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

#1241 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 07 October 2003 - 09:09 AM

I really enjoyed that one.
In most of the photos, if the billboards were taken away it would have been totally drab, which says something for commercial art.
Such dismal drab surrounds likely is the greater subtle "design"
to make the billboards so much more effective that the prisoners therein would want some form of escape and fanatsy is ideal
for forgetting the "real" world.
Just like the dogs fed up with the bells and the sadsack, you make people want to escape! Right?

On a more serious note the tv has been boon for sell/conditioning
and even though people may when they get a bit older and the earlier days of pressure to get income and pay mortgages etc
are past and they start to look for some personal meaning to life
they may turn off the tv in order to shut out the "bell" so they can
re-focus and become what they are supposed to be.
However its the little people who are far from appreciating the
deeper things of life so they are well enticed and captured
thus ensuring another generation is manning the oars until they are past their prime. After that it doesn't matter because there is
a new crop to sort for the land, circus or the man-0-wars.

The living wage etc is applying painkillers instead of removing the cause of the pain.
The coop as you say is healthy and just social enterprize and based on the opposite priniciples from that which is the origin of the pain. But all enterprize can't be or need to be in the coop form,
so obviously the principles are to be retained and applied across
society so the law of the jungle only applies to those who want it
(like a hole in the head).
Its a simple practical exercise to analyse the coop and frame the
principles/values as a guide to apply in all social organisations etc. There is the individual dimension and the collective, just as a
microcosmic society. I am sure most things will be covered.

The supra-coop is the most practical and needs to be based on the same principles. Much privatisation of public utilities is a
step backwards in terms of the cost of living and the profit motive replaces the service motive and likely to be publicly subsidized when the whole system is due for a major overhaul.

"...to restore confidence in fiat money by govt spending..."
I find it interesting that people criticise fiat money which is govt
printed /minted notes and coins. This is the only money that is
owned by the people and debt free. It usually only makes up a few percent of the money supply, the rest is computer figues tapped into computer accounts the means by which it is created into existence out of nothing the bank owns. I would hope that the printed U.S. dollar is not borrowed along with the rest, for their sake not that it makes much difference other than creating a
means for education and hope. (we are back to that word)
The difference between debt money and debt free money is that
debt free money will circulate and do its work and at the end of the cycle when it gets back into the banking system is cancelled.
Thus with each economic cycle when new money is circulated the volumn of money doesn't inflate and everyones good work looses value.
With debt money the money circulates and does its work and goes back to the bank and gets cancelled in the act of the
principle having returned and closed off the account thus cancelling that issue during the economic cycle. Sounds the same right. It doesn't end there.
Remember debt money is lent at interest, so the interest as well as the principle has to be earned/found and repayed which is very different.
In the first case the money isn't repaid if its is debt free. At this point visualise what society could do with all the repayments and interest. Not only is its benefit being denied but the weight of it over economic cycles and expanding is a huge dead weight,
worse than legalising square wheels and banning round ones.
There is more, remember the interest and principle has to be paid.
Nearly all the money supply is the principles so where do you get the interest from since they didn't create it so it was there to be possible to pay it and sqaure the account. Now the bankers would be so stupid as to play a bankers form of Russian roulette
making a system that is self-destructive, they have to drive the
economy to cause the creation of new money continually so there is enough to pay which creates inflationary pressure and surges
of surplus money and short money which the economy reflects.
And then there is the fractional reserve banking which multiplies
the actual money many times over on top of the fact it is orginally
created out of nothing. (creating the pretence that it is sound)
Now with all that prolific creation of money (while every day as loans are repaid it is also being cancelled) govts tell us we cant afford this cant afford that because the debt and interest is slowly taking up more and more of the budgets of the various
depts.
Obviously if people take their sovereign option of creating their whole public money supply themselves debt free all that prolific
generation of money wouldnt take place and there wouldn't be
the budgets depreciated by debt and interest.
It's not hard to work out how much money (debt free) should be created for a sound and balanced economy. Given that technology is making human energy redundant, the industrial revolution system of using employment as means of distributing purchasing power is obsolete, so all you need to do DonQ is sit down and devise a socially just way for the means of distribution
(purchasing power for goods and services to balance and maintain a working economy) that will allow virtually all of society to enjoy a much higher standard of living (economic freedom).
Bare in mind the values and principles of the coop.
Please note that debt free means NO TAXes (for debt repayment)
One doesn't need an active imagination to work out that we are like the dogs in the experiment under the present fraudulent banking system and realize life could be so different we wouldn't recognise it as the earth we know now.
If you gave Russia economic freedom (and cultural revival)
what number would yoy put beside it?
  • 0

#1242 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 07 October 2003 - 06:23 PM

<I really enjoyed that one.
In most of the photos, if the billboards were taken away it would have been totally drab, which says something for commercial art.
Such dismal drab surrounds likely is the greater subtle "design"
to make the billboards so much more effective that the prisoners therein would want some form of escape and fanatsy is ideal
for forgetting the "real" world.
Just like the dogs fed up with the bells and the sadsack, you make people want to escape! Right?>

Howdy Bader
It's like the drier the conditions out there the more the little animals want to drink from the waterhole, right?

<On a more serious note the tv has been boon for sell/conditioning
and even though people may when they get a bit older and the earlier days of pressure to get income and pay mortgages etc
are past and they start to look for some personal meaning to life
they may turn off the tv in order to shut out the "bell" so they can
re-focus and become what they are supposed to be.
However its the little people who are far from appreciating the
deeper things of life so they are well enticed and captured
thus ensuring another generation is manning the oars until they are past their prime. After that it doesn't matter because there is
a new crop to sort for the land, circus or the man-0-wars.>

If I were you I'd tie up the dog when the bell is ringing and the dog food commercials come up. Does he already know the different barkings for the brand names?;)

<The living wage etc is applying painkillers instead of removing the cause of the pain.
The coop as you say is healthy and just social enterprize and based on the opposite priniciples from that which is the origin of the pain. But all enterprize can't be or need to be in the coop form,
so obviously the principles are to be retained and applied across
society so the law of the jungle only applies to those who want it
(like a hole in the head).>

Very enlightening. I see two ways to go around it: Either choose the coop as the only favored economic instrument or complement it with outside schemes like living wages, etc. In the former, the worst outside the better it is for the coop, while in the latter you consider humanizing the other options...

But while we may be debating for hours on what the future may be holding for us, we may as well learn from the past...

'In 1910, the first kibbutz was established. Several followed in the next years. As time passed, more immigrants came to Israel, mostly all first passing through the kibbutzim. As Israel's population grew, so did the number of kibbutzim. In 1948, with UN backing, Israel declared itself a nation. A socialist government was set up which subsidized and furthered the growth of kibbutz communities.

Traditionally, the kibbutzim of Israel promoted a lifestyle based on complete shared ownership of all property, production of commodities, and profits.7 Everyone owned everything, or no one owned anything
  • 0

#1243 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 07 October 2003 - 07:15 PM

Hey, guys, I'm doing this Poll...

http://www.lifeisann...id=1531;start=0

I'll keep you posted, but there's a bunch of anarcho-capitalists out there (American libertarians) that are out to get me...;)

American libertarians do recognize the lion but propose another solution which is very much like the jungle. Nevertheless they may be a smaller problem than the cunning 'foxes' (politicians). What do you think?
  • 0

#1244 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 01:21 AM

This people have found out that the Lion ain't necessary...;)

'Lunch on kibbutz was the biggest meal of the day. Everyone had worked hard all morning and this created large appetites which often resulted with huge messes for me to clean. I started wiping the tables, and in frustration I exclaimed, "Can't these people be a little more neat?" My supervisor overheard my question and gave me some quick insight. "Brain, on kibbutz, all the fruits of labor are shared and enjoyed by everyone." Then suddenly, I began to understand a basic concept in community living. If the dining room was messy and boring, it was O.K., because the work I did helped to support me and the rest of the community. No one elite person was reaping the benefits of my hours of menial labor--everyone was benefiting. This realization led to new feelings about my work of which I had never felt before; work actually wasn't that terrible if it helped to better the community, and not just make extra profit for some random corporation. This realization led to other observations and more insight about kibbutz.

Work was the central activity on kibbutz, but it never was as formal and demeaning as work in the U.S. I soon found several relaxed things about kibbutz work. I could talk with my co-workers, and even with my boss, and not fear getting yelled at. *People treated me like a human being, and not some commodified, alienated employee*. It was O.K. if I showed up 5 minutes late once in a while. I could go to work with messy hair, because my boss had messy hair and a beard, and 50% of the other men had messy hair and beards. I never had to wear a certain stupid uniform displaying corporate logos of some galactic corporate entity that was probably doing environmental injustice somewhere else. I could simply wear shorts to work. There were no job interviews. There were no job rejections. Either you were needed for a job, or you were not. And if they didn't need you, it wasn't because you weren't qualified enough or you didn't look the right way, it was because they needed you more somewhere else. I happened to be needed in the dining room when I arrived and that's where they put me. It didn't matter that I was from some university or that I wanted to study the kibbutz. All that mattered was that I worked to the best of my ability.

Since I worked in the dining room, there was a concern about health as I was handling food. But I found that I was washing my hands and keeping everything as clean as possible not because "the Man" [the Lion] was looking over my shoulder with threats, but because these people were my extended family for the next part of my life, and I felt a compassion to do a decent job for them.'

(same source above)
  • 0

#1245 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 01:53 AM

I guess cheap Mexican labor--or Chinese or American or Russian--is expendable, say an externality to capitalism... Could the needy poor perhaps benefit from kibbutz-style coops? Wouldn't it be a way out of the Lion's abuses?:confused:

'A comparison between Israeli date production and California date farms reveals several interesting contrasts that highlight labor dynamics on kibbutz. On kibbutz, labor was scarce and thus expensive. The kibbutz members, themselves, were the main labor force out in the fields picking dates. The latest in modern technology was implemented to ensure that the greatest amount of dates could be picked in the least amount of time. Large tractors with tape decks and hydraulic tools were the norm in Israeli date picking. In California, where farmers relied on migrant workers to pick dates, less modern tactics were used. *Readily available cheap labor in California allowed farmers to compromise money on technological advances which increased productivity*. Instead of tractors, ladders were used to reach the dates which were then harvested with machetes. This more primitive way of harvesting dates took more time, but as labor was cheap and plentiful, productivity was not as important as it was in Israel. If it were Americans picking California dates, I bet that they, too, would enjoy the high-tech enmities that Israeli farmers use.
Another technological advance that kibbutz used to save money was aerial pollination. It was quite simple in theory. An airplane flew over the date trees and dumped pollen all over the place. In two hours time, the whole orchard was pollinated and ready to grow next years dates. More traditional methods of date pollination involved blowing pollen onto each bunch of dates using an airgun. This method was extremely precise, but excruciatingly slow. If one considered the 2,800 trees of Kibbutz Arava's date orchard and multiplied that times 15 bunches per tree, one would come up with a figure of around 42,000 bunches of dates that needed attention. This equated to at least one months work for ten people. The rapidity of aerial spraying saved the kibbutz an immense amount of time and labor costs.'

(same source)
  • 0

#1246 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 03:08 AM

"We have the assurance here that all of our needs, not necessarily our wants, are taken care of. Such needs are housing, work, food, health care, education, and community activities. It's funny, but many Americans are so caught up in their agendas they don't even have these basic essentials."

Another one in the series about the kibbutz. Bear with me please.

I wonder how Americans are ready to deffend and die for something they don't even have a clue about, and, worse of all, something they can't even enjoy.:confused:

Never mind, it was an stupid question...;)

(If you can't read through the stupid marks, click on the link)

http://www.overlande...sis/dates.shtml

?Hey Michael, do you feel that the kibbutz of Israel offers the world an alternative to global capitalism?
  • 0

#1247 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 03:34 AM

"In a world that is becoming increasingly predetermined, I hold this idea of community and self power most sincerely, for it is that which has given humanity that motives to keep evolving."

"Evolve or Else," like the dinosaurs. We seem to be so preoccupied about the causes of their disaperance and yet so oblivious to own...:(

Oh another "deep thought"...;)

'Each adult member has a different story of why they came to live on kibbutz. However, most people are living on Kibbutz Arava for two reasons: *1.) to be able to work for themselves, and 2.) to be able to raise their children in a safe and comfortable environment*. In a world whose cities are increasingly becoming more polarized and violent, these basic wants/needs are synonymous with life on a kibbutz.

Internally, Kibbutz Arava functions rather communally and ecologically. There is a central dining room and commons area. Food that is eaten in the dining room arrives as bulk, wholesale crates, thus eliminating retail wastes such as packaging and plastic wrappers. The kibbutz is a pedestrian community. People are able to walk and ride their bikes to any kibbutz activity. In fact, there are only five leisure cars available for the 130 adult members. On kibbutz, people don't throw much away. When things break, they are fixed either by the garage, carpentry shop, or laundry. Things are not easily thrown away, as items are scarce. There are public commodities, such as a coffee and tea lounge, a pool, an entertainment area, a computer and fax room, a music studio, and a horse stable. By offering these enmities, the kibbutz eliminates the need for everyone to have their own T.V., computer, etc.

The central kibbutz office handles financial and bureaucratic needs: The mail is stamped, travel reservations are taken care of, and painful tax forms are filled inconspicuously, often unseen by most members. Even though the kibbutz does not pay individual members money, it spends about U.S. $20,000, annually, for each adult. Because the kibbutz collectively spends its money on all its members, its is able to create a quality of life much higher than that of a person earning $20,000 in America. On kibbutz, each member owns a house, enjoys a beautiful landscape, and lives comfortably knowing that nutritional, health, and child needs are all provided for.

Kibbutz Arava has recently allowed for moderate privatization, allowing members to accept monetary gifts from outside family members. Because of this, some members had plush living accommodations with futons, entertainment systems, and cars. Other members had only what the kibbutz gave them. To help those members that had no money to spend on luxury items, the kibbutz upgraded many of its community areas such as the members lounge and the computer room.

Work on kibbutz is unique. Unemployment is quite low, about 1%. Those who are unemployed usually choose to be unemployed. There are no set schedules, jobs often change, and work progresses quite informally. There are no time cards and no paychecks. Payment is received as the security of knowing that there will always be food, health care, child care, and public services available at all times. Because Kibbutz Arava functioned this way, it had a minimal outflow of wealth. The minimal monetary provisions awarded to members and volunteers is usually spent at the kibbutz store where one can buy sundry foods, drinks, and basic supplies.

Externally, Kibbutz Arava functioned like any other business. It produced products, marketed them, and sold them with the goal of making as much profit as possible. To an outside buyer, the kibbutzim operated like any other business.

My biggest problem with kibbutz life was the long working hours. I felt that people really needed two days off to have enough free time to pursue individual goals. Also, I felt that too much red meat was consumed. For the most part the food was good, but after several months, it became quite monotonous. For people with specialized diets, such those found in Santa Cruz, kibbutz life might be impossible. My final complaint about my kibbutz experience was the above mentioned use of pesticides. This is bad and needs changing.

The modern day kibbutz is not an organization out to promote social change for other people. It does promote social change, though on an internal level for those living within its framework. The kibbutz, contrary to my initial hopes and curiosities, does not offer the world an alternative to capitalism. What it can do, in one member's words, is "show a personalized model of an alternative community that exists on a small level." The kibbutz is a selective community where people have come to live, in order to avoid the "contaminants" and negative attributes of a capitalistic society. People living on Kibbutz Arava have come to create a better lifestyle, to form a community where people care and look after one another, and where public activities act as a central source of entertainment. The socialist mentality and mostly communal lifestyle is really what I feel constitutes social change here. "Everyone to his or her own needs."

If the kibbutzim of Israel, or for that matter, any community in the world, wants to survive, they must uphold certain basic conditions. Community amongst people is vital. Without community, people are separate and weak, prone to any such action that prevails. When people live and work in a community, they hold the power to control their destiny. In a world that is becoming increasingly predetermined, I hold this idea of community and self power most sincerely, for it is that which has given humanity that motives to keep evolving.'

http://www.overlande...nal_words.shtml
  • 0

#1248 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 03:56 AM

Well, you may enjoy this Forum where they discuss the subject. Don't overlook the posting entitled "Kibbuts for the World?" which is mine...;)

http://pub4.bravenet...m=309082756&cp=
  • 0

#1249 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 07:16 AM

Howdy DonQ,

The Kibbutz leaves me somewhat cold. I could have been reading about Fort Apache 1845 or Mao's China 1959.
The coop is a way of business. The Kubbutz is a militant way of life which most peoples would vote with their feet to avoid.
Some would call it segmented communism.
It also is a micro-centralised society where as communism is macro-centralised society.
The key things I would want to know further is where does the synergy go, what does the socialist state of Israel get out of it and what are the laws that they abide by.
Obviously if a group of people built up a good business they couldn't sell it nor take anything away when the leave.
I see merit in it in a post nuclear holocaust world to regather some form of society.
I would think the Amish community in the U.S. would have more privacy. There may be some similarities to a coop but I wouldn't enter a zebra in a horse race. (oops I hope they aren't faster)
If you recall early in the piece I didn't take very kindly to the
social quality called humanism. To me the kibbutz is what I see
as a model of a society based on the philosophy of humanism.
If its not ones cup of tea one could soon feel like an Indian on a reservation. One would rather live on a kibbutz anyday than a reservation, but the heart would bleed for another reality.
That's my honest opinion.
Could you sell this style of life to the Russians as a major? I expect that such could be formed in every nation by those inclined towards a communal life closer to the land and away from the rat race.
I don't deny it has its merits.
  • 0

#1250 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 07:49 PM

<The Kibbutz leaves me somewhat cold. I could have been reading about Fort Apache 1845 or Mao's China 1959.
The coop is a way of business. The Kubbutz is a militant way of life which most peoples would vote with their feet to avoid.
Some would call it segmented communism.
It also is a micro-centralised society where as communism is macro-centralised society.
The key things I would want to know further is where does the synergy go, what does the socialist state of Israel get out of it and what are the laws that they abide by.
Obviously if a group of people built up a good business they couldn't sell it nor take anything away when the leave.
I see merit in it in a post nuclear holocaust world to regather some form of society.
I would think the Amish community in the U.S. would have more privacy. There may be some similarities to a coop but I wouldn't enter a zebra in a horse race. (oops I hope they aren't faster)
If you recall early in the piece I didn't take very kindly to the
social quality called humanism. To me the kibbutz is what I see
as a model of a society based on the philosophy of humanism.
If its not ones cup of tea one could soon feel like an Indian on a reservation. One would rather live on a kibbutz anyday than a reservation, but the heart would bleed for another reality.
That's my honest opinion.
Could you sell this style of life to the Russians as a major? I expect that such could be formed in every nation by those inclined towards a communal life closer to the land and away from the rat race.
I don't deny it has its merits.>

Howdy Bader
This is what I originally proposed...

'A MIXED MODEL, that includes competition and cooperation, would create a healthy competition, and it would allow to satisfy the material and human needs of all. (In this way, the cooperative enterprises would be forced to become more efficient, while capitalist enterprises would be forced to become more humane; we would have much to learn from the Israeli kibbutz [non-profit cooperatives]; and from the industrial cooperatives of Mondragon, in the Basque Country [a "workers capitalism"].)'

http://webspawner.co...ers/donquijote1

In other words, COMPETITION between capitalist and noncapitalist enterprises would both fulfill the democratic dream and create a healthy competition between the two. You don't have to like the kibbutz, the real coop or the sweatshop, but you may like the fact that there are CHOICES, not like Conan coming to power but the real choice of working for a lion or not at all.

The kibbutz could particularly benefit those who having nothing--like those migrant workers--got everything to gain, not least the fact of getting rid of the lion and providing a decent lifestyle to their folks...

One thing I would start by doing--I assure you they won't be called "kibbutz" or practice Judaism at all--is shortening the workweek to 30 hrs. a week, and plenty of cultural activities--particularly dancing--for the little people.

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

#1251 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 08 October 2003 - 08:52 PM

Hi again Bader
Here's a piece of writing I could have written myself, but something for which--luckily--there's no need now. Notice the emphasis on 'what we agree on' rather than 'what we disagree on.'

Hello,

'I very much enjoyed reading your piece, "Economic Emancipation" at
http://www.radio4all...chy/proles.html

I am writing for two reasons (besides telling you I liked the piece).

One reason is that I would like to share with you some areas where I
draw different conclusions (mostly in terms of strategy). One problem
is that we all tend to get too much into disagreements on little
issues -- instead of focusing first on common ground -- and my own
contribution to a better dialogue is that I will start off,
as I usually attempt to, by listing the areas where we are in
agreement. Actually it's mostly on tactics (rather than analysis) that
I would like to offer some ideas..

The second reason is that I'm hoping you're interested in activism
with the "radically ambitious" aim of true economic emancipation (and
economic democracy) for everyone. I have been developing a multi-year
activist strategic vision, not completely different from your own
article, but I am really attempting to build up a holistic group of
articles-cum-strategic-vision pieces (not too many, maybe 4 or 5)
which together let us plan out a multi-year path towards achieving
economic democracy. Not enough think about "how to get from here to
there"

I see it this way:

Stage I: I see corrupt individuals and businesses

Stage II: I see Corporate Power as a problem
that must be fixed, and unless it's fixed,
we'll never fully address I.

Stage III: I see "the system" (or "Capitalism" or "Corporate
Capitalism") as the problem that must be fixed, and unless it's fixed,
we'll never fully address II.

Stage IV: Ok, I know what we're against, now what are we FOR?
"Participatory Economics" and various good Libertarian Socialist /
Anarchist writings have tried to address this.

Stave V -- where I see not enough of -- is a real
pragmatic-idealistic "how do we get from here to there". And we need
to aim to get there in, say, 10 years. We may not, but if we don't aim
for that, we'll fail; we shouldn't "aim for" 100 years from now...

More on that later. By the way, briefly about myself: I co-founded
the ACTIV-L mailing list in 1990 and the UseNet's first/biggest
(only?) moderated, general purpose progressive news and analysis
newsgroup, Misc.Activism.Progressive, founded March 1991. I wrote
"Electronic Activism" part I in 1992 and part II in 1993, which were
circulated around the net, translated, etc. I taught a course, twice, for Z
magazine Left Online University in 1994/1994 I think it was, including
the premier semester, on "Electronic Activism on the
Internet". Chomsky/Shalom, and Zinn, taught some of the other courses
that semester. Much was put on hold for two or so years for me to get
my doctorate finished...and now I have much less time, but no less
principles, than when I was a grad student rather than a university
prof.

In my now much more limited time, I've gravitated towards distilling
my work to where the greatest effect can be had, and thus towards
strategic planning and vision, as outlined above (and i more detail
below), as opposed to individual activism "areas" (though I do work in
those too; as an Israel-born Jewish person I find that speaking up for
Palestinian rights is an area I am "called upon" because it's one
where my voice might make a bigger difference; and Iraq and War on
Terrorism and Health and lots of other areas, but not in a systematic
way (not enough time) in those areas; the main focus is on item V in
the above I-II-III-IV-V.

About your piece. Where do we agree?

Certainly I agree we don't want a "Vanguardist approach" We also need
to "make it happen" for everyone. I would suggest at least three types
of reasons as to why: first, they deserve it as much as we do; second,
our own ability to have it for ourselves is at risk if the majority
continue to slave under the current system; and thirdly, not to be
overly ominous sounding, but the future of the earth increasingly
depends on the human race attaining a saner economic system.'

more...

http://www.economicd...ic-emancipation
  • 0

#1252 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 09 October 2003 - 08:10 AM

howdy DonQ,
yeah I liked that as well. True about the common ground but it takes time too as all things are related to other things and that is where those little things we disagree on come in. I think timing and balance come into it, the giving and taking, patience and maturity and emotions are usually not far away so we mustent
take ourselves too seriously. Last but least it takes a good match
that is the potential (compatability) is there to create.
If she has produced for Z mag she must be good. Have you seen it? zmag.org heaps of good articles.
I think they have global economics section by my notes, haven't been there for a long time.

re Kubbutz, we have discussed the options on that previously.
Has a place for a particular role and in some countries an
important role. When Pacific Islanders have moved to Aust and NZ from close family living in fairly simple village life and then exposed to western cities the future shock has been a cause of many problems. It would have been better for a transition stage
and a kibbutz type society in which technical-industrial as agricultual skills along with language and education re cultural change would have been ideal. That's only one model.
You are more oriented towards practical models I have been more macro re the big problem so we are more enclined to pull in different directions (focus) not against each other.
Both are needed of course.

Have a quote I know u will enjoy:

"The Jew and the Goy are like the wolf and the lamb; if you want the wolf to dwell with the lamb, please provide a fresh one every day."'
from Wolf,Lamb and Ouroboros,
Israel Sharmir, a rare Israeli voice of freedom.
His w-site is Israelsharmir.net
  • 0

#1253 MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 09 October 2003 - 02:05 PM

Hi donq, i know im very slow of this topic(animal farm), anyway, i just read it from the link you gave me. i must say it's a good read. a deliciously political fun read. i love the last part when all the pigs are walking on hind legs. it showed that we,human, are no differences with pig - greedy and lazy. it also tell of the characterisitics importance of the leader, of any group, in whichever manner communistic or "democratic". out of curiousity. what do you think if snowball became the "leader"?


in regards of the economic model, i'm in for it. that would be what im working towards to build. one thing i would like to bring up is : do you think that the standard of living around the world should be lower? what is your thoughts for this.


cheers
  • 0

#1254 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 October 2003 - 10:51 PM

"we absolutely need to
create worker-run alternative workplaces on a MASS scale
to the point where that seed has a spreading effect"

<yeah I liked that as well. True about the common ground but it takes time too as all things are related to other things and that is where those little things we disagree on come in. I think timing and balance come into it, the giving and taking, patience and maturity and emotions are usually not far away so we mustent
take ourselves too seriously. Last but least it takes a good match
that is the potential (compatability) is there to create.
If she has produced for Z mag she must be good. Have you seen it? zmag.org heaps of good articles.
I think they have global economics section by my notes, haven't been there for a long time.>

Howdy Bader
I'm glad you liked it. Actually the guy's proposal is eerily similar to mine; I'll post some more later. I'm aware of Zmag magazine and have read some good articles but I'm not a regular, now having no time.

The thing is, it's absolutely wonderful that we disagree and yet be able to find common ground, for we are not propositing a fit-all solution, but rather a real democracy both politically and economically.

By the way, you think it's a good idea to have a Ministry of Coops?

<You are more oriented towards practical models I have been more macro re the big problem so we are more enclined to pull in different directions (focus) not against each other.
Both are needed of course.>

It's good to build the future upon what we know though--rather quickly--then expand little by little (our only constant should be 'change'). People is afraid to take big risks, particularly when they have been betrayed so often. We know this much though: Cooperation works for some people, and this can expanded to fit all those who want it.

The kibbutz would be particularly good for places like Kerala, but I can see many idealist people from the West chipping in, at least as voluntaries, the way it is now.

<Have a quote I know u will enjoy:

"The Jew and the Goy are like the wolf and the lamb; if you want the wolf to dwell with the lamb, please provide a fresh one every day."'
from Wolf,Lamb and Ouroboros,
Israel Sharmir, a rare Israeli voice of freedom.
His w-site is Israelsharmir.net >

I see, so the lion doesn't mind sharing with the little animals as long as they provide a good lunch...;)

One point though: The lion can be of any nation, although isolationalism is a problem to reckon with.

And now back to the same article... (I'll throw a few comments in [...])

'I also agree we need tangible material gains (attained in the short
term -- you didn't state, but clearly intended this clarification).

Again more than one reason comes to mind: first, because the workers
deserve better conditions; second, they might be more open to
listening to ideas from "us" who helped them attain those gains; a
third reason is the potential to (sometimes) have a synergy where
small reforms lead to more power which leads to more reforms. For
example, if health care was a right, not only would workers benefit
directly in many ways; they would also have one less worry about
losing their job, and thus, a little bit less the employer could
threaten, and thus, a little more negotiating power vis a vis the
employer.

Yes, we need to involve the working class...

I also agree that the *lack of leisure time* [deja vu?] is a problem to work to
overcome. Again there are multiple things to be gained: the first two
or three reasons parallel the ones just listed. But also over-work
dulls the mind and leaves people too tired to be active in (or even
think about) a civic life.

It is concerning the demand for the *4 hour day* [I'd go for 6], that I would like to suggest
a few problematic issues, and to propose a solution.

On one level, my critique can be stated as follows (I'll elaborate
below): capitalism is not capable of delivering this.

One might ask: "ok, fine, let's push for the 4 hour day, and if
Capitalism is broken BEFORE (and on the way towards) us achieving the
4-hour-day, then GREAT! What's wrong with that?" What's wrong are
several things.

Briefly, a) it won't happen that way and B) independently of whether
you agree on a), if workers deserve and would benefit from what I'm
proposing to address a), then that, independently, is a desideratum,
ie worth getting, even if you don't agree fully with me that it's also
*necessary* to get, it's enough if we agree that it's worth getting,
so why not do it alongside the rest anyway?

Let's add a bit more detail to our picture.

There are a lot of anti-labor propaganda which
contain a grain of truth (Chomsky has suggested that *all*
propaganda, even the most vulgar, contain at least a thread of
truth). In particular, when they cry "we'll go out of business" it's
usually an exaggeration or a lie, BUT... But it remains true that
under the capitalist system their competitors WILL gain an advantage
over them if their competitor DOES move to Mexico to avoid the better
conditions (or "threat" of better conditions) here.

In fact it's much worse: the stock market will punish you not only for
doing the right thing if it takes away profits or reduces profits; it
will punish you even if it reduces the *rate of increase* of
profits. This is NO defense of capitalists; it is an accurate
statement which, when thought through for a second or two, merely
underlines the depth of the problems and inhuman madness inherent to
this system as exemplified in such perverse incentives for the
employers. It's in fact a critique of, not a defense of the economic
system to point this out -- but it's important to keep in mind.

And as you indicated yourself, it's that much worse when it's not just
workers in plants X and Y in the US, but workers in different
countries pitted against one another.

In any case, unless the movement is international, moving jobs from
state to state will be a weapon powerful enough to crush labor. I will
assume we agree on that point...and thus that the work ahead of us is
international in scope And surely, that solidarity, and more
specifically, communication and cooperation, among workers in
different states, is something that we should try to advance. (but we
need something much more specific than these words..)

..in labor strikes, boycotts, etc...

But that is too weak, is not enough by itself.

I am about to explain what my suggestion is.

Before I do, however, I would like us to agree on one thing. And that
is, regardless of how much of the above analysis you agree with, and
regardless of the extent to which you feel an "extra, additional
action" besides international worker solidarity in demanding better
conditions from employers -- let us agree that, if what I am about to
suggest is something which itself is a desideratum, that is, something
which is independently desirable, then one should work for it, even if
it's not fully clear, or fully convincing to everyone, whether, or the
extent to which, the *strategic value* of attaining it is

After all, regardless of the size of its strategic impact in the
struggles of workers versus employers, if it is itself a desideratum,
then it's worth fighting for independently of how much one is (or is
not) expecting it to also have a strategic impact helping attain
concessions from the bosses.

With that said, my claim is that *we absolutely need to
create worker-run alternative workplaces on a MASS scale
to the point where that seed has a spreading effect* [we need to build the water wells!],
highly leveraged, because now workers need corporations less, and the
corporations need to offer more, for the workers to want to work for them.

Remember: Managers' don't have to ACTUALLY move a plant to Mexico, to
lower wages; it's enough that there is a CREDIBLE THREAT that they
*could* do so (even if at a significant cost to the employer), to get
more concessions from workers.

The same dynamic could work for us. It's enough that there is a
credible threat of moving to the autonomous collective or even less
than that -- that there is a credible threat that unless employers
give us more, we will increase the number of such autonomous
collectives from 100 to 1,000...'

to be continued...
  • 0

#1255 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 October 2003 - 11:13 PM

> Just the very thoiight of kibbutz life or kolhoz life, leaves me cold,
> shaking and reaching out for my explosives belt!

Wait don't blow up yet! It ain't because of you but because you better
aim at those who force these migrant workers to work like this...;)

Harvest of Shame '99
As autumn begins to wind down, migrant workers pick the late-ripening
Fuji apples in the orchards of eastern Washington. By early November,
more than 150,000 workers will have ended their punishing annual tour
of the state's cherry, apricot, peach, and apple orchards. An
estimated 37,700 -- mostly from Mexico and Central America -- will
have lived outdoors with their children in the weeds and ditches and
desert wind, without cookstoves, running water, or toilets.

"So far we've been lucky," says Kevin Barry, environmental health
director of the Grant County Public Health Department. Even with
hundreds camped on the banks of the Columbia River, drinking the river
water and bathing in it, he says, "we haven't seen an outbreak of
cholera or hepatitis."

These deplorable living conditions are the norm in the great fruit
basket east of the Cascades. But this year the housing issue pitted
state and federal agencies against each other in a struggle that left
growers angry, regulators looking confused, and workers again sleeping
on the ground.

Growers are not required to provide housing for workers, but if they
do, it must meet standards set by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA). These standards, enforced by the state, call
for houses or military-style tents with seven-foot-high walls and
solid floors, running water, enclosed areas for cooking and eating,
and electric refrigeration and lighting. But the state health
department has been licensing camps since 1995 that fall below these
standards.

The regulatory situation fell apart last summer. Nearly half of
Washington's 16,000 migrant cherry pickers were left homeless while
state and federal agencies argued over the acceptability of
state-licensed camps where workers furnished their own tents and
growers provided drinking water, showers, and toilets.

"We were trying to get something going," says Rich Nafziger, who
advises Gov. Gary Locke on farmworker issues. "Nobody was doing
anything. These don't meet federal codes, but they're better than
sleeping in the weeds."

The United Farm Workers of America (UFW) assailed the state-licensed
camps, accusing Gov. Locke of scheming to weaken the federal rules to
please growers who want workers to live nearby but don't want to
provide suitable housing. "Once those rules were established, they
weren't going to change," says Erik Noel Nelsen, a UFW researcher. "We
couldn't allow it. These are the most exploited workers in the U.S.
and they deserve protection."

The union complained to OSHA, and the agency told the state it would
no longer tolerate its licensing of substandard camps.

"It's the most asinine thing I've ever seen," says apple and cherry
grower Les Dorsing of Royal City. Dorsing spent $125,000 to provide a
state- licensed camp with a shower house, flush toilets, laundry
facilities, picnic tables, ice chests, and outdoor fire grates for 190
workers. But federal regulators wouldn't let them stay there.

"At six o'clock they had to leave the orchard and go into the
sagebrush to sleep," Dorsing says. "But the feds say it's better to do
that than to let them bring their own tents."

Not true, says John Spear, assistant regional administrator for OSHA.
"The feds have never said it's better to sleep in the sagebrush. It's
incumbent on the employer to provide housing under the standards in
force."

The UFW's Nelsen argues that the only real solution is for growers to
pay workers a living wage, so they can rent decent housing. "They
could double the [apple] pickers' wages and you'd pay one more penny a
pound. Not a big deal."

Also not likely to happen.

http://www.motherjon...nt.html#harvest

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

#1256 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 09 October 2003 - 11:27 PM

Hi donq, i know im very slow of this topic(animal farm), anyway, i just read it from the link you gave me. i must say it's a good read. a deliciously political fun read. i love the last part when all the pigs are walking on hind legs. it showed that we,human, are no differences with pig - greedy and lazy. it also tell of the characterisitics importance of the leader, of any group, in whichever manner communistic or "democratic". out of curiousity. what do you think if snowball became the "leader"?


in regards of the economic model, i'm in for it. that would be what im working towards to build. one thing i would like to bring up is : do you think that the standard of living around the world should be lower? what is your thoughts for this. >

Howdy Marquis, I knew you were up to something good.

Let me look back at what I said before...

'It's so clear that Orwell did reject both Marxism (the pigs) and Capitalism (the farmer), that it hardly needs to be bothered about. Nevertheless we can learn from the enemy, I mean the lion...'

<This is not true. The pigs (revolutionary elite) undermined Animalism (Marxism), this was the problem. George Orwell novell can perhaps be better understood with understanding George Orwell. George Orwell was Communist. In Spain he was among Trotskist (POUM), fighting Fascists. He was very close to the Stalnist aggression, were "Napoleons dogs" killed several of his POUM comrades and Andreas Nin, a leading member of POUM, was skinned alive(!). Luckily, George Orwell escaped this aggression, and also survived a bullet which passed through his throat and out his neck, shot by a fascist-sniper at the front in Spain. I think "Snowball" (Trotsky) is more the person George Orwell see as defender of Animalism (Communism).>

"If I had understood the situation a bit better I should probably have joined the anarchists". (Extract letter, October 1937 written by George Orwell to his friend Jack Common).

'Orwell was an *anarchist*. Just read his work and you'll see him rejecting hierarchy over and over (Big Brother). That's his legacy: NO LION NO PROBLEM!'

http://engforum.prav...ball#post266723

Now, a good question (and I think is good since for once my wife guessed what I meant) is: Who you think should have led the Revolution?

Clue...

http://www.k-1.com/O...ries/animf.html
  • 0

#1257 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 October 2003 - 12:07 AM

<Ideological paradigm amounts to the thoughts and attitudes of a people. And when those things change, the government, being a natural extension of the peoples' wishes (if said people are proactive, and we assume that by being idealistic in the first place, meaning we can fix it) will change appropriately. Changing the government is not even needed as a goal.

And I guess if you could show me that government needs to change in order to change societal beliefs, you'd negate that logic totally.

However, take for example the change from a superstitious to a scientific society. Before Newton (his life is a good point for the rise of science), most of Europe had monarchies. After Newton, and the rise of materialism, most of Europe still had monarchies.

Lets go back to an even more basic revolution. Ape-men before tools had a tribal orginization with a basic leader or silverback, and a troupe. After tools were invented, the troupe structure remained the same.

Gimmie some more time and I'm sure I could come up with more examples.

All that doesn't mean that certain government structures aren't better suited for a certain paradigm. Democracy for example, goes great with humanism. Although a benevolent dictatorship would work as well. Perhaps, this is where we have a misunderstanding? I'm taking your idea the wrong way, that the government has to change first, and all you mean to say is that your governmental system will work best within your humanistic paradigm?

Could, mayhaps, our whole argument stem from a miscommunication?>

Hi
I don't think it was miscommunication but rather who was first the egg or the chicken. I think the lion makes the little animals behave in a certain way helped by other animals in the upper end of the food chain, ie. the media, etc--it ain't by chance they benefit from it. An example of top-down decision was the war on Iraq. I think few sane people would have thought of invading that country acting on suspision. It was rather imposed with little democratic debate, and now...look at the mess we are in. Likewise the threat of ecological catastrophe is not under discussion. Like I heard today in NPR radio, it's not an issue for Wall Street and New York politicians. And no discussion, no issue, no problem--of course until it becomes too late. The classical response of the Ostrich. That's why I think we are doomed from above. However the little animals ain't totally free of guilt, as they are indifferent to the lion eating another little animal, some even hoping that it'll keep the lion satisfied for a while...:confused:

I assert though that in a real democracy would be harder for the lion to convince the little animals to go and fight another lion. The lion--Big Brother or whatever name--simply would be obsolete. No Lion No Problem!;)
  • 0

#1258 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 October 2003 - 12:29 AM

//Not too little not too much. I'll explain, in the former USSR was too little, now it's too much... //

<Supposition or if is there any proof why not put some light-. But one might be right , Putin follows the Bush path; Russia Does Not Dismiss the Use Nuclear Weapons in Preventive Strike http://english.pravd...1033_putin.html ha, ha, ha.>

It may have been too little since some stupid rock-and-roll made the mighty Soviet Union crumble. I would even have sent the Russian folk to experience the American ghetto. Of course they themselves suffered from scarcity and lack of hope...

<I love today one statement for its unintended humor;

//The Kubbutz is a militant way of life which most peoples would vote with their feet to avoid.
Some would call it segmented communism;
To me the kibbutz is what I see
as a model of a society based on the philosophy of humanism//(Bader)

I think that Kubbutz is perfect model for fire ants society. Ants fulfill condition ;- built up a good business they couldn't sell it nor take anything away when the leave. ?
I don-t know when Kubbutz model was created maybe the Kubbuts condition is responsible that Jews are consider as a nomads. Or maybe because Jew were nomads they creates the Kubbutz model. Kubbutz members don-t like to build what they couldn't sell it nor take anything away when the leave.
I don-t think that model of "Russians nomads" would apply favorable to Russian or any Slavic society. Thanks God, poppy crops changed us in farmers and metalsmiths. >

Had the Soviet Union implemented real coops--and not some Party-run kolkhoz--they would have both fed the people properly and would have beaten the hell out of the competition, stupid rock and all...;)
  • 0

#1259 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 10 October 2003 - 12:54 AM

This a very interesting article on Transnationals in Africa. There's a mention to the late agronomist Rene Dumont who proposed coops too (I'm tring to get more info)...

"We advocate democracy, which is a system to elect representatives of the people to make decisions designed to assist the country and its citizens both today, and in the future. Then increasingly power to make many decisions is handed to the CEOs and officials of TNCs not elected by the people, and who act in the interests of shareholders and profit, not in the interests of citizens, especially poor citizens, and who take actions that usually ignore long term consequences, and certainly ignore adverse effects on the environment."

http://www.toda.org/...am_beaudry.html
  • 0

#1260 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 10 October 2003 - 06:32 AM

Should there be a minister of coops?

Depends on the importance/extent of its development, but not likely initially, I would expect. Would probabaly go to the deputy Minister of Industry.
If Kibbutzim were common then I would expect a Junior Minister
associated perhaps with a Minister for regional development.
I would expect that this office for a junior would be seen as an
inside track to greater things given that it would cut across
a number of portfolios- transport, agriculture, industry, health,
housing, education, social policy and maybe others.
I accept there are a number of potentialities with these, my first
and fundamental non-acceptance is as a model for society (or a significant part), as in NATION. Given the thread title addresses a nation as a whole not segments. But now I have turned a corner in regards understanding your focus, I am quite happy to discuss these further.
However given the title of the thread I see little point in hyperthetics that dont apply to Russia.
I understand that the greater part of Russia's economy is still in the public sector (state owned).
The kibbutzim may provide a good model to adopt as a transition
from public sector to private sector coops and self-employment
with the goal of economic democracy. It may only be suitable for
isolated and rural based regions. The purpose to re-educate
and train to become joint owners of coop businesses.
In cities and industrial areas state enterprises could become
private worker owned by more direct means.
The re-education and training in all cases could also include what govt/academia/media every where else keep from the public like the truth about money.

One model which could be adapted almost anywhere in the world
is where one lives and works and gets higher/specialist/technical
education. The living on the job/at college is cheap, the work pays for the education and life and work skills are picked up along the way and then one graduates debt-free with work experience as well as a degree. Obviously takes longer but the
model could take in marriages. Add research potential (for the
private sector) and one could spend quite some time.
Given the broader and longer time factor a variety of small
"enterprises" could sporn there eg publishing, retail, design, media, professional sport, arts and so on and probably could become a self-contained city.
Such "cities" could be run on democratic financing (internal
money) , not debt and no taxes, as a learning model.
No capitalists, everyone is a winners, some win more then others as they are more specialist or inovative, not by exploiting.

Nice to see you back Marquis DS
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru