[FoRK] Re: An armed society... (freakin' Canada.)

Lion Kimbro <lionkimbro at gmail.com> on Mon Sep 17 13:55:10 PDT 2007

On 9/17/07, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2007, at 1:45 PM, Lion Kimbro wrote:
> >   Sympathizing with Ian, (wealth distribution IS a problem,
> >   in my book,)
> I agree, but OTOH any non-consensual forms of wealth RE-distribution
> are MUCH bigger problems...

  I agree with this.  We're not hearing any specific cases and situations
  being spoken here, and we all know how the Russian communist
  "experiment" went, so all things being equal, I agree.

  "Consensual" is one of my favorite words here.  I have seen people
  with more share with people with less, by their own earnest consent.
  "Giving."


> But let's kill one bad meme in its tracks:  greed is a *positive*
> force, not a negative one, in the sense that self-interest in
> individuals it is a constructive urge.  It's important to distinguish
> that constructive urge (wanting something --- money, chicks, a giant
> CPU farm, world peace, whatever) from the destructive urge of *not
> wanting somebody else to have something.*  We loosely use the term
> "greed" to mean both things;  in fact, they are distinct.

  I agree with this as well;

  "Needs" and "wants" are things that I can applaud,
  and all those that you listed--

  * ...money,
  * chicks,
  * a giant CPU farm,
  * and world peace, ...

  ... (all of which, incidentally, I share, ...)

  ...those are all valuable in themselves,
  as far as I can tell, as dreams and desires.

  People work for dreams and desires that they themselves
  have and hold;  Not for some abstract "State" that they
  can't see, and promises to "be really nice," and give them
  what they need.


  I share the rejection of the destructive desire-- not
  wanting somebody else to have something.
  (Well, putting consensual D/s S/M play to the side for the
   moment, which can be enormously constructive.
   I imagine Jeff Bone agrees.)


  I think that the current way we're operating as a people,
  though, really discounts a lot of "wants" and "needs,"
  though.

  For example, I can't imagine anyone picking up the
  menu, and ordering the kind of society we have right
  now, off of the alternatives.  ("Are there alternatives?")

  Most people, I don't think, would choose to purchace a
  racist, divided, suspicious society, where people hold
  their wealth over other people (NON-consensual BDSM,
  if you will,) over a society where people of different
  nationalities worked and talked with each other, worked
  according to interest and ability and dream, where we
  weren't so paranoid of every last thing, where we worked
  generously and shared for the health of the environment,
  where people felt heard and seen, and so on.

  Our society is really optimized for buying take-out,
  cheap computers (YES!), and watching TV at home
  (which, thank god, is finally changing, with the Internet!),
  and really leaving the governing and the department
  of "corrections" (read: measured administration of revenge)
  to authorities.

  I read something recently, that spoke of government
  as an "addiction."  I thought, "that's crazy, what could
  that mean?  They want to be anarchists or something?"
  And what they meant was--  the perpetual delegation
  of government.

  As in, the attitude of:  "Well, I cant want to be bothered
  to vote, to serve on a jury," and so on.  Delegate it,
  delegate it, delegate it away.


  Ah, ...

  Well, excuse me;
  My thoughts are in hyperdrive today.

  So, "wants and needs" -- yes.  "Greed."

  Wanting a better environment, wanting to grow the
  health of our individual freedoms and our society,
  ...

  ...so many wonderful things to want, to need.

More information about the FoRK mailing list