Collective Humanism
Posted: 17 September 2009 04:04 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20

This is a descriptor, really, of Humanism being a collective philosophy of our species, however dormant or unrealized. (As I helped contribute to Wikipedia, any comments appreciated) -D

COLLECTIVE HUMANISM

Humanism is increasingly coming to designate a sensibility for our species, planet and lives as a collective philosophy. While retaining the definition of the IHEU with regard to the life stance of the individual, collective Humanism utilizes a numerical modifier to distinguish itself as a broadening awareness within homo sapiens of our powers and obligations.

It is distinctive in that it presumes an advocacy role for Humanism towards species governance and this proactive stance is charged with a commensurate responsibility compared to individual Humanism. It identifies pollution, militarism, nationalism, sexism, poverty and corruption as being persistent and addressable human character issues incompatible with the interests of our species.

Collective Humanism asserts that species governance must be centralized within a world government and is inclusionary, in that it does not exclude any Human from its membership by reason of their collateral beliefs or possible religion alone. As such it can be said to be an envelope for variants of Humanism that address particular viewpoints,carrying forward a “human community” superset of ethics that complement the personal tenets of individuals.

 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 October 2009 12:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22

Martinus:

Humanism is increasingly coming to designate a sensibility for our species, planet and lives as a collective philosophy

Possibly,  but most humanists I meet are hardly more than the modern version of the village athiest.

Collective Humanism asserts that species governance must be centralized within a world government

Not any time soon I hope, humanity is not ready for it. 

However in “The Breaking of Nations” by Robert Cooper a senior Brittish diplomat there is a discussion of steps being taken in this direction.  He defines this movement as the post-modern state.  If you are active in this field you may find this short book (172pgs) useful.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 October 2009 02:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20
garythehuman - 02 October 2009 12:53 PM

Martinus:

Humanism is increasingly coming to designate a sensibility for our species, planet and lives as a collective philosophy

Possibly,  but most humanists I meet are hardly more than the modern version of the village athiest.

That is the central problem of Humanism, it has been hijacked by social climbing atheists and overwritten by their activities.

Collective Humanism asserts that species governance must be centralized within a world government

Not any time soon I hope, humanity is not ready for it. 

Rather a glib comment - can you outline why? Reluctance to surrender US hegemony?

However in “The Breaking of Nations” by Robert Cooper a senior Brittish diplomat there is a discussion of steps being taken in this direction.  He defines this movement as the post-modern state.  If you are active in this field you may find this short book (172pgs) useful.

I’m no Jacques Derrida, but that’s a fair categorization. In the organization of species, you could expect to see the beginnings in tribes and its culmination in the UN. We need to eliminate the poverty brought about by wasting resources on militarism and corruption.

From foreignaffairs.com “Cooper is most interesting in his explorations of how the West should cope with the encroachment of premodern violence. The American approach to such threats is hegemonic—to control, through military force if necessary, the foreign policies of threatening states. The European community, meanwhile, aims to expand outward to absorb threatening societies on its periphery. In Cooper’s view, neither approach is sustainable, and he seeks a synthesis that would allow the United States and Europe to confront threats together over the long haul. “

This reminds me of Tony Blair toadying up to Bush, carried on as twin-pillar imperialism. Expanding the European Union around the globe is not just more reasonable, it’s much more likely.

[ Edited: 02 October 2009 03:01 PM by Martinus ]
 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 October 2009 04:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22

Martinus:

Rather a glib comment - can you outline why? Reluctance to surrender US hegemony

?


The US ‘s tenuous hegemony is not the only the problem.  How long do you think before China Pakistan, Viet Nam and India will comboime to form a commom gov’t.  Hpw about Isreal and Palestien, Iraq, Iran & Russia.  Much of Africa still haven’t accepted the boundries Europeans have drawn for them.  If a world government comes it is still many generations(and many wars) away. Europe counldn’t come up with the Common Market and then the European Union until after 500 years of near genocidal wars, and a shift in the global centers of power.  And Europe is the only part of the world that is attempting this fusion voluntarily.

The most we can hope for in the immediate future is a minimal amount of cooperation on problems we all recognize as affecting the entire world.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 October 2009 06:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20
garythehuman - 03 October 2009 04:32 PM

Martinus:

Rather a glib comment - can you outline why? Reluctance to surrender US hegemony

?


The US ‘s tenuous hegemony is not the only the problem.  How long do you think before China Pakistan, Viet Nam and India will combime to form a commom gov’t.  Hpw about Isreal and Palestien, Iraq, Iran & Russia.  Much of Africa still haven’t accepted the boundries Europeans have drawn for them.  If a world government comes it is still many generations(and many wars) away. Europe counldn’t come up with the Common Market and then the European Union until after 500 years of near genocidal wars, and a shift in the global centers of power.  And Europe is the only part of the world that is attempting this fusion voluntarily.

The most we can hope for in the immediate future is a minimal amount of cooperation on problems we all recognize as affecting the entire world.

Perhaps you are being pessimistic - the Irish just ratified the Lisbon Treaty that in effect allows the EU to act as one country. “How long do you think before China Pakistan, Viet Nam and India will comboime to form a commom gov’t.” ? to counterbalance this, or simply join it.

The advantage to member nations is that they will be able to discard their military budgets and dependencies - a huge advantage over those that do not.

From there the rule of law will spread across the globe as quickly as John Peel’s London police force did - we all accept police now. And those countries, Russia and Japan included, respect authority and stability and don’t see the world through Rush Limbaugh’s glasses, not that you do. People will value their aged parents being taken care of over aircraft carriers. The trade agreements alone will proscribe warfare.

It’s all good, in truth, the times they are a changin’.

[ Edited: 03 October 2009 06:12 PM by Martinus ]
 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 07:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1777
Joined  2007-10-22

Dwight:

This is getting to be an interesting discussion.

“Rather a glib comment - can you outline why? Reluctance to surrender US hegemony

Giving up the US rather limited hegemony is not the point.  But rather is the question world ready for a single governing body?

“Perhaps you are being pessimistic - the Irish just ratified the Lisbon Treaty that in effect allows the EU to act as one country. “How long do you think before China Pakistan, Viet Nam and India will combine to form a common gov’t.” ?”

I think I am being realistic.  These countries will not come together for any reason in the foreseeable future.  The basic reason that the US recognized India’s “right” to develop a nuclear arsenal in contravention of current treaties, and knowing that this will cause our “ally” Pakistan to attempt to counter balance India by upgrading their nuclear arsenal, is that it sees India as a counter balancing power to China.  Viet Nam and China have a long history of conflict.  The tensions between, and histories of these countries work against them becoming united for any purpose.

As for the Irish vote to join the EU.  How long did that take?  And what “guarantees did the EU have to give to the Irish.  Also how much of a role did the Irish need for the EU’s economic strength after their banking collapse affect the vote.

The advantage to member nations is that they will be able to discard their military budgets and dependencies - a huge advantage over those that do not

  Ever hear of Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex speech?  Think you are going to have some opposition there?  Also in many parts of the world the ruling elites power base is the military itself, do you think they are going to give that up voluntarily?  Hell, I live in a county that has one of the highest numbers of politicians per population in the US.  If you would like to do a case study on the difficulties of reducing these numbers and rearranging the way political power is distributed even in a democracy, Erie County NY would be a good place to start.
  Another point, as long as non participating nations and areas do not give up their military the proposed world government will have to maintain its own military, so looking to this area for cost savings is not realistic.

From there the rule of law will spread across the globe as quickly as John Peel’s London police force did - we all accept police now

.”

Many people only accept the “rule of law” when it benefits them.  As Benazir observed “ In America, elected people walkout the door and make tens of millions with Halliburton or dealing with the Saudis for some investment bank.  . . . Here,{Pakistan}they take a cut of the money on its first pass through official hands.”  In fact many organizations prosper directly because they carry on illegal activities ie. the drug trade, the smuggling of humans at many borders.  And a major question is whose police? I hope you don’t have much invested in the companies currently engaged in developing Russia’s energy industry.

don’t see the world through Rush Limbaugh’s glasses, not that you do

.”

    That I don’t, I try to find out a little bit about what is going on before I open my mouth,  but then I don’t make my living producing political propaganda.  Joking aside, I understand something about where Limbaugh’s base is coming from.  Prior to WWII and the Cold War, the interior areas of the US, that is the areas of the country between the Appalachians and the Rockies, have a long tradition of isolationalism.  With the end of the cold war this area is at least partially reverting back to these ideas ( With the possible exception of the parts of this area that are economically dependent on the military bases Roosevelt put in these areas to combat this isolationist tendency.

  Actually,  a major part of my objection to pushing for World Government at this point is that allows the Limbaugh’s of the world to panic people with a threat to their identity that is not happening.  I think our energies would be better spent developing various procedures to deal with the current problems that can only resolved by a broad and even world wide actions.  “Every modern state is an imagined community, since a state is to large and complex to be experienced directly . . .  European states have always had to shape their citizens political imagination with whatever cultural symbols and historical memories were available.”  Pg. 6 Where have All the Soldiers Gone.  James J Sheehan Through common experience gained through these practical actions future generations may decide that a world-wide government is what is needed, but in today’s world I do not see it as a realistic or even a productive goal. 
  I am assuming that your conception is for some type of basically democratic government, however the majority of the people of the world do not even have a democratic local government, let alone a Bill of Rights.  This is another major obstacle to achieving a single world-wide sovereignty.


The trade agreements alone will proscribe warfare

.” 

That was what the economic & political elites thought on the eve of WWI.

It’s all good, in truth, the times they are a changin’

.”

The times always are and in many different directions.  Remember as Wm. James said, “If we claim only reasonable probability, it will be as much as men who love the truth can ever at any given moment hope to have within their grasp.  Pretty surely it will be more than we could have had, if we were unconscious of our liability to err.”
Pg. 365-6 The Varieties of Religious Experience. Modern Library 1994 From the Gifford Lectures, Edinburgh 1901-1902.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 09:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20
garythehuman - 04 October 2009 07:56 AM

“Perhaps you are being pessimistic - the Irish just ratified the Lisbon Treaty that in effect allows the EU to act as one country. “How long do you think before China Pakistan, Viet Nam and India will combine to form a common gov’t.” ?”

I think I am being realistic.  These countries will not come together for any reason in the foreseeable future.  The basic reason that the US recognized India’s “right” to develop a nuclear arsenal in contravention of current treaties, and knowing that this will cause our “ally” Pakistan to attempt to counter balance India by upgrading their nuclear arsenal, is that it sees India as a counter balancing power to China.  Viet Nam and China have a long history of conflict.  The tensions between, and histories of these countries work against them becoming united for any purpose.

As for the Irish vote to join the EU.  How long did that take?  And what “guarantees did the EU have to give to the Irish.  Also how much of a role did the Irish need for the EU’s economic strength after their banking collapse affect the vote.

I’m sure the economy was a strong factor, but so was the EU’s clarification that it would not intrude on abortion laws, etc. And the vote was 67% positive. But granted, there is always a quid pro quo.

The advantage to member nations is that they will be able to discard their military budgets and dependencies - a huge advantage over those that do not

  Ever hear of Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex speech?

I was named after him.

  Think you are going to have some opposition there?  Also in many parts of the world the ruling elites power base is the military itself, do you think they are going to give that up voluntarily?  Hell, I live in a county that has one of the highest numbers of politicians per population in the US.  If you would like to do a case study on the difficulties of reducing these numbers and rearranging the way political power is distributed even in a democracy, Erie County NY would be a good place to start.
  Another point, as long as non participating nations and areas do not give up their military the proposed world government will have to maintain its own military, so looking to this area for cost savings is not realistic.

The fact that there are entrenched interests in areas like militarism, corruption and the drug trade is no reason to work around them. They ARE the problem - if you don’t confront them then what are we doing, if anything??

I recently completed Vol I of a book on this scenario in which the world accepts world government for two main reasons

1) A world boycott of nuclear-armed nations (no trade, no tourism etc.) was economically crippling them
2) The control of nuclear fusion allowed the huge amount of money we pour into energy to instead be used for old age pensions in the poorer countries. That carries the day in places like India, South America and China.

This is speculative fiction around events one decade hence. If we can get 300M using Facebook we can also use national referendums and direct democracy via the web to change things. Things do change, Gary, we must at least hope they might.

If you wish to read the book it’s at https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/3263 and use this coupon for a free reviewer’s copy HX99M . (This offer is valid for all CFI readers).

From there the rule of law will spread across the globe as quickly as John Peel’s London police force did - we all accept police now

.”

Many people only accept the “rule of law” when it benefits them.  As Benazir observed “ In America, elected people walkout the door and make tens of millions with Halliburton or dealing with the Saudis for some investment bank.  . . . Here,{Pakistan}they take a cut of the money on its first pass through official hands.”  In fact many organizations prosper directly because they carry on illegal activities ie. the drug trade, the smuggling of humans at many borders.  And a major question is whose police? I hope you don’t have much invested in the companies currently engaged in developing Russia’s energy industry

.

As mentioned corruption is a major area for reform, uniform international law is essential for that. Local police do just fine, absent corruption. Russia is still a wild west scenario, but no worse than the illegal drug industries in the US.

don’t see the world through Rush Limbaugh’s glasses, not that you do

.”

    That I don’t, I try to find out a little bit about what is going on before I open my mouth,  but then I don’t make my living producing political propaganda.  Joking aside, I understand something about where Limbaugh’s base is coming from.  Prior to WWII and the Cold War, the interior areas of the US, that is the areas of the country between the Appalachians and the Rockies, have a long tradition of isolationalism.  With the end of the cold war this area is at least partially reverting back to these ideas ( With the possible exception of the parts of this area that are economically dependent on the military bases Roosevelt put in these areas to combat this isolationist tendency.

That “isolationism” is controversial. The 1823 Monroe Doctrine stated the opposite, and the adventures of Bush in Iraq are a more recent example of the influence of the Red States.

> Through common experience gained through these practical actions future generations may decide that a world-wide government is what is needed, but in today’s world I do not see it as a realistic or even a productive goal.

I realize that what you state here would be the consensus reaction of the US public if the UN came into its ascendancy. But in the book Obama has to overcome that (in his second term) because a) the 2nd Depression has left America bankrupt after factories left Europe and the US en masse for China, never to return because of the 20:1 wage discrepancy and b) the US just couldn’t afford to fund the Pentagon as opposed to being paid by the world to maintain the UN’s military presence.

Make no mistake, there will be no “recovery”, in the 30’s Depression the factories could fire back up again. Now- they’re gone. And so the West has to accept that the de facto slavery of the 3rd World is at an end and we have to learn that less is more. Personally I am looking forward to it.
 

> I am assuming that your conception is for some type of basically democratic government, however the majority of the people of the world do not even have a democratic local government, let alone a Bill of Rights.  This is another major obstacle to achieving a single world-wide sovereignty.

Is that not a singular reason for them to adopt such rights under the auspices of the UN?

It’s all good, in truth, the times they are a changin’

The times always are and in many different directions.  Remember as Wm. James said, “If we claim only reasonable probability, it will be as much as men who love the truth can ever at any given moment hope to have within their grasp.  Pretty surely it will be more than we could have had, if we were unconscious of our liability to err.”

Well, militarism and corruption have been given their fair hearing, and I don’t think we should take the risk of them continuing any longer. I don’t trust them to look after us any more, just the opposite, look what illegal drugs are doing to Mexico. Time to start letting people take responibility for their own orifices, and putting the cash into health care instead of cops’ pockets?

It’s true that my version is Utopian, but “Man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a Heaven for?” wink

[ Edited: 04 October 2009 09:13 AM by Martinus ]
 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 09:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Martinus-

1) A world boycott of nuclear-armed nations (no trade, no tourism etc.) was economically crippling them

This was the No.1 reason why Japan attacked the US in 1941.
The act of boycotting and “crippling”(although whether it really ever cripples in any scenario is open to discussion)is part of the age old Humdrum of Warfare. It is Soft-War, which runs hand in hand with War. Maybe some can come up with some examples of where Embargo works, maybe not. The point is, it’s just another example of Sabre-Rattling.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 11:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20
VYAZMA - 04 October 2009 09:31 AM

Martinus-

1) A world boycott of nuclear-armed nations (no trade, no tourism etc.) was economically crippling them

This was the No.1 reason why Japan attacked the US in 1941.
The act of boycotting and “crippling”(although whether it really ever cripples in any scenario is open to discussion)is part of the age old Humdrum of Warfare. It is Soft-War, which runs hand in hand with War. Maybe some can come up with some examples of where Embargo works, maybe not. The point is, it’s just another example of Sabre-Rattling.

There are innumerable examples of successful embargoes, of course. The blockade of the South in the Civil War, of England by Napoleon (Euro trade), Cuba recently. Japan is not a good example, it was one reason but not No.1, as it was hell-bound to have an empire no matter what, beginning with China and Manchuria in the 30’s.

World sentiment can be galvanized, witness Greenpeace with the whales, the current climate debates, and it is just a matter of time before world polls start to be taken and taking effect - democracy at its root level. We in the West have not yet acceded to the reality of the loss of our factories and industry to Asia, so we will try to gangster it for a while longer - but to no avail.

The true issue is the character of our species, which is where Humanism comes in. We have to have some standards that relate fully to our entire species, our planet, and the lives we all enjoy within that envelope. Nuclear weapons, corruption, abuse of women and the weak, and especially the poverty that now is the hallmark of our proud species are character issues, and they need to be cited as such and dealt with, the same way we recognized the challenges handicapped people face and provided for them. Cleaning up our act.

There are many here among us who prefer the outlaw life, but the species has always come to terms with them too.

[ Edited: 04 October 2009 12:57 PM by Martinus ]
 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 12:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Martinus-

There are innumerable examples of successful embargoes, of course. The blockade of the South in the Civil War, of England by Napoleon (Euro trade), Cuba recently. Japan is not a good example, it was one reason but not No.1, as it was hell-bound to have an empire no matter what, beginning with China and Manchuria in the 30’s.

Well The US was not slated to be part of Japan’s Empire.(not in the context of long term strategic planning anyways.) That was directly in their written doctrines. You’re right they were hellbound to have an Empire. And the US and England’s 40 year campaign of preventing this expansion included supplying China with arms, treaties(restricting the number and size of Japans Naval Forces-in return for no further American Westward expansion ie.)diplomacy, and of course-Embargos. Trade shipment embargos, trade embargos, shipping lane blockades etc…all which gave the Japanese no choice but to invade the US. The reason they had no choice was Japan had succumbed to a Manifest Destiny of their own, which was driven by a Nationalistic Fervor which probably eclipsed even Germany’s.
Their ability to conquer further into the Dutch Indies, South-East Asia etc was being halted by their lack of Oil. The military government realized that they had no choice but to attack the US, who was the main blocker of their Empire building. This blocking obviously carried out by embargos, blockades, and total trade restriction.
I can’t believe You would cite the Embargo of Cuba as “successful”. Unless you mean by success all the undesired consequences which I though you routinely spoke out against.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 01:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  219
Joined  2007-05-20
VYAZMA - 04 October 2009 12:19 PM

Martinus-

There are innumerable examples of successful embargoes, of course. The blockade of the South in the Civil War, of England by Napoleon (Euro trade), Cuba recently. Japan is not a good example, it was one reason but not No.1, as it was hell-bound to have an empire no matter what, beginning with China and Manchuria in the 30’s.

Well The US was not slated to be part of Japan’s Empire.(not in the context of long term strategic planning anyways.) That was directly in their written doctrines. You’re right they were hellbound to have an Empire. And the US and England’s 40 year campaign of preventing this expansion included supplying China with arms, treaties(restricting the number and size of Japans Naval Forces-in return for no further American Westward expansion ie.)diplomacy, and of course-Embargos. Trade shipment embargos, trade embargos, shipping lane blockades etc…all which gave the Japanese no choice but to invade the US.

I suppose that I should return my term boycott rather than embargo. I contemplate ordinary people not buying anything from, or having anything to do, with nuclear-armed nations. That can be as effective as blocked shipping lanes, maybe more so. It wouldn’t be a national activity anyway, but by all of Humanity wherever they live.

I can’t believe You would cite the Embargo of Cuba as “successful”. Unless you mean by success all the undesired consequences which I though you routinely spoke out against.

The Cuban embargo is successful toward causing privation in Cuba, which is its intent. Its rationality or morality are separate matters.

I may seem at first glance to be a socialist, yes, small “s”, but certainly no communist. Canadians freely visit Cuba and two years ago we rented a car and drove around Havana, which is a stark slum outside of a few targeted government restoration projects.

I stopped by an apartment building and noted the complete lack of maintenance on the building, which just about threw my Dutch wife into apoplexy.. I said to a woman there “I know the last time these doors were painted, 1959.” She nodded and said “Maybe before that.”

You don’t paint public property, and that’s all you have to know or see about communism.

 Signature 

Dwight Jones
http://www.humanism.ws
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“Our lives teach us who we are.”
-Salman Rushdie

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 01:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

The Cuban embargo is successful toward causing privation in Cuba, which is its intent. Its rationality or morality are separate matters.

Right- further proof that embargos, or boycotts aren’t “ultimately successful”. They are extensions of warfare.

I may seem at first glance to be a socialist, yes, small “s”, but certainly no communist. Canadians freely visit Cuba and two years ago we rented a car and drove around Havana, which is a stark slum outside of a few targeted government restoration projects.

I stopped by an apartment building and noted the complete lack of maintenance on the building, which just about threw my Dutch wife into apoplexy.. I said to a woman there “I know the last time these doors were painted, 1959.” She nodded and said “Maybe before that.”

You don’t paint public property, and that’s all you have to know or see about communism.

Ahh Marty…Marty Marty Marty. I see these same unpainted doors in Buffalo.(and Toledo, Miami, Dallas, Boise, LA, etc…)
The doors are unpainted because the people aren’t empowered by a feeling of ownership. In fact they are disenfranchised. Cut loose from the Social-Economic fabric. They’re POOR. This happens under Communism, Democratic Capitalism, Dictatorships, Anarchies.
I read your comments above about a “popular boycott”. You gotta be realistic. This isn’t gonna happen. The planet is becoming “Consummerized”. People want to buy stuff- they don’t care where it comes from. I’m personally painfully aware of these dynamics.
As I watch millions of my local citizens driving around in foreign cars, and simultaneously wondering why they are “seeing so many unpainted doorways”.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 October 2009 09:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

**cough, cough, gasp!***You PAINT doors?????
Wow, in my (middle to upper middle class) neighborhood, a painted door is an affectation. I have NEVER painted a door in my life!! We like to see the wood!

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 October 2009 03:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Well in both these posts Asanta, an “unpainted door” is meant to imply shabbiness. Disrepair, neglect. I too would much rather see the natural grain on wood. Some nice stain, or Tung oil finish. Of course lots of doors today aren’t wooden. They are composite “wood”, or steel, or aluminum. These pretty much have to be “finished” somehow.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
‹‹ A Conversation      Lifeism ››