV.

<To be honest, i do have a pessimistic view that the world would change and, if it does, it is going to take a long time. But, im still hanging onto it because of hope. im still searching for a solution for a change, hopefully, and in a peaceful manner. >

Cheer up, Marquis! We got to throw that party soon!!!

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#109 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 June 2003 - 01:21 AM

Hey guys, here's a taste of what's to come, if we tame the lion... Of course, there would be no lion on your back! :)

"What a Difference a Co-op Makes"
By Fred Stapenhorst
...The annual election always highlights the fundamental differences between our store and other natural foods stores. We are owned by our customers. We are controlled democratically, on a one-member/one-vote basis. We are in business solely to serve. Our profits are continually re-invested to improve and expand our services. Money flowing through the co-op stays in the community. We are concerned about satisfying the needs of outside investors. In short, our ownership structure makes us profoundly different than privately-owned natural foods stores.

Sometimes, however, it is difficult to see the difference. On the surface we look very similar to other natural foods stores. Similar products, prices, and services. How then does consumer ownership, democratic control, or the local use of profits actually make a difference?

Imagine for a moment a region where half the stores were cooperatives. Raley's, Lucky's, Safeway would take a back seat to a community of co-op stores. What would happen if co-op purchasing power exceeded the corporate stores, half the population in the Sacramento area were co-op members, the revenues from 50 percent of Sacramento's grocery purchases stayed local, and the profits from 50 or 100 co-op stores were re-invested to improve service?

Would the difference be more obvious? No doubt! Unfortunately, in the U.S. we've never had the opportunity to participate in a large-scale example of cooperative ownership. Despite three separate waves of co-op development in this century, food cooperatives have always remained a very marginal segment of the U.S. economy. That fact remains true today.

To better understand the implications of an economy with a thriving co-op sector we need to look outside of our country -- Sweden in the 1950s and '60s, the Mondragon system of cooperatives in Spain, the Migros cooperatives in Switzerland, or the Japanese system of food cooperatives. These are examples of where a significant portion of an economy is run by cooperatives (at one point over 20 percent of all retail trade in Switzerland was conducted through cooperatives). When these co-op systems are studied closely the differences between them and private businesses become more apparent. Their scale allows for a fair comparison. For example, the Swedish cooperatives challenged price fixing of consumer goods in the 1950s and successfully conducted internal "social concerns" audits since the 1970s, and in all of these cooperatives the lack of outside investor dividends allows them to plow profits back into the business in the form of better prices and improved services.

These differences are harder to manifest at [our co-op], mainly because we are such a tiny part of our local economy. Yet, even at our scale, we offer a broader product line than any natural foods store in Sacramento, our prices are competitive, and we provide a greater selection of consumer services and educational programs for our customers. Most importantly, we have now successfully run a democratically controlled and owned business for 25 years.

Again, I challenge you to imagine what might be if most grocery stores in Sacramento were cooperatives. It is that vision that motivates me, and I will draw upon it when I mark my ballot...in our co-op's election. I encourage you to reflect on your own vision for cooperatives when you mark your ballot.

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#110 machlud haul

machlud haul

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 16 June 2003 - 05:34 AM

Hi all,

These are hopeful thoughts and ideas: can hear many friends talking about getting out of the system, sometimes early morning hours really leading to actual changes for the better. At individual level, at grass roots - and this is how I believe the most durable progress is achieved, by invisible cultural change, by countless individual decisions. It is just the rational plans, centraliced action that I am sceptical about. So, I am at loss as to any general guideline for action except at individual level. These structures are in many ways meaningful (with real progress in many parts of the West) and there has to be some participation although they are just a shadow of the high ideals of our societies. So, I hope that there will be organic growth into something better in whatever actual form this would take. But we can't order it to happen. Capitalism is effective but not civilized and unchecked in can lead to destruction - there seems to be a race against time, but probably no-one can really say how much (or how little) time there is left. My guess is often very pessimistic, but sometimes the situation seems more hopeful - who can really say?
  • 0

#111 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 16 June 2003 - 04:58 PM

<My guess is often very pessimistic, but sometimes the situation seems more hopeful - who can really say?>

Hi all

The future is determined by us, not fate, not divine intervention, just our actions... Waiting amounts to indifference, and that condems us. Either we face the 'beast' or we don't. Either we tame him or he eats us...

Humanity at the Crossroads

Source: book 'You Are Being Lied To'; article 'Will the Real Human Please Stand Up?' by Riane Eisler. Fragments.

Today the mix of the dominator model and advanced technology become increasingly unsustainable, the blade is the nuclear bomb and/or biological warfare and terrorism [written before Sept. 11!]. Increasingly advanced technologies in the service of a dominator ethos threaten our natural habitat, as well as that of most species with whom we share our planet.

Regions ranging from the former Soviet Union to countries is Asia, Africa and Latin America are being forced into a replay of the robber-baron days of early capitalism.

In sum, the outcome of the tension between the partnership and dominator models as two basic human possibilities is far from settled. We are now at what scientists call a bifurcation point, where there are two very different scenarios for out future.

One is 'dominator system breakdown': the unsustainable future of high technology guided by the dominator model [the Lion]. This is where high technology in service of the domination of nature despoils and pollutes our natural habitat. It is a future where advanced technologies will be used not to free our human potentials, but to more effectively control and dominate. And ultimately, it is a future of environmental, nuclear, or biological holocaust.

The other scenario is 'breakthrough to partnership': the sustainable future of a world primarily orienting to the partnership model [for the benefit of all species]. Here advanced technologies are developed and used in ways that promote environmental balance and the realization of our species' great untapped potentials. International regulations ensure corporate accountability to workers, communities and natural habitats. [I'd add here the promotion of cooperatives as an option to counterbalance corporations.] New economic institutions and rules recognize the value of the work of caring and caregiving, and discourage violence, exploitation, and the despoliation of nature.

"Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time; the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence" -M.L. King

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#112 machlud haul

machlud haul

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 June 2003 - 05:31 AM

True enough: we are a species prone to domination and aggression - I just wonder how will we be able miraculously to change this, simply relying on reason and good will? I see a transformation or collapse in quite near historical future, maybe even during this century. Perhaps this is too melodramatic, but the future does look grim. Bioweapons are especially scary and don't need big structures for delivery. Capitalism (as its predecessors) creates alienation and conflict - how long can we manage this complex and explosive situation? If I would have a program it would be not to have a program - just to encourage grass roots change in whatever specific form and participation even in the mainstream debates and politics. If we want a humane solution we have to see these errors both as humane and as also ours. We can't puritanically just separate from the mainstream and be only antagonistic towards it: it has been tried, about zillion times, and won't work.
  • 0

#113 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 June 2003 - 06:29 PM

<True enough: we are a species prone to domination and aggression - I just wonder how will we be able miraculously to change this, simply relying on reason and good will? I see a transformation or collapse in quite near historical future, maybe even during this century. Perhaps this is too melodramatic, but the future does look grim. Bioweapons are especially scary and don't need big structures for delivery.>

Hi Machlud

I'm at the same time more pessimistic and more optimist...

The pessimism is that destruction not only may happen in this century, but it's likely to come within a few years...

The optimism is that a solution is really around the corner and it may come as either the enlightenment of our leaders (not all must be stupid, or sold out, are they?) or as a campaign of nonviolence.

Say, if we had an enlightened leader, he may think like this...

(Source: World Press Review, letters)

Yes, we need to fight a war, but no, the enemy is not Iraq... The enemy is oil with 65+ percent of the known oil reserves in the politically unstable, "Death to America"-chanting Middel East. Imagine the advances the United States could make to world stability and developing domestic employment opportunities if it spent the $79+ billion Congress recently approved for Bush's Iraq war on alternative energy subsidies and investment. Might this be a better way to fight terrorism, support our troops, and regain world favor?

Jay Lustgarten
San Anselmo, California
  • 0

#114 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 June 2003 - 06:33 PM

<An American style constitution, and free and unfettered markets>

And I thought it had to get away from it...

Where else has it worked?

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#115 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 18 June 2003 - 11:20 AM

I can't go with you on that one Mach-h, that's sticking your head in the lions mouth. The crimes against humanity that have gone on even since the turn of the previous century has to be amongst the worst in the history of the world. Nothing humane here. But I go all the way with you when you say you are skeptical about "rational plans and centralised action". That is a good summary of the Soviet Union.
The quote from Riane Eisler, after a summary of the problems of the planet, then talks of international regulations to force good things to happen and stop the bad. That was the purpose of the Soviet Union and the U.N. which had/have similar constitutions and the exact same underlying philosophy.
One way to get rid of the lion is to replace it with another. But who is fooling who?
What was the underlying philosophy? To create an external-
exterior regime that rationalised ideals down to regulations
and sanctions against non-conformance, thus creating an environment within, that would theretically enable mankind to be
free and at peace in a socially just society. On the one hand it resulted in tyrany on an incredible scale that dwarfed the Third Reich (although the world is not allowed to know this, and not anything to do with Russian interests) and on the other it will likely become the "democratic" world government Lenin dreamed of.
The only healthy crowd is to assemble healthy people who
agree in what they practice. That's working from the ground up
and from within outwards. This is the opposite to herding people together and compeling them to conform to a code of group practice, which the external regime, centralisation
etc, represents.
The latter is the domain of the beast (lion as used) because of centralised power and the former being decentralised power
neutralises those dynamics that usurp the power that belongs to the people.
What ever anyone offers for solutions, answers, the ideology
or principles, whatever, you have to analys which way the dynamics work. They will either work towards centralising power away from people or decentralising power which impowers the people. Some people after making a good anlysis of the worlds problems mix these two up. It's easier to recognise the problems than formulate the answers. And the best answers are the ones the people own, not adopt after someone plays the messiah.
Donq. said it was up to our actions. True and the greater part of that is the responsibility of the individual in a democracy. No
responsibility, no democracy.
But it also applies to the beast (lion) its also up to his actions to retain his interests and since he holds (usurped) the power as
Mach-h said "we can't order it to happen". THat is until we
have taken back enough power to do so.
Anyone who thinks that what has developed into all these problems are just the result of mis-guided concepts and ideas
is also sticking their head in the lions mouth- ie feeding the lion.
Animals like being feed (rewarded).
How much time have we got? It looks short alright.
There is much to suggest that the agenda is to create global control of the planet and all life on it and will be done by Order out of Chaos. That means the destruction is not by accident but by design to bring people to a no-option answer that begs the question. That answer is already in the making by the beast.
The method of using conflict to achieve this is reflected in the
letter quote from Jay Bestgarten. That's the old Hegelian
dynamic made famous by Marx and claimed by some to be further
developed by Kissinger- thesis v antithesis.
  • 0

#116 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 19 June 2003 - 10:49 AM

Donqu, Mach-h and Marq.. and any others interested:

These all come through worldnewsstand.com
Go to knightstemplar.com and read about the Boston Tea Party.
Has been made relevent to the current situation re global corporate dominance over gov. away from the people and mentions when the corp was granted same status as an individual
regarding human rights.

On the bottem of the worldnewsstand site click on "controlled
media Inc", that's a good read, only short but to the point.
The click on chap11 (two) in the contents of the book, at the bottom. The name of the chapter is "Behind the scenes, lerks the Bank".
After reading that click on the highlited word "The Money Makers"
which will take you to the site wealth4freedom.com
and after reading that click on "Principles of Monetary Reform"
at the bottom.

Well worth a read.

Also found an iteresting Russian Proverb:

Dwell on the past and you will lose an eye; forget the past and you will lose both eyes.
  • 0

#117 machlud haul

machlud haul

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 19 June 2003 - 02:23 PM

Hi again,

In haste before the Midsummer and long awaited vacation: our differences are clearly concerning just the remedies and not the sickness itself or at least not its symptoms. I don't much like history and do regard the Australian aborigines as being easily more civilized than the liberal West (which on the other hand is so far the most civilized - or least barbaric - developed society that has ever existed). I would not want to lose reason and enlightenment, but I don't believe that the humankind is yet (if ever) able to behave with reason and enlightment as a collective. The nature of our species seems to be deeply insecure and our aggression is most often misguided defence against the hostile world making it in the process even more inhospitable. A social and spiritual transformation is needed, but I don't believe that it will ever happen according to a rational plan or concerted political action. There probably is really too little information to make any guess very reasonable, but I would personally say that the next few decades are looking very dangerous and maybe even disastrous - as melodramatic as this might seem. Well, enough of gloom: am now off to enjoy the Nordic summer (raining at the moment with 13 degrees centigrade...) Will be back in a couple of weeks!
  • 0

#118 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 20 June 2003 - 02:26 AM

Well I would agree with Mach-h regarding a deepseated problem with the human species. On the other hand the majority of people live in relative peace within society, but it only takes a
few to spoil it for everyone else.
On the one hand his overview is consistent with the Bible theme
on the other while we are still waking up to the same world we
naturally would want to find better ways to do things and
put a stop to the coruption and exploitation where we can.

One of the web references I gave previous. post was the
"worldnewsstand" which I gave as a "com", it should be a
"net".
  • 0

#119 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 20 June 2003 - 01:58 PM

<The only healthy crowd is to assemble healthy people who
agree in what they practice. That's working from the ground up
and from within outwards. This is the opposite to herding people together and compeling them to conform to a code of group practice, which the external regime, centralisation
etc, represents.>

Hi Bader, all

That's centrally true. The thing is--and that's the main failure of both communism and capitalism--that a system can't impose anything by decree or by necessity on the people. A better system would would allow different people to take part in different economic enterprises as well as to belong to different parties. What we got now is BS. The lion controls the water well so the thirsty, hungry animals must go to the waterhole where he eats them...

<The latter is the domain of the beast (lion as used) because of centralised power and the former being decentralised power
neutralises those dynamics that usurp the power that belongs to the people.>

The lion certainly benefits from the heards. He uses different methods to control them: religion, nationalism, ignorance...

The little animals must roam free...

<Donq. said it was up to our actions. True and the greater part of that is the responsibility of the individual in a democracy. No
responsibility, no democracy.
But it also applies to the beast (lion) its also up to his actions to retain his interests and since he holds (usurped) the power as
Mach-h said "we can't order it to happen". THat is until we
have taken back enough power to do so.>

Taming the beast means changing the jungle enough so that it becomes safe and liveable. No need for bloody revolution, no need for terrorism--which is sticking the head in the lion's mouth...

One important part of the process though is revealing the beast before the eyes of the little animals, which is not always welcomed... :)

HOW THE BLACK SHEEP WERE EXPELLED

One day the Wolf, who had been thinking how to best eat the sheep,
decided to dress as a sheep... And that's how the sheep trusted the
new sheep more every day, some confessing to him, others voting for
him, and most allowing to be trimmed by him...

Meanwhile, the Black Sheep thought this way: "If he got paws and fangs
and howls, wolf it is..."

And that's the reason why from then on the Black Sheep weren't allowed
to mingle anymore with the simple and common sheep...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#120 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 21 June 2003 - 10:43 PM

The emblem of the Fabian International Sociatists was just that.
A wolf with a sheep skin tied across its back.
For those who can't contemplate mans intentional evil towards man, they can rest in the thought that it was a bad winter that year for timber wolves and he perchance came upon a sheep that had just died of malnutrition in the snow.
For those who can, it represents stalking the sheeple, as one has put it ( people who remain like sheep).
If I remember correctly the London School of Economics was the crown jewel of that movement. And it wasn't set up by the socialist party or the unions but the principle investor was a German financier, while generally he was considered a capitalist
and the opponent of the socialist.
The point to gain is that both believe in a centralised world
regime. The rank and file merely compete over how to get there.
Also understand that Marx understood the rule of the money
system and yet never opposed it. It would not have been over
an ethnic clash but I would suggest we can rest assured was that because he could see that the dynamics of the money (debt)
system was the single and most powerful form of regime through
which all social, political and economic centralisation under one
global form of government could develop. Today the World Bank,
IMF and WTO etc are the current informal world governemnt
driving nations into one uniform system.
The dialectic struggle that divided and confused everyone along the way, the left versus the right, was meant to aid this development. Currently the ball is in the court of the state and corporate bureacrats (fascism).
Perhaps the old communistits dreampt that they will pull off a coup at the end when it falls into place.
The fact that labels are changing doesn't mean the players have
retired. In fact some of the older ones are quietly coming back into view.
For Russia to be number one. It either replaces the US at the head of the new world order, and have the lion franchise or opt out of the jungle regime and create an alternative for the animals who need an alternative waterhole.
That waterhole is a perfect symbal of the western banking system holding everyone under siege.
Russia may well be the only "country" that is capable
of standing up to the lion, meaning too strong for the lion to attack without grave risk. That's on the basis that they have internal security against the lions interests. The only other possible hero could China. ( taking about action through national entities)
I was interested and pleased to read that when Mr Putin played host to a number of G8 leaders at the 700 year celebrations of
St Petersburg he spoke about Peter the Great who was determined to free the Russians of European influence, no doubt it referred to dominating influence and intrigue.
It was the internationalists who created a new capital of Russia.
The purpose would have been to destroy nationlism, the history
of the Russians, in leaving St Petersburg as just a memory of the old world. Same is happening today with freemarket globalisation. Nationalism and the world prior to its revolution are to pass into history as governments surcome to global regimes, NEW World order, and the ethnic blend increases rapidly
breaking down cultural strongholds.
The Third Reich was another attempt at creating a new world order. The same year it came to power Roosevelt issued a new dollar bill which announced a new world order with the masonic pyramid symbol on it.
Both the Soviet attempt and Nazi attempts at creating a new
world order were supported by Wall Street internationalists.
Little wonder people say when you lose sight of the past you lose the future.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru