From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Mon Jul 11 2005 - 18:40:46 BST
Hi Platt,
Glad you are unaffected by the hurricane. I can't imagine what being in was
would like. Pennsylvania seems relatively "safe" from "big weather" threats.`
At 07:37 AM 7/11/2005, you wrote:
>Whoa. Stop right there. If you had read "The Road to Serfdom" you would
>know that Hayek's thesis, borne out by history, says that Central Economic
>Planning (CEP) inevitably leads to brutal dictatorships. Thus, any
>discussion of CEP must include the examples of such dictatorships.
I'm not sure I see the connection. This would lead to your believing that
Denmark (for example) is "inevitably" on its way towards a brutal
dictatorship, would it not? Indeed, there are many countries with "more
CEP" than the U.S. that give no evidence they are headed towards military
or brutal dictatorships of any kind.
So, I'd disagree that history bears out such an "inevitability".
> > That is, private wealth interests and wealthy capitalists can "say" all
> > they want that we would all be better off without anti-trust laws (as one
> > example), but where is any supportive historical or global example showing
> > this?
>
>In recent years, Hong Kong.
I'm not familiar with the specifics, are monopolies "legal" in Hong Kong?
> > Or more exactly: "The conservatives who keep trumpeting about the virtues
> > of free enterprise are normally just supporting their own self-interest.
> > They are just doing the usual cover-up for the rich in their age-old
> > exploitation of the poor." (in LILA)
>
>Not to be obstreperous (thank you Merriam-Webster), but could this be a
>case of quoting out of context?
It is a quote that supports what I believe to be underlying the argument
calling for an abolition to all government interference in the marketplace.
Whether Pirsig believes, or not, that we should abolish all government
interference (anti-trust laws, labor regulations, etc.) I can only infer
from his comments. See below.
> And remember that Pirsig is not against "social planning". He states "
> > There's a place for them but they've got to be built on a foundation of
> > Quality within the individuals involved." It is not an abolishion of social
> > planning, but a revisioning of the foundation upon which social planning
> > occurs.
>
>Reference please.
The quote is from ZMM, I don't have the page number in front of me (using
an online copy), but the full paragraph is:
"My personal feeling is that this is how any further improvement of the
world will be done: by individuals making Quality decisions and that's all.
God, I don't want to have any more enthusiasm for big programs full of
social planning for big masses of people that leave individual Quality out.
These can be left alone for a while. There's a place for them but they've
got to be built on a foundation of Quality within the individuals involved.
We've had that individual Quality in the past, exploited it as a natural
resource without knowing it, and now it's just about depleted. Everyone's
just about out of gumption. And I think it's about time to return to the
rebuilding of this American resource...individual worth. There are
political reactionaries who've been saying something close to this for
years. I'm not one of them, but to the extent they're talking about real
individual worth and not just an excuse for giving more money to the rich,
they're right. We do need a return to individual integrity, self-reliance
and old-fashioned gumption. We really do. I hope that in this Chautauqua
some directions have been pointed to."
From this I've presented my take being: Pirsig would say that before we
waste time building more social programs based on the current ideology, we
need to get individuals seeing this new way. He would NOT, I'd argue, say
that the solution is abolish social planning and let business and private
wealth run rampant.
Do you feel he'd argue that all social planning *should* be abolished?
Pirsig seems to feel, as I agree, that the emergent aspect of recognizing
Quality as a noun will restructure the way people act within the culture.
This is why I've long stated my belief in "changing the dialogue" (or
attempting to, against the onslaught of talk-radio, news media,
entertainment and embedded cultural values that seek to preserve old SOM
ways of thinking, and reify old SOM materialistic and political patterns).
Pirsig also seems to feel, as I agree, that social planning does have its
place, and is a necessary component of government. I'd argue, with MSH,
that unregulated wealth acquisition (coupled with the ideology that
> > Pirsig's own motivation was to get individuals seeing the "Good is a noun,
> > not an adjective" and that "Quality is the source of subjects and objects".
> > He'd say, I believe, that before we waste time building more social
> > programs based on the current ideology, we need to get individuals seeing
> > this new way. He would NOT, I'd argue, say that the solution is abolish
> > social planning and let business and private wealth run rampant. Within our
> > materialist paradigm, such a thing would prove utterly disadvantageous for
> > the majority of citizens. History bears this out.
>
>I'd say that's quite a stretch in putting words in Pirsig's mouth,
>especially given what he said about any CEP city "being always a dull
>place." (Lila, 17)
>
>Platt
>
>
>
>
>MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archives:
>Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
>MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
>To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
>http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 11 2005 - 20:39:40 BST