============================================================================ Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 21:10:31 -0800 (PST) From: Jessica Markland <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden To: •••@••.••• Dear Richard: I get so much out of your e-mails. Today I tried to get a copy of The Story of B. Local library is bringing it in from elsewhere. In the interim I have got about 1/3 of the way through another, earlier book of Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael". It's so clear, and makes so much sense (the theme is similar to B) Quinn writes almost as well as you do, so I am not sure which of you should be the new Messiah. I sincerely hope your optimism about the time being right for this movement proves to be true. Keep on doing what you are doing. =============== Dear Jessica, Thanks for your kind words. I do my best, but I cannot agree that my writing is even a patch on Quinn's. I believe it is time for humanity to give up its fetish for messiahs and its search for salvation. We are our own salvation, each of us in our own way, each part of the fabric of society and of life. You, too, must become 'B'. It is by waking up from our Tak delusion that we make the time right for the movement. imho, rkm ============================================================================ From: "John Bunzl" <•••@••.•••> To: <•••@••.•••> References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 07:28:08 -0000 Dear Richard, Again, an excellent piece of writing which gives each of us a compass by which to re-check our positions on the journey you so rightly describe is underway - and we ARE moving in the right direction and the potential for success IS there for all the reasons you outline. The key to success, I think, will be greater understanding. As the vortex of corporate globalisation strengthens its grip, its muscles and sinews are already becoming more defined and therefore more visible. What is now only dimly discernable to the movement as a bunch of effects or symptoms which we don't like will develop into a greater understanding of how the vortex actually works and, therefore, what its key drivers are and how we can disarm and neutralise them. Since now, generally speaking, the movement only sees symptoms, it should not surprise us that it is, largely, a reflection of those symptoms: a rag-tag and fragmented army of NGOs and activist groups each addressing a particular but independent aspect of the globalisation vortex. We need to move on to root causes and maybe Cyberjounal might invite a discussion on the subject of 'what do we see as the root cause?' Schumacher said: "Everything in this world has to have a STRUCTURE, otherwise it is chaos" - and I'm afraid our growing movement is no exception. Perhaps, therefore, we should return to Schumacher to see what he has to say on the subject of large-scale organisations: "The large organisation [our growing anti-corporate globalisation movement?] will consist of many semi-autonomous units, which we may call quasi-firms. Each of them will have a large amount of freedom, to give the greatest possible chance to creativity and entrepreneurship. The structure of the organisation can then be symbolised by a man holding a large number of balloons in his hand. Each of the balloons has its own bouyancy and lift, and the man himself does not lord it over the balloons, but stands beneath them, yet holding all the strings firmly in his hand." In the case of the current movement, however, the balloons are still floating all over the place. Writing like yours helps bring them together! It's a privilege to be working with you. all the best John ============= Dear John, Thanks for your contribution. You raise several issues that I hope will be developed further in our list dialog. I think the search for root causes has been part of our mission from the beginning, and your voice is welcome as we continue that journey. When you talk about 'semi-autonomous units' I think you are very much in the right direction. Hierarchies are the enemy of freedom and the friend of domination. But we've been so thoroughly conditioned to think in term of hierarchies that it's difficult to escape from that mindset. Why do you think in terms of one man, holding all the balloons in his hand? Yes the balloons are all over the place, and they need to be brought into synergy and harmony. But let us accomplish that with decentralized processes. regards, rkm BTW> Please checkout John's website: http://www.simpol.org. ============================================================================ Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:52:28 -0600 From: Teresa Hawkes <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden Interesting. rkm wrote: > Quinn helps us understand that such harmonization has always been central to being human - except within the deviant Tak cultural branch. The time has come for 'The Great Remembering'. Non-Taker peoples have always tried to tell us this as we marched over them in the last 10,000 years. Now that one of our own, Quinn, has managed to say it to us in a way that makes us able to hear this basic message, can we abandon the quintessential Taker stance of superiority and let others tell us truths we need to hear without needing the intervening blessing of Taker voices and institutions to make it okay to listen and act upon what we hear.... can we listen to the women who have always told us this. can we look into our own children? this message was always there in their eyes before we trained it out of them. can we see this truth in the beasts who serve us and their wild cousins just before they die under our guns and before our bull dozers? can we listen at last to the wisdom of "natives" everywhere - the endless list of all those we have closed our ears to? can we simply listen instead of formulate, postulate, control, dominate and proclaim? this is the meme that will save us all. Blessings, Teresa Hawkes Publisher The Oracular Tree http://www.oraculartree.com Establish the habit of reverence. =============== Theresa - we're listening! - rkm ============================================================================ Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 13:03:37 +0100 From: Bob Ocegueda <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• Subject: Re: rkm> The myth of human dominion and the birth of the Takers Hi Richard, Excellent stuff!... as usual. When will this article be posted on the web so I can link to it in my messages? Thanks, Bob ========= Bob - it'll be online in about a week - rkm ============================================================================ Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 01:07:17 +0800 To: •••@••.••• From: Betty Daly-King <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: rkm> A change of vision: returning to the Garden Dear Richard, Have you read Jared Diamond, "Guns, Germs and Steel" - I've been told some of my theories sound similar to Diamonds, so now I'm requesting it from library because I like having my ideas reinforced and beautified! Previews read like it is something you would get your teeth into. Betty ======== Betty - yes, I did sing my teeth into that one. It was the _other world-shaking book I read this year -rkm ============================================================================ From: "Jeff & Diana Jewell" <•••@••.•••> To: <•••@••.•••> Subject: RE: cj,rn> recap of rkm's 'philosophy' Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 17:32:46 -0800 Richard, once again your 'philosophy' is a masterfully concise overview of the complex history that has brought humankind to this place and time. However, I find the thrust of your thinking decidedly too utopian. While acknowledging the brilliance of your conceptions, and the utility of idealism and simplicity in informing the great movement which decent societies must now pursue as probably the greatest test of mankind, I respectfully suggest that I don't believe it plausible that we can get there [i.e. as per your vision] from here -- at least not in any discernible direct path over the next generation. If so, it seems necessary to me to adopt a longer term strategy of incremental progress, defining intermediate goals that are attainable, and pushing as hard as possible to build momentum based on a string of visible successes won through concerted activism and increasing popular solidarity. To think of deposing capitalism anytime soon is wishful thinking in the extreme. The world of today is ruled by people whose interests and belief systems are strongly aligned with those of global capitalism, and their highly advanced systems of domination are quite capable of suppressing or accommodating any 'dangerous classes' that may arise, as history has shown. And the rest of the people are essentially powerless, effectively leaderless, uninformed or disinformed, and more concerned with survival or prosperity than freedom or political protest. While I certainly agree that capitalism is inherently and increasingly unsustainable -- and must be superceded with an ecologically sustainable [and hopefully moral] system sometime in this century -- it is very unclear what the successor system will or should be, and what forces will emerge to establish it. At this point, some forms of fascism may be the most likely outcome, given the lessons of history and the mosaic of current trends. Indeed authoritarian systems that can successfully represent themselves as benevolent dictatorships are probably quite acceptable to most people -- if not preferable to democratic regimes that are seen as more bureaucratic and less efficient. For those of us who cherish freedom as the foundation of decent societies, it is suggested that the great cause of our time should be a global movement to achieve 'real' democracy [i.e. as per Lincoln's definition of government of, by and for the people] -- rather than trying to displace capitalism. As progressive activists well understand, to achieve real democracy in the face of capitalism would of course be truly revolutionary. But it could hardly be branded as radical heresy [as an assault on capitalism clearly would be] by the ruling regime -- since it supposedly exists -- indeed as the distinguishing feature of our proud heritage, and cornerstone of our freedom. And if we can actually achieve something resembling real democracy, the solidarity built in this great cause would well prepare the future generations for the next stage in the human struggle -- perhaps then to dismantle the capitalist system, presuming that a consensus arises as to what the successor system should be. Regarding this key point of strategy and goals for the movement, I would much prefer it if future history may show that you are right and I am wrong. I also want to salute the wisdom of many others who have contributed to the pursuit of truth and progressive change through the cj-list. But there's a risk that the range of views may be too narrow, and more constructive criticism would probably benefit us all. With great respect, Jeff Jewell, North Vancouver, BC, Canada. ======================= Dear Jeff, Nice to hear from you! I'll think of you and Diana when I visit Tahiti Nui's later this year. I can understand your pessimism regarding the prospects for radical transformation. My own view is that radical transformation will be difficult, but that incremental transformation is downright impossible. The system just isn't fixable. Capitalism is a carnivore, and you can't turn it into a herbivore without killing it. Any attempt to reform it simply makes it function less effectively. You'd get total economic collapse before you'd get any significant benefits of the kind we would all like to see. If you have no idea at all about how radical transformation might be brought about, then of course deposing capitalism would seem like wishful thinking. That's why my own investigations for the past few years have been devoted to understanding how such a transformation might come to pass. You seem to dismiss without comment the suggestions I have offered in that regard. Why? cheers, rkm -- ============================================================================ Richard K Moore Wexford, Ireland Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance email: •••@••.••• URL: http://cyberjournal.org A community will evolve only when the people control their means of communication. - Frantz Fanon "One cannot separate economics, political science, and history. Politics is the control of the economy. History, when accurately and fully recorded, is that story. In most textbooks and classrooms, not only are these three fields of study separated, but they are further compartmentalized into separate subfields, obscuring the close interconnections between them" -- J.W. Smith, The World's Wasted Wealth 2, (Institute for Economic Democracy, 1994), p. 22. Permission for non-commercial republishing hereby granted - BUT include and observe all restrictions, copyrights, credits, and notices - including this one. ============================================================================ .