[lbo-talk] To each according to work

Bill Bartlett billbartlett at aapt.net.au
Sun Apr 20 04:39:30 PDT 2008


At 12:56 AM -0700 20/4/08, andie nachgeborenen wrote:


>OK, I've only been thinking about this for 32 years, but I don't get
>it. Maybe you're a dogmatic idiot. Or maybe we disagree. You believe
>in magic. I don't. We both want a better sort of society that counts
>as an advance on what we have. We differ on what would count as an
>advance and what;'s necessary and possible. We also differ on what's
>desirable. I think -- bear in my mind that I am writing from
>America, land of the free -- that modest extension of social
>democracy would be an advance. I certainly think that abolition of
>private property would be an advance. For reasons we've talked to
>death I do not think the elimination of authority, law, bureaucracy,
>government, and democratic enforcement of democratically accepted
>rules (coercion) would be either desirable or possible. You think
>any a society with such institutions would be a slave society ruled
>by a corrupt class of exploiting masters. I think you don't know a
>good thing when you see it, that
> your all-or-nothing philosophy shows that you don't get it, and
>that it's silly and counterproductive. We have been over this
>before. I don't think our discussion is very productive because we
>keep repeat ring the same points. You use invective and persuasive
>definitions, talk about how nice things would be if only, warn
>darkly about risks I am willing to accept and see no way to avoid.
>I'm not sure there is anything more to say. But do me a favor of not
>assuming that I'm a fool. I've been around the block. I just see
>things differently than you do.

Don't take it personally mate. If its any comfort, it seems likely you are smarter than me. Certainly more knowledgeable than me. We've just been around different blocks, that's all. Don't let the way I approach an argument and put together a sentence fool you into believing I disrespect you. That isn't so either.

I admit, I may exaggerate a tad. That's the art of rhetoric, as you ought to know. Being something of a classical scholar. Exaggeration is a way of highlighting an interesting point. All art forms use it and all good artists employ the technique. Naturally, that includes bullshit artists. Like me and you. You're doing it now, so am I, doesn't imply any disrespect for each other.

Anyhow, stop trying to change the subject.

Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list