From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Fri Apr 23 2004 - 22:05:47 BST
Dear Platt,
You wrote 16 Apr 2004 10:35:06 -0400:
'I don't know about the Dutch, but I'm sure Americans, released from having
taxes automatically taken out of their pay and freed from the threat of
fines, jail and confiscation of their property, would gladly keep tax money
for themselves and their families. I keep remembering Pirsig's observation
to the effect that, "Cooperation without coercion is a devastating
fiction".'
If I would believe in cooperation without coercion I would be at the
lower-left corner of the lower-left quadrant. I am somewhere in the middle,
so I agree with Pirsig.
Quite a few Dutch might be convinced by a populist political party to keep
their tax money for themselves, too. They would come to their senses quite
soon, however, when information about the break-down of health-care,
education, maintenance of dykes (not unimportant here) etc. etc. would get
public. If government would break down, we would re-invent it before being
flooded, before bored youth would form too many violent gangs and before too
many cripples and carriers of contagious lethal diseases (who couldn't pay
private health-care) would crowd our streets.
Dutch politicians being more sensible than the average voter, they haven't
yet created such a populist political party promising substantially lower
taxes.
I asked you:
'could you give a description of American "liberals" and "conservatives"
using [the verbs to "liberate" and to "conserve"]? If no, what would be the
criteria for a "literal meaning" of these terms for you (also applicable
outside a political context)?'
You replied 16 Apr 2004 10:35:06 -0400:
'I cannot imagine using these terms outside a political context. That
context defines the "literal meaning" of those terms for me. In a historical
context, I believe those terms had opposite meanings from their current
American political context.'
Do I understand rightly that in the current American political context
"conservatives" tend to "liberate people" and "liberals" tend to "conserve
old systems that they still consider valuable"? Funny.
These terms can be used and are used also in for instance religions
(referring to dogma's and traditions) and in (more or less) bureaucratic
organizations (referring to administrative procedures and rules). There they
still have their original -what I would call their "literal"- meanings.
You continued:
'Is their a simpler way to express how you see the "war" between levels?'
I see "war between levels" as an unfortunate metaphor. "War" in itself is
o.k., but I see the phenomena for which that term is fitting as conflicts
between patterns of value of the same level. Discrete levels cannot be at
war. People participating in patterns of value of different levels CAN, but
everyone participates in patterns of value of all levels. I see no way to
determine whether someone participates more in the 1st/2nd/3rd/4th level
than someone else, whereas I DO see ways to determine whether the particular
patterns of value of a particular level someone participates in are of
higher or lower quality: by assessing their stability, versatility, openness
to DQ and harmony with patterns of value of a higher level. E.g. a
democratic 3rd level pattern of value is more open to DQ and more in harmony
with a 4th level pattern of value like 'fairness' than an authoritarian one.
Their relative stability and versatility is not yet finally decided by
history, but their seems to be a trend towards more democracy in recent
history that suggests higher quality. So "democracy" and "authoritarian
structures" can be said to be at war; "fairness" and "authoritarian
structures" can not. If say Russians feel a need for strong leadership and
tend to give more power to those who seem to fit that role, no amount of
rhetoric telling them that it is not fair that a few people have lots of
power and a lot of people have little will make them behave differently.
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 : Fri Apr 23 2004 - 22:46:10 BST