>Joe R. Golowka wrote:
>
> > > In fact, I'd fight _against_ it; I think it would be far worse than
> >> what we have now. And I'm a socialist: if you can't persuade me, your
> >> arguments will be lost on a skeptic.
> >
> >This is a perfect example of what the concept of a coordinator class can
>help explain. You and most other members of the coordinator class would
>not support such a thing since it goes against your class interests.
>Market Socialism and centralized planning are both basically coordinator
>class visions of socialism.
This is a really stupid ad hominem, classic vulgar Marxist reducdtionism in anarchsit guise. I could say as well that I believe that your views represent petty bourgeois idealism. They we're equal. But neither of us knows whether the views urged by the other (or our own) are true or justified.
>
>I don't think this is actually true. As near as I can tell, his opposition
>is based on his notion of human nature. Justin believes that people will
>behave unsocially unless they are subject to stern authority. Which has an
>element of truth to it of course. Where I differ is that I believe this is
>not innate human nature, but adaption to circumstances.
I do not believe in an "innate human nature" that is manifested the same say in all times and places regardless of circumstances. It is because I think that human nature reflects a response to circumstancxes that I hold the views I do. I think the incentive structures of a nonmarket socialism of the sort you advocate will tend to produce systematic shirking, stifle innovation, and lead to generalized poverty. I am not going to argue for this here. I havedone so extensively in this list and you can look it up in the archives. I am only making the point taht you have misconstrued the nature of my objection. I do not think the statement "people are geedy and lazy, period" has any meaning. I think that your proposals would create a society that would make them greedy and lazy. I simply want to be clear about my conception of human nature. It is not what you attribute to me.
I also reject the "stern" authority as a description of my own proposal. As far as democracy goes, I am not sure that there is any real difference between the kind of uathority that I urge and that you urge.
>I am assuming that co-operation is natural human nature, and that it is
>only the fact of a society which constantly rewards unnatural behaviour
>which has created what Justin sees as the normal and natural behaviour.
You, however, do believe an an unchanging human nature. I agree that cooperation is normal and natural. The right set of incentives can encourage it. Thedifference bewteen us is not this, but over what the right social structure to create that set of incentives is.
>
>I can't see how it goes against his objective class interests. Even
>supposing that he enjoyed real power over other people,
Which I do not have and would not want.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com