From: Arlo J. Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Sat Jul 10 2004 - 02:47:32 BST
Mel,
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 17:06:09 +0000, "ml" wrote:
>
> So, if it is deliberate, it probably is because of a "bad guy"
> or small conspiring group.
Perhaps. I won't disagree with you in theory. But I wonder then why when such
actions are made fully public, no one in the corporation (or the people with
the power to make the decision to act) does anything to rectify it? (Unless
forced by a court with actual power to enforce its demand) I think they can't
because the dialogue does not exist to allow them to do so. The unassailable
bottom line is the profit margin, and so long as this is satisfied, why should
Union Carbide care? Indeed, as Platt has made clear, "caring" is a smothering
social layer.
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> >...how should we feel for the population of Tijuana?
> >Or don't they count?
>
> Coke and UC seem to generate an amount of anger in your
> posts if I am not mistaken. Where is the greatest Quality?
> A) Making UC stop dumping
> B) Helping the affected people
> C) Making Coke pay more
> D) Organize a boycott/call 60 minutes...
>
You say "make", and I know that Platt will latch onto that as social coersion.
But in the immediate here and now I think the highest Quality would be "B".
I think the next highest Quality endeavor would be to rethink the practice of
modern capitalism to bring Quality, or value, into the dialogue.
As for "boycott", I always encourage people to choose products based on fair
labor practices. I personally do not drink any Coke products (actually, any
soda at all, bad bad stuff). One of the reasons I bought a Harley was because
(living near their production in Lancaster for many years) I was impressed by
their organization. They brought in "experts" (I have no recollection who) to
help make their plant workers more connected with their labor. Now, most
production line workers follow a bike from beginning to completion. Harley was
concerned about labor alienation, and realized that it was "good" to
restructure. And it improved their products, better Quality through greater
connectedness. Harley-Davidson, all-American, responding to a GASP! Marxist
concern. I support local community agriculture through a CSA farm south of
where I live. I buy only local animal products from an organic, free-range
farm. I've hired out contractors over the years and always talk to the labor
before making a decision. I buy coffee based on labor practices that encourage
local ownership of crop and distribution. I could go on, but you get the idea.
The point is that I do act personally on these things.
In the meantime, yes, I do favor social regulations on the dumping of toxic
waste into the groundwater of a populated area. If that "smothers" the
"personal freedom" of capitalists to maximize their profits, so be it. I also
favor social regulations on murder, to the chargrin of those wishing to express
their personal freedom to kill. Ooops, I have a feeling that I am most
certainly going to branded a Stalinist now.
> I am not mocking here, but when I get PO'd at something
> I find doing something better than just being angry...
> (Imagine a Tijuana Libre: Coke, Tequile,& Lime thrown
> in the face of a Coke CEO)
>
I like the idea!
> If you/we recognize their actions as low quality, how can
> Coke and UC be brought to understand the same? If the
> world is dominated by SOM and only a small population
> even knows the term MoQ, much less understands it,
> does that imply a duty to push the understanding we have
> or is this a more personal set of applications on the level
> of individuals?
>
> puzzled by application...
>
As am I sadly. First, of course, is the personal application. Sure. But since,
as you say, only a small population understands the MOQ, we need to support a
dialogue that would get Quality involved in the local and national dialogue.
The problem with modern capitalism is that it vehemently opposes the dialogue
changing. It is quite happy with everyone believing that "anything done in the
name of money is justifiable". Addressing alienating labor practice, in a
critical way, as Pirsig does in ZMM is an important step.
Those who believe, as Platt seems to, that although a "flawed system", the
absolute only other alternative is eastern bloc socialism. Saying, sure our
workers' labor activities are alienated from its product, but any change at all
will thrust us into communist Russia and favor "material equality" and create
massive blankets of socialism and interfere with my personal freedom to
accumulate all the wealth I can, is blind and ridiculous. We need to argue
vocally and strongly that there are other options, and modern capitalism is not
the only system other than eastern bloc socialism.
Arlo
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 : Sat Jul 10 2004 - 02:50:09 BST