Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [NationalConstitutionalConvention06] Re: The Global Delusion (April 27, 2006)

Expand Messages
  • Michael Adorno
    I believe they will ruin it for everyone. Over the past hundred years or so, our culture has developed a terrible addiction to excessive consumption which had
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 31, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I believe they will ruin it for everyone. Over the past hundred years or so, our culture has developed a terrible addiction to excessive consumption which had been ushered in by the industrial revolution. Much like any addictive process, it was a gradual one and the addict has to hit rock bottom before finding an opportunity for redemption. Either that or ride it out to the point of self extermination. I hope we are seeing the former. I personally am a strong believer that things can only get better, but unfortunately it seems as though they will probably first get much worse.
       
      Eric Reinhardt <ericreinhardt2003@...> wrote:
      Well most of us are satisfied with a reasonable amount of material
      goods/stimulation. Sadly, it is our "elites" who never seem to have
      enough, and if they are not held in check and SOON, I believe they
      will ruin this planet for the vast majority.

      --- In NationalConstitutio nalConvention06@ yahoogroups. com, Michael
      Adorno <dogheadma12@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > I believe the lesson is that materialism is a necessary evil, to be
      respected and kept in it's proper sphere. It should not be placed at
      the pinnacle of aspiration, but rather should take it's universally
      conducive postition as secondary to spiritual enlightenment. Instead
      we choose to continue to plunder our home with the motivation of
      sensual satisfaction. A classic cart in front of the horse idiom. But
      that is just the humble opinion of yours truly. It's not my empire, I
      just survive in it.
      >
      > DAN 1 <srubnaya@.. .> wrote: It seems that these thinkers
      were not yet aware that Earths resources could be depleted, or they
      bet that science and technology would develope the ability to produce
      the needs of People without the finite natural resources... like
      through the breakdown and designed reconstruction of cells, molecules
      and even atoms. But then again, maybe the mineral natural resources
      that appear to be getting harder and harder to find, are still in
      vast quantities deeper inside the Earth...or on the other planets in
      our solar system.
      > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion
      to "Barbarism", (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might
      be a good thing. Also, all three types of cultures,
      ("Technocracy" , "Egalitarian Communism" and "Laissez-fair
      Capitalism") can co-exist on Our World...even be mixed in one
      proportion or another. All Humanity has to do is develope more
      tolerance to difference and learn to see the compatibilities. Such
      would give us social choices that We would enjoy having.
      > Respectfully, DAN 1
      > --- In NationalConstitutio nalConvention06@ yahoogroups. com, "The New
      York Review of Books" <dogheadma12@ > wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
      > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
      > >
      > > --
      > >
      > > The New York Review of Books
      > > April 27, 2006
      > > http://www.nybooks. com/articles/ 18931?email
      > >
      > > The Global Delusion
      > > By John Gray
      > >
      > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have believed
      that
      > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
      > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted
      that
      > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single
      type of
      > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
      > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global
      system.
      > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
      > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
      > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian
      communism and
      > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version
      of
      > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of
      life to
      > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these
      thinkers
      > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of industrialization
      > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been achieved,
      war
      > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the
      diverse
      > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
      > >
      > > ------------ --------
      > >
      > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
      > > Review's free email newsletters:
      > >
      > > http://www.nybooks. com/newsletters
      > >
      > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
      > >
      > > http://feeds. feedburner. com/nybooks
      > >
      > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
      > > on http://www.nybooks. com. The New York Review of Books is not
      > > responsible for the contents of this message.
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of
      Blockbuster Total Access now
      >



      Like movies? Here's a limited-time offer: Blockbuster Total Access for one month at no cost.

    • DAN 1
      Well said Mr Adorno. Humanity cannot evolve if We are stuck in the materialistic mode. We will always have material needs, as a species, (as far as i can
      Message 2 of 13 , Apr 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment

        Well said Mr Adorno. Humanity cannot evolve if We are stuck in the materialistic mode. We will always have material needs, as a species, (as far as i can tell), but We do seem to be trapped in it. As you wrote, "it should not be at the pinnacle of aspiration." Yes, "...secondary to Spiritual Enlightenment" and a renewed consciousness of Social Responsibility...which might be a benefit of Spiritual Awakening.

        Respectfully,  DAN 1


        --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, Michael Adorno <dogheadma12@...> wrote:
        >
        > I believe the lesson is that materialism is a necessary evil, to be respected and kept in it's proper sphere. It should not be placed at the pinnacle of aspiration, but rather should take it's universally conducive postition as secondary to spiritual enlightenment. Instead we choose to continue to plunder our home with the motivation of sensual satisfaction. A classic cart in front of the horse idiom. But that is just the humble opinion of yours truly. It's not my empire, I just survive in it.
        >
        > DAN 1 srubnaya@... wrote: It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths resources could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the finite natural resources...like through the breakdown and designed reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then again, maybe the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder and harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
        > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion to "Barbarism", (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good thing. Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy", "Egalitarian Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity has to do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would enjoy having.
        > Respectfully, DAN 1
        > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "The New York Review of Books" dogheadma12@ wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
        > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
        > >
        > > --
        > >
        > > The New York Review of Books
        > > April 27, 2006
        > > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18931?email
        > >
        > > The Global Delusion
        > > By John Gray
        > >
        > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have believed that
        > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
        > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted that
        > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single type of
        > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
        > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global system.
        > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
        > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
        > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian communism and
        > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version of
        > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of life to
        > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these thinkers
        > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of industrialization
        > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been achieved, war
        > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the diverse
        > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
        > >
        > > --------------------
        > >
        > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
        > > Review's free email newsletters:
        > >
        > > http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
        > >
        > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
        > >
        > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
        > >
        > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
        > > on http://www.nybooks.com. The New York Review of Books is not
        > > responsible for the contents of this message.
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------
        > Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now
        >

      • DAN 1
        Yes Mr. Reinhardt. But, I see these elites as psuedo elites . They have little to do with real superiority. Sure, they have mastered the arts of profit
        Message 3 of 13 , Apr 1, 2008
        • 0 Attachment

          Yes Mr. Reinhardt. But, I see these "elites" as "psuedo elites". They have little to do with real superiority. Sure, they have mastered the arts of profit taking and manipulation of Our failing government to enhance their own power over The People, but they are not truly Elite. The truly Elite are givers not takers. They are much more likely to be volunteers than profiteers. They care about America, as a nation of The People and do what they can to help it. The pretenders, who are full of fear and, as you say, "greed", serve only themselves. They are powerful and dangerous, but their big weakness is their obviousness.

          They are tragic waste of Human talent.:( It is my Hope that they are only a temporary phase of Our Culture.

          Thanks for mentioning them.

          Respectfully,  DAN 1


          --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Reinhardt" <ericreinhardt2003@...> wrote:
          >
          > The main problem as I see it is that we have "elites" today that want
          > it all or nothing. They are not interested in the concept of economic
          > co-existence. It's THEIR economic system or the highway. GREED.
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "DAN 1"
          > srubnaya@ wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths
          > resources
          > > could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would
          > > develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the
          > finite
          > > natural resources...like through the breakdown and designed
          > > reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then again,
          > maybe
          > > the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder and
          > > harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the
          > > Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
          > >
          > > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion
          > to "Barbarism",
          > > (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good thing.
          > > Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy", "Egalitarian
          > > Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our
          > > World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity
          > has to
          > > do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the
          > > compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would
          > enjoy
          > > having.
          > >
          > > Respectfully, DAN 1
          > > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "The New
          > York
          > > Review of Books" <dogheadma12@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
          > > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
          > > >
          > > > --
          > > >
          > > > The New York Review of Books
          > > > April 27, 2006
          > > > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18931?email
          > > >
          > > > The Global Delusion
          > > > By John Gray
          > > >
          > > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have believed
          > that
          > > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
          > > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted
          > that
          > > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single
          > type of
          > > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
          > > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global
          > system.
          > > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
          > > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
          > > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian
          > communism and
          > > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version of
          > > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of
          > life to
          > > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these
          > thinkers
          > > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of industrialization
          > > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been achieved,
          > war
          > > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the
          > diverse
          > > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
          > > >
          > > > --------------------
          > > >
          > > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
          > > > Review's free email newsletters:
          > > >
          > > > http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
          > > >
          > > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
          > > >
          > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
          > > >
          > > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
          > > > on http://www.nybooks.com. The New York Review of Books is not
          > > > responsible for the contents of this message.
          > > >
          > >
          >

        • DAN 1
          Dear Mr. Bern. Your plans always desrve serious consideration. I thank you for sharing them here. I hope We can all benefit from mutually beneficial
          Message 4 of 13 , Apr 1, 2008
          • 0 Attachment

            Dear Mr. Bern. Your plans always desrve serious consideration. I thank you for sharing them here. I hope We can all benefit from mutually beneficial discussions about them. Here, in your web site and in Third Parties Coalition.

            I really like the idea of the "Civilian Service Corps". They would make good use of Human Resources that might otherwise be wasted.

            I think a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour might be better though. But, that is just me.

            Just the "CSC" plan alone would help Our Nation a lot.

            This idea might work well with the "American Earned Guaranteed Income" that I wrote about in Third Parties group site.

            Yes. I certainly will consider making this plan a part of the Third Parties Platform...though there may be a wee delay while We decide on a presidential candidate and wait for additional members to increase Our vitality.

            Let's keep sharing these good ideas. It is responsible of Us to do so. They may just find a way to take root, with other innovations, in the potentially fertile soil of the American People.

            Respectfully,  DAN 1


            --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, Paul Bern <jointheparty@...> wrote:
            >
            > I have a plan to clean up and restore the earth's environment, create anywhere from 300,000 to as many as a million new jobs, as well as rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure. The info is on my website (www.virtualdemocracyparty.org) but please allow me to copy and paste it into this response. The solution is self-explanatory.
            > THE VIRTUAL DEMOCRACY PARTY'S SOLUTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT AND FOR HOMELESSNESS
            > [1] Create the Civilian Service Corps, a large public works initiative aimed at solving the problems of taking care of our environment and infrastructure.
            > [2] The C.S.C. will issue civilian draft cards to all workers, who will be paid the proposed $10.00 per hour minimum wage that is part of the Virtual Democracy Party's platform. This new program is estimated by the V.D.P. to be capable of creating from 300,00 to 1,000,000 new jobs.
            > [3] Those persons who do not take advantage of our proposed lifetime education system on the Internet can volunteer or be drafted into the Civilian Service Corps.
            > [4] Newly released prisoners will automatically be drafted into the C.S.C., eliminating the need for parole permanently.
            > [5] Homeless individuals and families can volunteer for or be drafted into the C.S.C. as a means for getting off the street and into a job.
            > [6] Those individuals who successfully complete two years of steady work will be rewarded with up to two years of higher education free of charge in an accredited community college or vocational school.
            > [7] Unemployment benefits will increase to 50 weeks instead of the current maximum of 26 weeks so that a fair opportunity can be had by everyone who is healthy enough to work. Those needing day care will have daycare either available on-site or at another prearranged location at little or no charge
            >
            > If we're going to be taking action to repair the Earth's environment and America's infrastructure, this action needs to be decisive and all-encompassing. While we're at it, please think about the prospect of making this idea a part of the Third Parties Coalition's platform, with the ultimate goal of making this a campaign issue for the third party candidate that will represent the TPC in the 2012 national election.
            >
            > DAN 1 srubnaya@... wrote:
            > It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths resources could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the finite natural resources...like through the breakdown and designed reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then again, maybe the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder and harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
            > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion to "Barbarism", (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good thing. Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy", "Egalitarian Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity has to do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would enjoy having.
            > Respectfully, DAN 1
            > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "The New York Review of Books" dogheadma12@ wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
            > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
            > >
            > > --
            > >
            > > The New York Review of Books
            > > April 27, 2006
            > > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18931?email
            > >
            > > The Global Delusion
            > > By John Gray
            > >
            > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have believed that
            > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
            > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted that
            > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single type of
            > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
            > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global system.
            > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
            > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
            > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian communism and
            > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version of
            > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of life to
            > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these thinkers
            > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of industrialization
            > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been achieved, war
            > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the diverse
            > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
            > >
            > > --------------------
            > >
            > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
            > > Review's free email newsletters:
            > >
            > > http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
            > >
            > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
            > >
            > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
            > >
            > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
            > > on http://www.nybooks.com. The New York Review of Books is not
            > > responsible for the contents of this message.
            > >
            >

          • Paul Bern
            Hey thanks Dan, I appreciate the positive feedback. Also, I have spent the last day and a half giving my website a complete overhaul. You have a link to your
            Message 5 of 13 , Apr 2, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Hey thanks Dan, I appreciate the positive feedback. Also, I have spent the last day and a half giving my website a complete overhaul. You have a link to your site on mine as well as an announcement about my party's alliance with the Third Parties Coalition. To view your link, please go to


              DAN 1 <srubnaya@...> wrote:
              Dear Mr. Bern. Your plans always desrve serious consideration. I thank you for sharing them here. I hope We can all benefit from mutually beneficial discussions about them. Here, in your web site and in Third Parties Coalition.
              I really like the idea of the "Civilian Service Corps". They would make good use of Human Resources that might otherwise be wasted.
              I think a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour might be better though. But, that is just me.
              Just the "CSC" plan alone would help Our Nation a lot.
              This idea might work well with the "American Earned Guaranteed Income" that I wrote about in Third Parties group site.
              Yes. I certainly will consider making this plan a part of the Third Parties Platform...though there may be a wee delay while We decide on a presidential candidate and wait for additional members to increase Our vitality.
              Let's keep sharing these good ideas. It is responsible of Us to do so. They may just find a way to take root, with other innovations, in the potentially fertile soil of the American People.
              Respectfully,  DAN 1

              --- In NationalConstitutio nalConvention06@ yahoogroups. com, Paul Bern <jointheparty@ ...> wrote:
              >
              > I have a plan to clean up and restore the earth's environment, create anywhere from 300,000 to as many as a million new jobs, as well as rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure. The info is on my website (www.virtualdemocra cyparty.org) but please allow me to copy and paste it into this response. The solution is self-explanatory.
              > THE VIRTUAL DEMOCRACY PARTY'S SOLUTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT AND FOR HOMELESSNESS
              > [1] Create the Civilian Service Corps, a large public works initiative aimed at solving the problems of taking care of our environment and infrastructure.
              > [2] The C.S.C. will issue civilian draft cards to all workers, who will be paid the proposed $10.00 per hour minimum wage that is part of the Virtual Democracy Party's platform. This new program is estimated by the V.D.P. to be capable of creating from 300,00 to 1,000,000 new jobs.
              > [3] Those persons who do not take advantage of our proposed lifetime education system on the Internet can volunteer or be drafted into the Civilian Service Corps.
              > [4] Newly released prisoners will automatically be drafted into the C.S.C., eliminating the need for parole permanently.
              > [5] Homeless individuals and families can volunteer for or be drafted into the C.S.C. as a means for getting off the street and into a job.
              > [6] Those individuals who successfully complete two years of steady work will be rewarded with up to two years of higher education free of charge in an accredited community college or vocational school.
              > [7] Unemployment benefits will increase to 50 weeks instead of the current maximum of 26 weeks so that a fair opportunity can be had by everyone who is healthy enough to work. Those needing day care will have daycare either available on-site or at another prearranged location at little or no charge
              >
              > If we're going to be taking action to repair the Earth's environment and America's infrastructure, this action needs to be decisive and all-encompassing. While we're at it, please think about the prospect of making this idea a part of the Third Parties Coalition's platform, with the ultimate goal of making this a campaign issue for the third party candidate that will represent the TPC in the 2012 national election.
              >
              > DAN 1 srubnaya@... wrote:
              > It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths resources could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the finite natural resources... like through the breakdown and designed reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then again, maybe the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder and harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
              > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion to "Barbarism", (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good thing. Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy" , "Egalitarian Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity has to do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would enjoy having.
              > Respectfully, DAN 1
              > --- In NationalConstitutio nalConvention06@ yahoogroups. com, "The New York Review of Books" dogheadma12@ wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
              > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
              > >
              > > --
              > >
              > > The New York Review of Books
              > > April 27, 2006
              > > http://www.nybooks. com/articles/ 18931?email
              > >
              > > The Global Delusion
              > > By John Gray
              > >
              > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have believed that
              > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
              > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted that
              > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single type of
              > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
              > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global system.
              > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
              > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
              > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian communism and
              > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version of
              > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of life to
              > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these thinkers
              > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of industrialization
              > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been achieved, war
              > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the diverse
              > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
              > >
              > > ------------ --------
              > >
              > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
              > > Review's free email newsletters:
              > >
              > > http://www.nybooks. com/newsletters
              > >
              > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
              > >
              > > http://feeds. feedburner. com/nybooks
              > >
              > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
              > > on http://www.nybooks. com. The New York Review of Books is not
              > > responsible for the contents of this message.
              > >
              >

            • Eric Reinhardt
              Exactly, Dan, and that is why I always put quotes around the word elites when I refer to them, because they are elite in name only. And please call me
              Message 6 of 13 , Apr 2, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Exactly, Dan, and that is why I always put quotes around the
                word "elites" when I refer to them, because they are "elite" in name
                only. And please call me Eric.


                --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "DAN 1"
                <srubnaya@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > Yes Mr. Reinhardt. But, I see these "elites" as "psuedo elites".
                They
                > have little to do with real superiority. Sure, they have mastered
                the
                > arts of profit taking and manipulation of Our failing government to
                > enhance their own power over The People, but they are not truly
                Elite.
                > The truly Elite are givers not takers. They are much more likely to
                be
                > volunteers than profiteers. They care about America, as a nation of
                The
                > People and do what they can to help it. The pretenders, who are
                full of
                > fear and, as you say, "greed", serve only themselves. They are
                powerful
                > and dangerous, but their big weakness is their obviousness.
                >
                > They are tragic waste of Human talent. [:(] It is my Hope that
                they are
                > only a temporary phase of Our Culture.
                >
                > Thanks for mentioning them.
                >
                > Respectfully, DAN 1
                >
                >
                > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "Eric
                > Reinhardt" <ericreinhardt2003@> wrote:
                > >
                > > The main problem as I see it is that we have "elites" today that
                want
                > > it all or nothing. They are not interested in the concept of
                economic
                > > co-existence. It's THEIR economic system or the highway. GREED.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "DAN 1"
                > > srubnaya@ wrote:
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths
                > > resources
                > > > could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would
                > > > develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the
                > > finite
                > > > natural resources...like through the breakdown and designed
                > > > reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then
                again,
                > > maybe
                > > > the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder
                and
                > > > harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the
                > > > Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
                > > >
                > > > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion
                > > to "Barbarism",
                > > > (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good
                thing.
                > > > Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy", "Egalitarian
                > > > Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our
                > > > World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity
                > > has to
                > > > do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the
                > > > compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would
                > > enjoy
                > > > having.
                > > >
                > > > Respectfully, DAN 1
                > > > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "The
                New
                > > York
                > > > Review of Books" <dogheadma12@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
                > > > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
                > > > >
                > > > > --
                > > > >
                > > > > The New York Review of Books
                > > > > April 27, 2006
                > > > > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18931?email
                > > > >
                > > > > The Global Delusion
                > > > > By John Gray
                > > > >
                > > > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have
                believed
                > > that
                > > > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the
                nineteenth
                > > > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted
                > > that
                > > > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single
                > > type of
                > > > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in
                a
                > > > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global
                > > system.
                > > > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that
                was
                > > > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
                > > > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian
                > > communism and
                > > > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a
                version of
                > > > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of
                > > life to
                > > > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these
                > > thinkers
                > > > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of
                industrialization
                > > > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been
                achieved,
                > > war
                > > > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the
                > > diverse
                > > > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
                > > > >
                > > > > --------------------
                > > > >
                > > > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
                > > > > Review's free email newsletters:
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
                > > > >
                > > > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
                > > > >
                > > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
                > > > >
                > > > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend"
                feature
                > > > > on http://www.nybooks.com The New York Review of Books is not
                > > > > responsible for the contents of this message.
                > > > >
                > > >
                > >
                >
              • Eric Reinhardt
                I also like the idea. It worked very well during the Depression and it would be very good for a lot of our college students today to give them some MUCH NEEDED
                Message 7 of 13 , Apr 2, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  I also like the idea. It worked very well during the Depression and
                  it would be very good for a lot of our college students today to give
                  them some MUCH NEEDED exposure to the REAL world as opposed to the
                  fantasy world often portrayed in their agenda-driven textbooks.


                  --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "DAN 1"
                  <srubnaya@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Dear Mr. Bern. Your plans always desrve serious consideration. I
                  thank
                  > you for sharing them here. I hope We can all benefit from mutually
                  > beneficial discussions about them. Here, in your web site and in
                  Third
                  > Parties Coalition.
                  >
                  > I really like the idea of the "Civilian Service Corps". They would
                  make
                  > good use of Human Resources that might otherwise be wasted.
                  >
                  > I think a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour might be better though.
                  But,
                  > that is just me.
                  >
                  > Just the "CSC" plan alone would help Our Nation a lot.
                  >
                  > This idea might work well with the "American Earned Guaranteed
                  Income"
                  > that I wrote about in Third Parties group site.
                  >
                  > Yes. I certainly will consider making this plan a part of the Third
                  > Parties Platform...though there may be a wee delay while We decide
                  on a
                  > presidential candidate and wait for additional members to increase
                  Our
                  > vitality.
                  >
                  > Let's keep sharing these good ideas. It is responsible of Us to do
                  so.
                  > They may just find a way to take root, with other innovations, in
                  the
                  > potentially fertile soil of the American People.
                  >
                  > Respectfully, DAN 1
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, Paul Bern
                  > <jointheparty@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I have a plan to clean up and restore the earth's environment,
                  create
                  > anywhere from 300,000 to as many as a million new jobs, as well as
                  > rebuilding America's crumbling infrastructure. The info is on my
                  website
                  > (www.virtualdemocracyparty.org) but please allow me to copy and
                  paste it
                  > into this response. The solution is self-explanatory.
                  > > THE VIRTUAL DEMOCRACY PARTY'S SOLUTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT,
                  > UNEMPLOYMENT AND FOR HOMELESSNESS
                  > > [1] Create the Civilian Service Corps, a large public works
                  initiative
                  > aimed at solving the problems of taking care of our environment and
                  > infrastructure.
                  > > [2] The C.S.C. will issue civilian draft cards to all workers, who
                  > will be paid the proposed $10.00 per hour minimum wage that is part
                  of
                  > the Virtual Democracy Party's platform. This new program is
                  estimated by
                  > the V.D.P. to be capable of creating from 300,00 to 1,000,000 new
                  jobs.
                  > > [3] Those persons who do not take advantage of our proposed
                  lifetime
                  > education system on the Internet can volunteer or be drafted into
                  the
                  > Civilian Service Corps.
                  > > [4] Newly released prisoners will automatically be drafted into
                  the
                  > C.S.C., eliminating the need for parole permanently.
                  > > [5] Homeless individuals and families can volunteer for or be
                  drafted
                  > into the C.S.C. as a means for getting off the street and into a
                  job.
                  > > [6] Those individuals who successfully complete two years of
                  steady
                  > work will be rewarded with up to two years of higher education free
                  of
                  > charge in an accredited community college or vocational school.
                  > > [7] Unemployment benefits will increase to 50 weeks instead of the
                  > current maximum of 26 weeks so that a fair opportunity can be had by
                  > everyone who is healthy enough to work. Those needing day care will
                  have
                  > daycare either available on-site or at another prearranged location
                  at
                  > little or no charge
                  > >
                  > > If we're going to be taking action to repair the Earth's
                  environment
                  > and America's infrastructure, this action needs to be decisive and
                  > all-encompassing. While we're at it, please think about the
                  prospect of
                  > making this idea a part of the Third Parties Coalition's platform,
                  with
                  > the ultimate goal of making this a campaign issue for the third
                  party
                  > candidate that will represent the TPC in the 2012 national election.
                  > >
                  > > DAN 1 srubnaya@ wrote:
                  > > It seems that these thinkers were not yet aware that Earths
                  resources
                  > could be depleted, or they bet that science and technology would
                  > develope the ability to produce the needs of People without the
                  finite
                  > natural resources...like through the breakdown and designed
                  > reconstruction of cells, molecules and even atoms. But then again,
                  maybe
                  > the mineral natural resources that appear to be getting harder and
                  > harder to find, are still in vast quantities deeper inside the
                  > Earth...or on the other planets in our solar system.
                  > > Anyway. I think a calculated and enlightened reversion
                  to "Barbarism",
                  > (without the cruelties), or a "New Tribalism" might be a good thing.
                  > Also, all three types of cultures, ("Technocracy", "Egalitarian
                  > Communism" and "Laissez-fair Capitalism") can co-exist on Our
                  > World...even be mixed in one proportion or another. All Humanity
                  has to
                  > do is develope more tolerance to difference and learn to see the
                  > compatibilities. Such would give us social choices that We would
                  enjoy
                  > having.
                  > > Respectfully, DAN 1
                  > > --- In NationalConstitutionalConvention06@yahoogroups.com, "The
                  New
                  > York Review of Books" dogheadma12@ wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Michael Adorno dogheadma12@ thought you would be interested in
                  > > > the following article from The New York Review of Books.
                  > > >
                  > > > --
                  > > >
                  > > > The New York Review of Books
                  > > > April 27, 2006
                  > > > http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18931?email
                  > > >
                  > > > The Global Delusion
                  > > > By John Gray
                  > > >
                  > > > For the past two centuries leading social theorists have
                  believed
                  > that
                  > > > modern development can have only one outcome. In the nineteenth
                  > > > century Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer, and Auguste Comte asserted
                  that
                  > > > the advance of science and technology was leading to a single
                  type
                  > of
                  > > > social organization, and unless modern societies foundered in a
                  > > > reversion to barbarism they were bound to converge in a global
                  > system.
                  > > > There was wide disagreement on the nature of the system that was
                  > > > coming into being. According to Comte it would be a kind of
                  > > > technocracy, while Marx believed it would be egalitarian
                  communism
                  > and
                  > > > Spencer laissez-faire capitalism. In each case it was a version
                  of
                  > > > industrial society that enabled scarcity in the necessities of
                  life
                  > to
                  > > > be overcome. Despite their different political visions these
                  > thinkers
                  > > > were at one in assuming that with the advent of
                  industrialization
                  > > > prosperity could be ensured for all. Once this had been
                  achieved,
                  > war
                  > > > would cease and a universal economic system would replace the
                  > diverse
                  > > > and conflicting regimes of the past.
                  > > >
                  > > > --------------------
                  > > >
                  > > > If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
                  > > > Review's free email newsletters:
                  > > >
                  > > > http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
                  > > >
                  > > > You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
                  > > >
                  > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
                  > > >
                  > > > This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend"
                  feature
                  > > > on http://www.nybooks.com The New York Review of Books is not
                  > > > responsible for the contents of this message.
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.