The Good Book

Originally posted by divegeester
Good interesting stuff thanks for sharing. I do believe in some of what you are talking about, here is my perspective which is probably more pragmatic:

I believe in supporting local business, but not if what they supply is crap or stupidly expensive with no tangible extra benefit to me

I believe is having fun while your young and I would have defi ...[text shortened]... al you pursue has never existed ever and never will - on earth (just to keep it spiritual)

I believe you are profoundly mistaken. Here is my spiritual rebuttal:

I believe that private property was mankind's original sin. Subdividing the common treasury of the earth's bounty into 'mine and thine' is what got mankind kicked out of the metaphorical Garden of Eden.

I believe that Jesus was a socialist (or a proto-socialist, if you will). Christians will latch on to an obscure passage or two to launch a holy war against gay marriage, but they will turn a blind eye to the dozens of passages which condemn the rich and an economic system of exploitation. To quote George Lansbury, "Socialism which means love, cooperation and brotherhood in every department of human affairs, is the only outward expression of a Christian's faith. I am firmly convinced that whether they know it or not, all who approve and accept competition and struggle against each other as the means whereby we gain our daily bread, do indeed betray and make of no effect the "will of God."

I believe that the Hutterites are the closest modern day practitioners of what Jesus had in mind. They are engaged in the process of building The Kingdom. A society with no private property and no exploitation. A society that once again treats the bounty of the earth as a common treasury (see Acts 2:43-47 and Acts 4:32-37). That may not be the 'pragmatic' approach, but the kingdom isn't supposed to be pragmatic.

I do not believe that it is up to you, as a Christian, to judge the motives of the least among us and decide which of them is fit to live and which should be left to starve. (Matthew 25:31-46) You may find yourself like the rich man who let Lazarus starve outside his door (Luke 16:19-31).

He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is because it is protectionism. I really cant see how you reconcile your protectionism with your desire to deal with world hunger.
If you preferred small businesses over multinationals, I might be more understanding, but your insistence on local is protectionism. But even your dislike of multinationals doesn't make a lot of sense. What do you have a ...[text shortened]... hem? How are they less capitalist than your local companies? They are certainly more efficient.

Efficiency is the most overrated word in the English language. I, for one, think we could do with quite a bit less 'efficiency.'

I don't know how things are in your part of the world, but 'buying local' is becoming a big thing over here. Every store now has a local section, which specialize in locally grown produce or locally made products. Restaurants boast of local ingredients. Words like 'locavore' are becoming part of the daily lexicon. So it isn't just me. There is a whole segment of society that is reacting against factory farming, big agribusiness and monolithic multinationals, like Walmart. Small is beautiful. Small and local is even better.

Originally posted by rwingett
Efficiency is the most overrated word in the English language. I, for one, think we could do with quite a bit less 'efficiency.'

I don't know how things are in your part of the world, but 'buying local' is becoming a big thing over here. Every store now has a local section, which specialize in locally grown produce or locally made products. Restaurants ...[text shortened]... lithic multinationals, like Walmart. Small is beautiful. Small and local is even better.

I think the USA has had an overdose of monoculture.

Here we just fork out whatever the cartels have deemed a fair price.

The best produce is exported.

Oh, and Walmart is coming.

Originally posted by rwingett
Man, you're a tough customer. What do you expect me to do? Throw Molotov cocktails through bank windows, or something? OK, here's my revolutionary resume:

As people who follow my posts already know, I never tire of regaling them about my time at East Wind Community. That's right, I have been to the mountaintop. I have seen the promised land. And it lies ...[text shortened]... eve I have made some positive changes, and will continue to make more as I go.

I agree, you are doing well. Non-violent boycotting of mass produced goods made by dodgy transnational companies is great thing. Vote with your pocket.
And as far as clothes are concerned (and many other modern appliances),much can be bought second-hand as there seems to be a huge surplus of unwanted goods (and food) in western countries.
I want to buy a share in a commune, possibly with a half-built house.
If I get that bit of land, I will attempt to get out of the rent cycle and possibly build and grow stuff intstead, take back the wealth for the common people.

Originally posted by twhitehead
That is because it is protectionism. I really cant see how you reconcile your protectionism with your desire to deal with world hunger.
If you preferred small businesses over multinationals, I might be more understanding, but your insistence on local is protectionism. But even your dislike of multinationals doesn't make a lot of sense. What do you have a ...[text shortened]... hem? How are they less capitalist than your local companies? They are certainly more efficient.

The more powerful, the more corrupt. I know your not naive.

Originally posted by divegeester
Good interesting stuff thanks for sharing. I do believe in some of what you are talking about, here is my perspective which is probably more pragmatic:

I believe in supporting local business, but not if what they supply is crap or stupidly expensive with no tangible extra benefit to me

I believe is having fun while your young and I would have defi ...[text shortened]... al you pursue has never existed ever and never will - on earth (just to keep it spiritual)

"...and never will"-why not? (briefly)

Originally posted by rwingett
I believe you are profoundly mistaken. Here is my spiritual rebuttal:

I believe that private property was mankind's original sin. Subdividing the common treasury of the earth's bounty into 'mine and thine' is what got mankind kicked out of the metaphorical Garden of Eden.

I believe that Jesus was a socialist (or a proto-socialist, if you will). Chris ...[text shortened]... He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.[/b]

I know a group of people that have bought a huge piece of land together.
All that have entered there do not return, that is part of the deal. They have no time, except for the time of telling where the sun is, and they live really simply. They live in harmony with nature, I dont know how long that grpup has been going , but I imagine it would have taken at least a couple of years to forget about time,the capitalist society they came from and possibly family they have left behind.
for better or worse , these people chosen to live like this. It is truly a mystery what goes in in the borders of thsat land. I suspect there are no roads for lost tourists....
They have made a decision and followed thorugh. They could all be killing eachother for all I know, but the fact that it is a mystery and they draw absolutely no attention to themselves means I reckon they have a peaceful, natural existence.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I know a group of people that have bought a huge piece of land together.
All that have entered there do not return, that is part of the deal. They have no time, except for the time of telling where the sun is, and they live really simply. They live in harmony with nature, I dont know how long that grpup has been going , but I imagine it would have take ...[text shortened]... aw absolutely no attention to themselves means I reckon they have a peaceful, natural existence.

A consciousness of time is the great scourge of human freedom. Clocks are the handmaidens of twhitehead's cherished 'efficiency', and harbingers of domestication, social stratification, hierarchy and alienation. The greater the precision by which a society measures time is an indicator of just how much personal freedom they have sacrificed on the altar of efficiency.

Who is this group? Are they registered with the FIC (Federation of Intentional Communities)?
http://www.ic.org/

Originally posted by rwingett
Efficiency is the most overrated word in the English language. I, for one, think we could do with quite a bit less 'efficiency.'

Why? Why should we all waste our time and effort on useless inefficiency when it could be better spent feeding those hungry people? My biggest complaint about the capitalist system is that encourages trading and 'the middle man' All the top minds are employed by wall street, not in any productive trade but acting as middle men between the investor and the investee. So horribly wasteful.

I don't know how things are in your part of the world, but 'buying local' is becoming a big thing over here. Every store now has a local section, which specialize in locally grown produce or locally made products. Restaurants boast of local ingredients. Words like 'locavore' are becoming part of the daily lexicon. So it isn't just me. There is a whole segment of society that is reacting against factory farming, big agribusiness and monolithic multinationals, like Walmart. Small is beautiful. Small and local is even better.
I fully realize that protectionism is on the up in some parts of the world. I am not surprised. Interesting that you don't seem to have any defense for it and instead have gone with 'thats what everybodys doing nowadays' and a few cute slogans.
Nevertheless it contradicts your earlier stated philosophy of helping those starving millions. Instead, having grown wealthy off their backs, you now wish to hang on to that wealth and 'keep it local'. Your just a hypocrite. Not unlike Jesus who preached socialism, but never did a days work in his life, preferring to live off others.

Edit: (OK that last sentence was just a bit of trolling). 🙂

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why? Why should we all waste our time and effort on useless inefficiency when it could be better spent feeding those hungry people? My biggest complaint about the capitalist system is that encourages trading and 'the middle man' All the top minds are employed by wall street, not in any productive trade but acting as middle men between the investor and the ...[text shortened]... to live off others.

Edit: (OK that last sentence was just a bit of trolling). 🙂

If food production were returned to local control, starvation would be eradicated. As I pointed out earlier, we have the power to eliminate starvation now. We do not do so because it is not profitable in our current economic system.

Here's a conundrum for you: we live in the greatest technological era in history. Our vast technology allows us to farm a greater number of acres with less labor input. We should be able to feed everyone, should we not? But, as the evidence shows, we do not. Now let's turn to the Amish communities. They maintain a very primitive level of technology. Yet there are no starving Amish. They manage to feed themselves very well. Why do you suppose that is? The conclusion, I think, is that beyond a certain point, our vaunted technology does little for us. It is the mode of social organization that plays a primary role in determining whether people are adequately fed or not.

Originally posted by rwingett
It is the mode of social organization that plays a primary role in determining whether people are adequately fed or not.

As far as I know, food production is sufficient to meet the needs of the world population, but pricing models lead to surpluses in some areas being dumped while other areas starve. Also, there is no requirement for agriprocessing companies (let's not talk about 'farmers'😉 to ensure that their compatriots are adequately and affordably fed; they are free to seek the highest price for their nutritious products anywhere in the world. Competition being what it is, though, enormous amounts must be spent on marketing and packaging to make the food sexy as well as nutritious. To my knowledge, nobody has taken this connection to its logical extreme.

Originally posted by rwingett
If food production were returned to local control, starvation would be eradicated.

How do you explain that?

As I pointed out earlier, we have the power to eliminate starvation now. We do not do so because it is not profitable in our current economic system.
So you say, but your method for going about it doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Here's a conundrum for you: we live in the greatest technological era in history. Our vast technology allows us to farm a greater number of acres with less labor input. We should be able to feed everyone, should we not? But, as the evidence shows, we do not. Now let's turn to the Amish communities. They maintain a very primitive level of technology. Yet there are no starving Amish. They manage to feed themselves very well. Why do you suppose that is?
A number of reasons, the main one is probably the communal spirit in the communities. But I don't think it has anything to do with farm size or technology.

The conclusion, I think, is that beyond a certain point, our vaunted technology does little for us.
Thats a very odd conclusion - coming from someone communicating on a chess website via the internet. I am starting to get the feeling you know nothing about the hungry people in Africa and why they are hungry.

It is the mode of social organization that plays a primary role in determining whether people are adequately fed or not.
That I agree with.

Originally posted by rwingett
I do not believe that it is up to you, as a Christian, to judge the motives of the least among us and decide which of them is fit to live and which should be left to starve. (Matthew 25:31-46) You may find yourself like the rich man who let Lazarus starve outside his door (Luke 16:19-31).

I'm not judging. God is 'Judge', but I'm very capable at discerning.

Can I give you a simple scenario: If you were/are an employer and you had some useless lazy git in your midst whom you were paying a lot of your hard earned money, what would you do? Think about it and be honest and..pragmatic.

If a man will not work, he shall not eat." 2 Thes 3:10

What you aspire to is admirable my friend, but simply unworkable and I have to say borderline naive, when brought into the light of our temporal economic reality.

Originally posted by rwingett
A consciousness of time is the great scourge of human freedom. Clocks are the handmaidens of twhitehead's cherished 'efficiency', and harbingers of domestication, social stratification, hierarchy and alienation. The greater the precision by which a society measures time is an indicator of just how much personal freedom they have sacrificed on the altar of e ...[text shortened]... Are they registered with the FIC (Federation of Intentional Communities)?
http://www.ic.org/

Dont know. Word leaked out to an ex-friend of mine. He (the ex-friend) was a special case. He would meet people and go places where others wouldn't-and without a car.
Based on the other things he told, his knowledge of the land and some of the more influencial "undergound" figures he was aquainted with, I have no reason to doubt him.

But I do wonder what they get upto, other than surviving?

Originally posted by divegeester
What you aspire to is admirable my friend, but simply unworkable and I have to say borderline naive, when brought into the light of our temporal economic reality.

It sounds as though you have let the money changers into your temple, divegeester. It is time to drive them out, for no one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.