[MD] Protestant Capitalism

[MarshaV]

At 03:40 PM 5/19/2009, you wrote:
>Marsha:
>Just like the subject and object are mutually created, so are the
>individual and collective.  It's an old-world struggle for old-world
>men.  Blah, blah, blah...  Platt creates an Arlo, Arlo creates a
>Platt, and both fight dirty.  Blah, blah, balh...  Both the
>Conservatives and Liberals in Gov't have lost their virtue.   Blah,
>blah, blah...  Instead of polarity how about seeing
>interconnectedness; how about discovering something new.  That's N-E-W.
>
>[Krimel]
>Do tell?
>By all means, lead the way, your excellence...

:Marsha:
You almost had your hooks in me didn't you dear
You nearly had me roped and tied
Altar, bound, hypnotized
Sweet freedom whispered in my ear
You're a butterfly
And butterflies are free to fly
Fly away, high away, bye bye






>______________________________________________________________________
>
> >Marsha to Ron:
> >I was wondering if you think, like I do, that Arlo, Platt and Krimel
> >are enmeshed in a subject/object discussion that can only conclude in
> >conflict?   Blah, blah, blah...  Where is their interconnectedness
> >acknowledged?  Where is their relatedness accepted?  Does anybody see
> >issues as ever-changing patterns?  And talk about egos?
> >
> >[Krimel]
> >It sounds to me like you don't know what the debate is really about then.
>In
> >terms of political debate it shows the contrast between the two streams of
> >world politics that dominated the past century. It is about the tension
> >between the individual and society. It is the struggle between order and
> >chaos.
> >
> >Its structure is polar. Platt has staked out a position on the extreme
> >right. It is Randian. In my view it is a position so extremely
> >individualistic that the libertarians are wary of it. It is Reaganism.
> >
> >I don't think either Arlo or I really advocate communism or any form of
> >absolute accumulation of power. But both us wind up voicing extreme
> >positions on occasion to highlight the contrast between the poles.
> >
> >But just the way the argument is structured is relevant. Polar opposites
> >colliding. Bouncing into nooks and crannies of current events and
>historical
> >minutia. The dynamic tension of between the individual and the collective
> >stretched out in time, shattering into fractals of infinite detail. It is
>me
> >against y'all. Us against them. Or it can be: me and you, a team, a
> >marriage, a family, a nation. Cooperation versus conflict.
> >
> >It is an essential distinction between western individualist thinking and
> >eastern collective understanding. It affects everything from how we
>allocate
> >private and public property to how we raise our children.
> >
> >I am sorry if the quality of the argument is not up to your standards. But
>I
> >hope it illustrates to any discerning reader that Platt's position was
> >justifiably and soundly rejected in the last election. When the pendulum
> >swings just a bit more, Platt and his neocon ilk will be back to the fringe
> >where they belong.
> >
> >In the mean time you could try to actually be the voice of reason or hold
> >your breath, close your eyes and walk on.
> >
>
>
>
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/


.
_____________

The self is a thought-flow of ever-changing, interrelated and 
interconnected, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual, 
static patterns of value responding to Dynamic Quality.

.
.