If all the nuclear weapons were set off that would be a game changer.
Like I said, it may no longer be a matter of socialism or barbarism, but
rather, socialism or extinction. But my point is that the existence of
nuclear weapons and the threat of their use is not going to stop the
class struggle. If the human species is made extinct then that might
stop it. As for the rest of what you said, I remember that once you
asked me why everything has to be a debate. Well, I kind of wonder that
myself. I don't claim to be an expert on anything, but there are some
things I know better than other things and I try to share what I do know
when the subject comes up. Now, imagine this. Picture yourself as a
teacher in a classroom. Suppose you are teaching something that you know
something about. I suppose you probably have a lot of expertise in the
adoption business. That is something that I am a complete ignoramus
about myself. So suppose you are teaching the ins and outs of the
adoption business. Then certain students just keep contradicting you and
when they do so they completely miss the points you are making. You
explain a point and one of these students denies that you know what you
are talking about and tries to refute you with some argument that had
nothing to do with what you were trying to explain. But you keep trying
to get your point across anyway and your students just keep denying
everything you say. Then suppose one of these students asks you why
everything has to be a debate with you. I get the feeling that you would
not be as patient as I am. But that is exactly what I face when I try to
explain Marxism to you. If you don't understand something you could at
least ask questions that relate to what I just said so that I could
reformulate my explanation to make myself more clear. But when you just
deny what I have said with a point that does not even relate to what I
said I can't do that. I don't know what else to do other than just
repeat myself. It is a frustrating job.
___
Carl Sagan “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance
between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all
hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great
openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some
tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes,
whichever one it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only skeptical,
then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new.
You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the
world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now
and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to be on
the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being
skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and
either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and
progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility
and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot
distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones.” ― Carl Sagan
On 4/9/2021 4:58 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
It doesn't matter if there are weapons of mass destruction? It matters becausea simultaneous discussion with someone from another list who espouses "Democdracy
nuclear winter will end all life on earth.
One of the things that happens when we begin to discuss things is that you insist that I stick with your points and follow the arguments of the philosophy in which you believe and I tend to rebel and repeatedly stray from your line of reasoning. So at that point, we can't continue to discuss the subject in a constructive manner. In the same way that I could never be a member of a religion, I cannot be an obedient Marxist. I'm having
violence happens anyway and it really doesn't matter whether it is instigated by outside forces or not. It is still inevitable and it doesn't matter if there are weapons of mass destruction involved or not. It is still going to happen. So my point, again, is that we have to make the best of it. We have to use these outbreaks of civil war or other wars to guide the outcome into something that will build the kind of society we would like to have. You just keep missing my point over and over. As for your comments about those other countries, I may have some quibbles with you, but to get into them would be doing the same thing you are doing. That is, to stray from my own point and to forget it. I will remind you of this, though, as I have reminded you many times. No revolution is going to turn out exactly the way we want it to. There is virtually nothing in this world that turns out exactly the way we want it to. There are just too many variables to keep track of. The chaos theorists call it the butterfly effect. That is, the flapping of a butterfly's wings in South America can lead to a typhoon in the South China Sea ten years later. Not even a quantum computer could predict that. We just have to look at which things went wrong every time they go wrong and try to understand why they went wrong and then apply those lessons to the next time. That is called science.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Friday, April 9, 2021 3:31 PM
To: blind-democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: today's episode of Economic Update
Syria started as demonstrations by peace loving people against an autocratic government. That is exactly what I was saying. They don't want to inflict violence and they don't want violence inflicted upon them. But the
As for your claim that you can understand why people would devote theirlives to these theoretical concepts, I don't think you understand at all. How can you really understand if you just keep on missing the whole point of those concepts?
to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension. But if
___
Carl Sagan “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness
You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling theworld. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones.” ― Carl Sagan On 4/9/2021 9:41 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Russia and China are beginning to gather other countries and set up a financialSyria started as demonstrations against an autocratic government by peaceThe US is stealing the oil and preventing the people from being fed. None of the other countries that you've mentioned have fared well except for Cuba and in order for them to survive, the government had to run an almost police state. Vietnam? What is it now except a vassal of the west because the US dollar rules the world. The new, hopeful development is that
loving people and was turned into something else by outside forces. The country
is being destroyed. Huge numbers of refugees have had to leave.
rulers can easily squash them.Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
(Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 9:41 PM
To: blind-democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: today's episode of Economic Update
Miriam wrote: "Sure, angry people can rise up, but the kind of power that will be
used against them is very different now."
It is not a matter of angry people rising up. Again, it is a matter of
taking steps to secure their rights and to defend themselves. Again,
when anyone sees that some people have power and privilege and use
that power to maintain that situation and to manipulate them a certain
amount of resentment builds up and the ones who do not have the power
and privilege will take steps, peaceful steps, to attain justice. Not
only is the effort peaceful, but it is most likely to be perfectly
legal according to the laws of their oppressors. Depending on how many
people are involved and depending on how much pressure is exercised it
may even have some success. In fact, the concessions and the take
backs may happen over a long period of time. But it is when enough
success has been accomplished by the seekers of justice that the
people with the power and privilege see that they are in actual danger
of being deposed that all hell breaks loose. The ones who are fighting
for justice do not want to be shot at. They do not seek to be shot at
or to shoot other people. But they do defend themselves when they are
attacked and that is when a revolution happens. There may be
adventurists who try to circumvent this process, but adventurist
movements fail because they do not have the masses behind them and the
inAs for the power that can be used against them, well, look at some ofthings are very different now than they were. Sure, angry people can rise
the places in the world where armed conflict has broken out recently.
The Syrian rulers have some pretty impressive power to use too and
they have been using it, but a civil war still broke out. Of course it
is not and never was a socialist revolution, but, like I said, the
revolution is what is inevitable. It has to be made a socialist
revolution if it is going to be a socialist revolution. Look to Vietnam. Look
to Algeria.
Look to Cuba. Look to the Congo. All relatively recent and with a lot
of deadly power to use against any revolution, but that did not stop
the revolution from happening. It is kind of like having a hurricane
bearing down on you. You can't stop it. It is going to be destructive
whether you like it or not. But those who prepare for it fare better
than those who claim that hurricanes are impossible and do nothing
about it. And a hurricane is not an uprising by angry people or angry forces of
nature.
___
Carl Sagan “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance
between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all
hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great
openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in
some tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes,
whichever one it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only
skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything
new.
You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling
the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every
now and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to
be on the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit
of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent
it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding
and progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of
gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you
cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones.” ― Carl
Sagan On 4/8/2021 9:04 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I understand what you are saying and what you've said in the past.
But
up, but the kind of power that will be used against them is verycan be averted before they even begin. And in the past, society wasn't on the brink of climate catastrophe or threatened by nuclear weapons. History can tell us about human behavior but it can't predict outcomes. And
different now than in the past because of advances in technology. The
uprisings
orthe past, the organizing was more effective because the populationare reaching. I understand your loyalty to the ideas. But my pessimism,
hadn't been so thoroughly manipulated by the mass media and Big Tech
as it is now. Just look at the numbers that the tiny fragmented
socialist parties
Marxism. Sometimes when they are not teaching what you want to learn you justis it realism?, tells me that the outcome for which you hope and that peoplesocialist revolution. But the revolution itself is not something that happens
are working for, just isn't in the cards.
Miriamof revolutions have happened throughout history. We can look at them
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 8:22 PM
To: blind-democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: today's episode of Economic Update
Revolutions are inevitable though. We have the historical record that
shows it. And it is not just that the historical record shows that a
bunch
and see under what circumstances they occurred and what led up to
them. We can see that it is always a matter of a class exploiting
another class and as long as that happens the resentments will build
up to make more revolutions happen. So, again as I have explained so
many times, it is not a matter of organizing the workers to have a
socialist revolution. It is a matter of organizing the workers when
there is a revolution to make it a socialist revolution. That is
another lesson we can learn from history. Not every revolution against
capital is a socialist revolution. In order for it to be a socialist
revolution there has to be a movement to make it a
at the direction of anyone. A lot of people have to participate, but it may as
well be regarded as a act of nature in that no one actually wants a revolution
and all the destruction that it entails. They want their rights and then they
want to defend themselves. By the way, you mentioned
that you didn't study Marxist theory in college because of the times
when you attended college. Let me say that I never took a college course that covered Marxist theory either. That is not to say that I did not study Marxist theory when I was in college though. I also never took a college class on evolutionary biology even if evolutionary biology was an underlying assumption in all my college biology classes. But I still graduated from college knowing quite a bit about both evolutionary biology and
balance___
Carl Sagan “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite
it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new.hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great opennessbetween two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all
new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension.
But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, whichever one
4:44 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is rulingworld. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now
the
and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to be on
the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and progress. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones.” ― Carl Sagan On 4/8/2021
new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new.appear to me to be realistic. I think it is a beautiful dream, kind of like theepisodes, is worker cooperatives. Now we have a bit of a problem theWhat he didn't talk about, is how to get from where we are to what
he's describing. And all he was talking about, and has talked about
in other
name of which, is reality. We are living in a world ruled by multi
national corporations that control nations which have military power.
So talking about organizing workers in order to have a socialist
revolution, does not
kingdom of heaven.
balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of alleveryone an employee of the state because it is a long range goal to actuallyMiriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 3:43 PM
To: blind-democracy <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: today's episode of Economic Update
I have not listened to that episode that you refer to, but based on
what you say you have learned from it that is what I have been
trying to tell you all along. For one thing, of course it is not a
program for making
abolish the state.
___
Carl Sagan “It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite
hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a greatBut if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, whichever one it is, you’re in deep trouble. If you are only skeptical, then no
openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension.
ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones.” ― Carl Sagan On 4/8/2021 1:10 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not anmark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of beingYou become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling
the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But
every now and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns
out to be on the
skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and
either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and
progress. On the
about, today.Richard Wolff described his understanding of Marxism in this
episode and I'd suggest that anyone who has read Marx, listen to what he says.
I have not read Marxist theory, or perhaps I read samples of it in
college courses. But given the fact that I attended college from
1955 to 1959 while the cold war was at the center of our country's
consciousness, it's doubtful. As Wolff remarks, he studied
Economics and History at three Ivy League colleges and his highly
competent professors wouldn't touch the subject with a ten foot
pole. However, what I learned today from Wolff is that the theory
focuses on the class conflict that is inherent in the capitalist
workplace and the solution implied, is worker cooperatives rather
than employer/employee arrangements. The theory does not involve
state socialism because if the state is the employer, the same
employer/employee conflict may result. It has nothing to do with
government control or government ownership. That is what Economic
Update was
Miriam.
