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

5809R: [anthroposophy] Re: thanks, bruce/breaking blood ties

Expand Messages
  • Sören Groth
    Nov 4, 2002
      --- In anthroposophy@y..., Sören Groth <sgroth@b...> wrote:
      > --- In anthroposophy@y..., "VALENTINA BRUNETTI" <okcgbr@t...> wrote:
      > > Dear Soren,
      > > here I have to disagree.
      > > The "healthy impulse" lies in the Socialistic non-marxist stream
      of XIX
      > > Century:
      >
      > My statement was a very condensed thought... and you put it right.. I
      > didn't mean the impulses of Marx and Lenin was healthy social
      > impulses, but that they made ideology of healthy social impulses...

      As in the onliest parts of marxism I agree to he took from Proudhon.
      Marx was the worst slanderer, he loved industrial progress, national
      political expansion, and a german chauvinist.... communism was
      something he borrowed to serve his big philosophical EGO, the theory
      of dialectic materialism explaining everything in history .. to Marx
      the proletariat, the real living people there was just a brick in a
      big philosophical dialectic battle.... and funny enough the
      materialism in Marx is total IDEA not MATTER and SUBSTANCE ...
      The onliest reason this person really got a hold on the MOVEMENT of
      people and lead there minds away from the real MATTER and SUBSTANCE
      into a world of abstract thinking .. that the MOVEMENT in Europe was
      based on migration, leaving the known world, the group soul of artisan
      and peasant life, to become an attachment to the machine, and when
      seeking for something to replace the spiritual and human needs, they
      did not find rights (which must replace the unconscious group rights,
      the family-blood ties) but priveleges. The benefits of division of
      labour, the cultural sphere of the elite offered no answer, other than
      "You'll get pie in the skye when you die" ..
      Now we have this migration on a global stage - and make the same
      mistake, and as much as some try to modernize their views, their
      arguments is total blueprints of Malthus and ManchesterLiberalism..
      And in this turmoil, where there no longer is any Groupspirit guiding
      migration (in earlier migrations in history there was a principate
      guided by the spiritual world .. there is no more, it's an individual
      destiny to participate in migration (country to city... or to
      emmigrate - immigrate) ... I do understand that this have a bit
      different perspective in the US, as the migration in the
      industrialized age, was more obviousley an individual destiny for the
      ones performing it... by emigrating ... It's not quite the same
      feeling of adventure a girl from northern Thailand feels when she is
      sold to a factory owner in Bangkok, or a brothel. No matter how
      individually liberty wonderful Libertarians without heart may make it
      sound like ... "money doesn't smell"
      Friedman... Isn't that he guy who thinks a company only have one moral
      responsibility and that is to make as much money as possible to it's
      owners ?? And as the companies should not take any responsibility all
      interference from organised labour, organised consumers or organised
      rights sphere is interference in "freedom" ??
      Ends up with a pretty closed and exclusive brootherhood in the
      economical sphere -

      Sören
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic