Michael Dawson writes:
> Choice can lead to errors, and, sometimes, it sucks to have too many options. Ditto for democracy. . . These points, however, are footnotes.
Footnotes? With respect, I disagree. While I have no problem with choice, it is the escalating craving for greater variety that is part of the problem. Because our culture enshrines the individual as the be-all and end-all of existence, embracing and desiring variety has come to be seen as emblematic of the vitality of the individual and individualism. Any diminishment in variety is interpreted as an attack on individualism. And shoring up notions of individualism is crucial to keeping capitalism going.
> The main point is that choice is one-half of what's miraculous and precious about human beings (the other half being our capacity for altruism).
While it is for the best that we accept the fact that human beings can make choices (assuming the oposite does not seem to lead to any benefit), what is vital is how we understand choice and how we exercise choice in a moral fashion. The ability of choice in and of itself is neutral -- it can lead to either good or bad.
As for altruism, I prefer to think of human beings possessing a capacity for compassion. The concept of altrusim demands the concepts of individual and other, both of which are problematic
> The mere existence of choice and democracy, as all of us here know all too well, does not guarantee they will be used toward the best, most rational ends. But reaching the best, most rational ends is literally impossible
without maximum societal facilitation and encouragement of choices and democratic processes.
Choice must always be emphasized, but it seems (to me at least) you are conflating the concept of choice with variety. A demand for variety often leads to the creation of false and immoral choices. The production of such choices does nothing but degrade a society.
> Now, it's humanity's challenge to comprehend how capitalism actually fails to live up to its own claims in this essential area, and then to move toward a social system that transcends capital's disguised dictatorial command over our options in life.
Hasn't capitalism always deified the individual? What claims are you referring to when you say that capitalism has failed to live up to its own claims?
> Stop trashing choice! There couldn't be a worse recipe for disaster, and the left can't sustain any more disasters. We're one or two more away from oblivion.
The real disaster is the continued fetishization of the individual and the cancer of individualism (hedonists and slaves to personal desire will disagree LOL). Once the interdependence of reality is comprehended, then the illusion of self falls away and real progress can begin to be made (see Nargarjuna The Fundamental Wisodm of the Middle Way).
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister