>>Make the same allowances like walking down the
>>street.
Todd wrote:
>Oh yes. I do.
>
>For now.
>
>Didn't someone famous once say something about critique
>of everything, hmmmm, my sweety Ken? <batting innocent
>eyelashes>
(Grin.) Yes, someone famous did say that.
But he didn't say to make "critique of everything" right in the face of everyone/anyone near by.
We still keep to the rules of social engagement, not division. (Marxists are, currently, a small crowd of anti-social personalities, who get some personal reward outta being isolated; it also feeds feelings of depression, perpetuating the actual feeling. They _ain't_ social.)
My fave story about Karl was of his first attendance of the IWMA (or IWA). The reports are that he said nothing. He just sat and listened.
Imagine that? Sitting and listening to other people. Figuring out what they are on about. What worries them. Then becoming important in their lives because you can actually address their concerns. As opposed to, oh, spouting "vanguard" theory at them like gospel. Exhorting them to adhere to your "vision."
Ken.
-- I am quite convinced that you'll never get a fair distribution of goods, or a satisfactory organisation of human life, until you abolish private property altogether. So long as it exists, the vast majority of the human race... will inevitably go on labouring under a burden of poverty, hardship and worry. I don't say that the burden can't be reduced, but you'll never take it right off their shoulders. You might, of course, set a statutory limit to the amount of money or land that any one person is allowed to possess.... You might make it illegal to buy, or even to apply for public appointment... laws of that type would certainly relieve the symptoms, just as a chronic invalid gets some benefit from constant medical attention. But there's no hope of a cure, so long as private property continues.
-- Sir Thomas More, 1516
"Utopia"