From laires11@gmail.com Wed Jan 1 04:50:51 2014 From: laires11@gmail.com (Luisa Aires) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2014 12:50:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: Dear Mike This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this fantastic project. Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) Happy new year to all XMCAers Best wishes, Lu?sa On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to bring > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and ponder > too. > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being squeezed > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > used for distance rather than safety). > > Best, > Huw > From laires11@gmail.com Wed Jan 1 04:50:51 2014 From: laires11@gmail.com (Luisa Aires) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2014 12:50:51 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: Dear Mike This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this fantastic project. Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) Happy new year to all XMCAers Best wishes, Lu?sa On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to bring > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and ponder > too. > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being squeezed > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > used for distance rather than safety). > > Best, > Huw > From lchcmike@gmail.com Thu Jan 2 17:46:41 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:46:41 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of the doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to communicate in print. The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, so to speak. It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards themselves, on new year's eve. I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his own point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way of "shaping" the growth process. For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, at a time when we could show three living systems created on principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of this line of joint activity between university and community setting. I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body within which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of university and community people/entities." I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a representation that could communicate to a broader community? In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And achieve other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, but it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, university faculty and students, and the university administration. The third audience are those among you who are interested in the relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental spiral. :-)) mike PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth these days) (In 1950 terms it was four quarters or one dollar). :-) On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > Dear Mike > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this > fantastic project. > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and > ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > Best wishes, > > Lu?sa > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to bring > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and > ponder > > too. > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > squeezed > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > > used for distance rather than safety). > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > From lchcmike@gmail.com Thu Jan 2 17:46:41 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 17:46:41 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of the doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to communicate in print. The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, so to speak. It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards themselves, on new year's eve. I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his own point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way of "shaping" the growth process. For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, at a time when we could show three living systems created on principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of this line of joint activity between university and community setting. I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body within which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of university and community people/entities." I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a representation that could communicate to a broader community? In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And achieve other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, but it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, university faculty and students, and the university administration. The third audience are those among you who are interested in the relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental spiral. :-)) mike PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth these days) (In 1950 terms it was four quarters or one dollar). :-) On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > Dear Mike > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this > fantastic project. > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and > ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > Best wishes, > > Lu?sa > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to bring > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and > ponder > > too. > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > squeezed > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > > used for distance rather than safety). > > > > Best, > > Huw > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Jan 3 06:18:58 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:18:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in condensed form: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling and inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their concscious orientation. Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) Best, Huw On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one > time." I personally thought that > Andy brought out the feel of the doing of the work in a way that is quite > difficult to communicate in print. > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of professor > emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, so to speak. > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards themselves, on > new > year's eve. > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will assume > its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If so, I like > the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the change in medium > and the perspective of a film maker who has his own point of view on the > whole enterprise, create an interesting way of "shaping" the growth > process. > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably relevant > that we began arrangements for this > film several years ago, at a time when we could show three living systems > created on principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation > at once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of this > line of joint activity between university and community setting. I knew > this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from afar to see > "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw three such systems > as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter is "Oh,so that is > how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second encounter is "What? How > is the one the > same as that one I saw yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is > "Oh, I get it. Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body > within which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of > university and community people/entities." > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of ridiculous > evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a sympathetic outsider > with the skills needed to provide a representation that could communicate > to a broader community? > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a > multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary > educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and > Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. So one > audience here was my colleagues > at UCSD. Couldn't we address issues of diversity very effectively through > such courses? And achieve other > presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical activity > in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June afternoon. Its a > long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these people we want to > provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of activity can be created > and sustained. We do not go into detail, but it requires at least the > combined efforts of local citizens, university faculty and students, and > the university administration. > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does not > suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative > representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what in the > hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and emotion > he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental > spiral. :-)) > > mike > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth these > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > Dear Mike > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this > > fantastic project. > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and > > ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to > bring > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and > > ponder > > > too. > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > > squeezed > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > > > used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Fri Jan 3 06:18:58 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:18:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in condensed form: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling and inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their concscious orientation. Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) Best, Huw On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one > time." I personally thought that > Andy brought out the feel of the doing of the work in a way that is quite > difficult to communicate in print. > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of professor > emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, so to speak. > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards themselves, on > new > year's eve. > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will assume > its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If so, I like > the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the change in medium > and the perspective of a film maker who has his own point of view on the > whole enterprise, create an interesting way of "shaping" the growth > process. > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably relevant > that we began arrangements for this > film several years ago, at a time when we could show three living systems > created on principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation > at once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of this > line of joint activity between university and community setting. I knew > this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from afar to see > "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw three such systems > as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter is "Oh,so that is > how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second encounter is "What? How > is the one the > same as that one I saw yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is > "Oh, I get it. Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body > within which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of > university and community people/entities." > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of ridiculous > evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a sympathetic outsider > with the skills needed to provide a representation that could communicate > to a broader community? > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a > multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary > educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and > Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. So one > audience here was my colleagues > at UCSD. Couldn't we address issues of diversity very effectively through > such courses? And achieve other > presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical activity > in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June afternoon. Its a > long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these people we want to > provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of activity can be created > and sustained. We do not go into detail, but it requires at least the > combined efforts of local citizens, university faculty and students, and > the university administration. > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does not > suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative > representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what in the > hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and emotion > he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental > spiral. :-)) > > mike > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth these > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > Dear Mike > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing this > > fantastic project. > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory and > > ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps to > bring > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch and > > ponder > > > too. > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > > squeezed > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. buses > > > used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Sat Jan 4 19:50:30 2014 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:50:30 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> Message-ID: <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Happy New Year! And thank you, Mike, for kicking off with The Video: The 5thD in 2D. And here is a clip from Huw's feed-back. " Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their conscious orientation." And here is a clip from Mike: "For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at once." First I want to note that the solitary paid staff, Veverly Anderson, Director of Town and Country Learning Center, completely grokked the contribution of the "buddies", their allure, their connections linking with the kids who participated in the project in similar family structures, upbringing, and opportunity. She could hope and appreciate the "dream of university education" that could take kids on to higher education and bring someone back to take her place. That is forward looking! I also want to note the reflection of the student participant who said she wants to "give-back," giving back to the community after it has given her so much. I think that is "built-in" to CHAT as I understand, with Mike's avowed disclaimer in place. The ideal synchronicity that made the drive to the project 20 minutes instead of hours does not escape my scrutiny, either. I think it fair to say that I misunderstand General Systems Theory, but I am a practitioner nonetheless. The beginning of a new year allows one to pause to reflect on the past year. Four "thread" from XMCA are big in my mind: 1) The death of adjunct professor of French at Duquesne who died in poverty, starved, alone, deeply in debt with medical bills is huge. As I near the age of 60, I had thought that after retirement I might also teach in a community college or other institute of higher learning. Now "adjunct" has become the equivalent of the term "wage slave" which compares work for gainful employment with slavery. If the institutions of higher education can demand highest level credentials for cognitively complex work that is grueling and give NO benefits or "safety net" it is a national and international scandal. Helen Worthen, on Sept. 22 said: " So yes, it makes a ghastly a snapshot but what's also important is the flip side of the story -- how to change things so that it doesn't happen again and again. This is not a snapshot. It's a long, long story. But it's the same story. The two need to be told together." We can shift things. 2) I remember the video of Lincoln High and David H. Kirshner's 9/16 comment: " Mike, There's not much context given, but one assumes this change in the culture at Lincoln High is a result of a concerted effort by one or more individuals. The changes seem to include some pretty dramatic reorientations in identity structure of some students. These changes seem to have to do with a social analysis of some sort, reminiscent of Freire's work. The kids who have changed have come to see themselves as authors of change. The question I'd like to take up concerns scale-up. Can whatever was done at Lincoln be transported to other locations?" My two connected thoughts. A) The video of Lincoln High coupled with the 5thD in 2D video are a breath of fresh air after the scourge of drugs and crystal meth devastated communities. We can turn it around! David Kirshner's questions need to be asked in every institution of higher learning training the leaders, teachers, and policy makers, including lawyers and politicians. What incentives can be brought to bear in communities to train and hire to build healthy productive communities. Answer: the answer is not money. B) David mentioned Freire's work. Freire was also mentioned in the context of the discussion with Dr. Paul C. Mocombe. 3) Dr. Mocombe said, "Contemporarily, the haitian government is pushing education as the solution to haiti's problems. I disagree. For me it is part of the problem. It is the violent means by which we are brought into the dialectic of the capitalist world-system, which begs the question is there a liberating educational pedagogy? I disagree with Paulo Freire by the way." The highly enlightening discussion bounced back and forth for a while. Paul paused on a pessimistic note. We rushed into year-end activities so I was unable to frame the question: "What's wrong with Paulo Freire?" I've worked with The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, also Myles Horton and Paulo Freire We Make the Road by Walking, and Dewey's Democracy and Education. It is not so easy to come up with a road map. So what if "The Map is Not The Territory"(Wittgenstein). With google maps these days you can change your view of everything by changing the scale of the view. Academia has scale in its hands, but funding comes from grants, and grant signify money, money signifies power. The power to grant money is the power to determine focus. Dr. Mocombe suggests that the disease of capitalism and therefore violent overthrow is inevitable. I am committed to disagreeing because of philosophy and wisdom and DIALOGIC development which leads to: 4) How we talked about play! A wide ranging history and survey of play, games and stage and ventriloquation. I have not got the time to review all that we said, how it kept on going, how it chimed in with other strands. My last words are unconnected and exuberant! The joy and creativity of the baby using a symbolic key! How do we prove it, how do we discuss it, how does Waldorf education, Rudolph Steiner, brain wave research and Suzuki violin training with child and mother all fit together with experiential learning and CHAT!!! These and other random queries will encourage me to "plow on" through another year of teaching Freshmen and Sophomore English. Valerie -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 11:19 PM To: Mike Cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in condensed form: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling and inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their concscious orientation. Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) Best, Huw On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one > time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of the > doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to communicate in > print. > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of > professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, so to speak. > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards > themselves, on new year's eve. > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will > assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If > so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the > change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his own > point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way of > "shaping" the growth process. > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of > this line of joint activity between university and community setting. > I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from > afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw > three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter > is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second > encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw > yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. Each > is its own thing, living as part of the social body within which it > has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of university and > community people/entities." > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of > ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a > sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a > representation that could communicate to a broader community? > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a > multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary > educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and > Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. > So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address > issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And achieve > other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical > activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June > afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these > people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of > activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, but > it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, > university faculty and students, and the university administration. > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does > not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative > representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what > in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and > emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental > spiral. :-)) > > mike > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth > these > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > Dear Mike > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing > > this fantastic project. > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory > > and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps > > > to > bring > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch > > > and > > ponder > > > too. > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > > squeezed > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. > > > buses used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > Best, > > > Huw > > > > > > From jennamcjenna@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 09:48:56 2014 From: jennamcjenna@gmail.com (Jenna McWilliams) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:48:56 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA Message-ID: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the link to the full article below. New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to subsequent generations. http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html Jenna McWilliams Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University ~ jenmcwil@indiana.edu jennamcjenna@gmail.com From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 11:19:08 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:19:08 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: Interesting Jenna, any chance that you have details about the actual study? This link describes conclusions without describing methods or findings. I'd be interested to see what their measures are and how strong the effect is and other things like that. As they say, the devil is in the details... But if it is well supported and replicable, this would be a very interesting finding - and one that could turn evolutionary biology on its head since this sounds like Lamarckian evolution rather than the Darwinian evolution. Time for a paradigm shift? -greg On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the link > to the full article below. > > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > subsequent generations. > > > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > > > > > Jenna McWilliams > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > > ~ > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:23:29 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 20:23:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of thing. I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if you're interested in "how" this may come about. Best, Huw On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the link > to the full article below. > > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > subsequent generations. > > > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > > > > > Jenna McWilliams > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > > ~ > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:23:29 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 20:23:29 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of thing. I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if you're interested in "how" this may come about. Best, Huw On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the link > to the full article below. > > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > subsequent generations. > > > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > > > > > Jenna McWilliams > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > > ~ > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > > > > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Sun Jan 5 12:34:25 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 20:34:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think this is the epigenetic inheritance that we talked about here a couple of years ago, that Marcus Pembrey is associated with. These mice are not inheriting 'memories' from their parents; their parents had experiences, apparently fairly traumatic, that caused changes in their genetic material (though not changing the DNA sequence) which then lead to behavioral changes in the next generation. Important, yes, and arguably ground changing for evolutionary biology. But it doesn't mean that I have a memory for experiences my father had. Martin On Jan 5, 2014, at 3:23 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic > domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of thing. > > I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic > assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if > you're interested in "how" this may come about. > > Best, > Huw > > > On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > >> I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of >> research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the link >> to the full article below. >> >> New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has >> shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically >> through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned >> that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful >> experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to >> subsequent generations. >> >> >> http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html >> >> >> >> >> Jenna McWilliams >> Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair >> Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University >> >> ~ >> jenmcwil@indiana.edu >> jennamcjenna@gmail.com >> >> >> >> From lchcmike@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:42:30 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:42:30 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: What a great suggestion to read Waddington, Huw. He is/was a really interesting developmental theorist. He especially endeared me when he wrote that "A new level of development is in fact nothing more than a new relevant context." The attached paper I found online so I assume its ok to send along to any who wish to follow up. Such findings sure complicate our notions of epigenesis in interesting ways. mike On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic > domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of thing. > > I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic > assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if > you're interested in "how" this may come about. > > Best, > Huw > > > On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > > > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the > link > > to the full article below. > > > > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited > biologically > > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned > > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or > stressful > > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > > subsequent generations. > > > > > > > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > > > > > > > > > > Jenna McWilliams > > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > > > > ~ > > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > From lchcmike@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:42:30 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:42:30 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: What a great suggestion to read Waddington, Huw. He is/was a really interesting developmental theorist. He especially endeared me when he wrote that "A new level of development is in fact nothing more than a new relevant context." The attached paper I found online so I assume its ok to send along to any who wish to follow up. Such findings sure complicate our notions of epigenesis in interesting ways. mike On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic > domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of thing. > > I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic > assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if > you're interested in "how" this may come about. > > Best, > Huw > > > On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: > > > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the > link > > to the full article below. > > > > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited > biologically > > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they learned > > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or > stressful > > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > > subsequent generations. > > > > > > > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > > > > > > > > > > Jenna McWilliams > > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > > > > ~ > > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > From lchcmike@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:46:09 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:46:09 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: Naturally I forgot to attach the paper! Grrrr. mike On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > What a great suggestion to read Waddington, Huw. He is/was a really > interesting developmental theorist. > He especially endeared me when he wrote that "A new level of development > is in fact nothing more than a new relevant context." The attached paper I > found online so I assume its ok to send along to any who wish to follow > up. > > > Such findings sure complicate our notions of epigenesis in interesting > ways. > mike > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic >> domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of >> thing. >> >> I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic >> assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if >> you're interested in "how" this may come about. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: >> >> > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of >> > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the >> link >> > to the full article below. >> > >> > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has >> > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited >> biologically >> > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they >> learned >> > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or >> stressful >> > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to >> > subsequent generations. >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Jenna McWilliams >> > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair >> > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University >> > >> > ~ >> > jenmcwil@indiana.edu >> > jennamcjenna@gmail.com >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: waddington-assimilation.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1085716 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140105/54009a6b/attachment-0001.pdf From lchcmike@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 12:46:09 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 12:46:09 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: Naturally I forgot to attach the paper! Grrrr. mike On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > What a great suggestion to read Waddington, Huw. He is/was a really > interesting developmental theorist. > He especially endeared me when he wrote that "A new level of development > is in fact nothing more than a new relevant context." The attached paper I > found online so I assume its ok to send along to any who wish to follow > up. > > > Such findings sure complicate our notions of epigenesis in interesting > ways. > mike > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic >> domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of >> thing. >> >> I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with genetic >> assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if >> you're interested in "how" this may come about. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams wrote: >> >> > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of >> > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the >> link >> > to the full article below. >> > >> > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has >> > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited >> biologically >> > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they >> learned >> > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or >> stressful >> > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to >> > subsequent generations. >> > >> > >> > >> http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Jenna McWilliams >> > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair >> > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University >> > >> > ~ >> > jenmcwil@indiana.edu >> > jennamcjenna@gmail.com >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: waddington-assimilation.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1085716 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140105/54009a6b/attachment-0003.pdf From lchcmike@gmail.com Sun Jan 5 16:45:25 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 16:45:25 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: Thanks for the long and thoughtful commentary on the film and the discussion around it, Valerie. As a means of retaining the dia-logic nature of this exchange, I will go through and comment in between paragraphs of your text where it seems helpful. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:50 PM, valerie A. Wilkinson < vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> wrote: > Happy New Year! And thank you, Mike, for kicking off with The Video: The > 5thD in 2D. > And here is a clip from Huw's feed-back. " Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as > tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that this film attends > to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns of the people running > the groups, for whom development, leading activity etc is not seemingly > part > of the their conscious orientation." > The there is a tension of going deep vesus going more broadly in representing the flow of activity, which itself is part of a complex socio-cultural ecology, only a small part of which is open to investigation. Therefore, the developmental processes involved are, so to speak, "short circuited." Huw noted this weakness of the representation. I totall agree with him. To overcome this weakness would have required more temporally sustainable infrastructure than we could muster.;... I N THIS MEDIUM. (Note that we have student field notes going back 20 years in the electronic archive). At the moment is an archeological problem which we do not have the time to address yet. > And here is a clip from Mike: "For those of you interested in the line of > work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > once." > > That is a terrible mashing of two thoughts. 1) We needed to have three in operation at the same time and 2) many different CHAT principles came in to play to motivate this need. > First I want to note that the solitary paid staff, Veverly Anderson, > Director of Town and Country Learning Center, completely grokked the > contribution of the "buddies", their allure, their connections linking with > the kids who participated in the project in similar family structures, > upbringing, and opportunity. She could hope and appreciate the "dream of > university education" that could take kids on to higher education and bring > someone back to take her place. That is forward looking! I also want to > note the reflection of the student participant who said she wants to > "give-back," giving back to the community after it has given her so much. > I > think that is "built-in" to CHAT as I understand, with Mike's avowed > disclaimer in place. The ideal synchronicity that made the drive to the > project 20 minutes instead of hours does not escape my scrutiny, either. > This speaks to constraints on creating the representation given the > materials we were able to muster > AND the constraints on the medium. And you are right on about Ms. Veverly. She is amazing. > > > > I think it fair to say that I misunderstand General Systems Theory, but I > am > a practitioner nonetheless. > The beginning of a new year allows one to pause to reflect on the past > year. > Four "thread" from XMCA are big in my mind: > 1) The death of adjunct professor of French at Duquesne who died in > poverty, > starved, alone, deeply in debt with medical bills is huge. As I near the > age of 60, I had thought that after retirement I might also teach in a > community college or other institute of higher learning. Now "adjunct" has > become the equivalent of the term "wage slave" which compares work for > gainful employment with slavery. If the institutions of higher education > can demand highest level credentials for cognitively complex work that is > grueling and give NO benefits or "safety net" it is a national and > international scandal. Helen Worthen, on Sept. 22 said: " So yes, it makes > a > ghastly a snapshot but what's also important is the flip side of the story > -- how to change things so that it doesn't happen again and again. This is > not a snapshot. It's a long, long story. But it's the same story. The two > need to be told together." We can shift things. > The project is trying to take this truth seriously. It motivates my > interest in a meso-genetic methodology, because, when we combine > different sources of descriptions, at different levels of the system of > which the activity and its idioculture are (also) constituitive. > > > > 2) I remember the video of Lincoln High and David H. Kirshner's 9/16 > comment: " Mike, There's not much context given, but one assumes this > change > in the culture at Lincoln High is a result of a concerted effort by one or > more individuals. > The changes seem to include some pretty dramatic reorientations in identity > structure of some students. These changes seem to have to do with a social > analysis of some sort, reminiscent of Freire's work. The kids who have > changed have come to see themselves as authors of change. The question I'd > like to take up concerns scale-up. Can whatever was done at Lincoln be > transported to other locations?" My two connected thoughts. A) The video > of > Lincoln High coupled with the 5thD in 2D video are a breath of fresh air > after the scourge of drugs and crystal meth devastated communities. We can > turn it around! David Kirshner's questions need to be asked in every > institution of higher learning training the leaders, teachers, and policy > makers, including lawyers and politicians. What incentives can be brought > to bear in communities to train and hire to build healthy productive > communities. Answer: the answer is not money. But it might be that institutions of higher education, in so far as they publicaly espouse a commitment to diversity , in their own espoused self-interest, support this form of undergraduate education? Or not? And if not, why not? With respect to the connections between points A&B. The film created by David Gonzales grew up as one of the focal activities in a U-Clink program that allowed Lincoln hi students in the-then, school of social justice, to make a film with communication students from ucsd. David is doing a multi-modal thesis around the kinds of tensions that come out so clearly when High School kids and College "buddies" collaborate in making a film "from the kid's point of view". B) David mentioned Freire's > work. Freire was also mentioned in the context of the discussion with Dr. > Paul C. Mocombe. > > 3) Dr. Mocombe said, "Contemporarily, the haitian government is pushing > education as the solution to haiti's problems. I disagree. For me it is > part of the problem. It is the violent means by which we are brought into > the dialectic of the capitalist world-system, which begs the question is > there a liberating educational pedagogy? I disagree with Paulo Freire by > the way." The highly enlightening discussion bounced back and forth for a > while. Paul paused on a pessimistic note. We rushed into year-end > activities so I was unable to frame the question: "What's wrong with Paulo > Freire?" I've worked with The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, also Myles Horton > and Paulo Freire We Make the Road by Walking, and Dewey's Democracy and > Education. It is not so easy to come up with a road map. So what if "The > Map is Not The Territory"(Wittgenstein). With google maps these days you > can > change your view of everything by changing the scale of the view. Academia > has scale in its hands, but funding comes from grants, and grant signify > money, money signifies power. The power to grant money is the power to > determine focus. Dr. Mocombe suggests that the disease of capitalism and > therefore violent overthrow is inevitable. I am committed to disagreeing > because of philosophy and wisdom and DIALOGIC development which leads to: > I am disabled from this conversation by several years of dense experience of Russia's great socialist experiment. However, I believe it was Korzybsk who coined the phrase "the map is not the territory." Please check provenance (he wrote, holding a chair whose founder is a devotee of general semantics!) :-) > > 4) How we talked about play! A wide ranging history and survey of play, > games and stage and ventriloquation. I have not got the time to review all > that we said, how it kept on going, how it chimed in with other strands. > My > last words are unconnected and exuberant! The joy and creativity of the > baby > using a symbolic key! How do we prove it, how do we discuss it, how does > Waldorf education, Rudolph Steiner, brain wave research and Suzuki violin > training with child and mother all fit together with experiential learning > and CHAT!!! These and other random queries will encourage me to "plow on" > through another year of teaching Freshmen and Sophomore English. > I think the idea of tertiary artifact works well at the organizational level of the various joint activities. Play/work/caring/winning/losing are somehow bracketed so that within it, the pursuit of romantic science in an environment less grim than a neurosurgical rehabilitiation unit, where play is harder to find, and other motives crowding in. And I have NO IDEA of how one would import such activities into classrooms in the junior or senior colleges around, Not even if those who carried the load were properly paid to do a proper job. I also think I am unbelievably lucky to be able to spend my time thinking about such matters, fully cognizant of how tough it is for all but the very privleged. At last a way to get an insitutional title with some power in it! mike the VP Valerie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 11:19 PM > To: Mike Cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D > > "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in condensed > form: > > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 > > One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this > development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling and > inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. Seeing the > mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact > that this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns > of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading activity > etc > is not seemingly part of the their concscious orientation. > > Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) > > Best, > Huw > > > On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > > > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at one > > time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of the > > doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to communicate in > > print. > > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of > > professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the way, > so > to speak. > > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards > > themselves, on new year's eve. > > > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will > > assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If > > so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; the > > change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his own > > point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way of > > "shaping" the growth process. > > > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > > once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of > > this line of joint activity between university and community setting. > > I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from > > afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw > > three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter > > is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second > > encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw > > yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. Each > > is its own thing, living as part of the social body within which it > > has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of university and > > community people/entities." > > > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of > > ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a > > sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a > > representation that could communicate to a broader community? > > > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing a > > multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the post-secondary > > educational institutions in the US. We are so predominantly Anglo- and > > Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. > > So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address > > issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And achieve > > other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical > > activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June > > afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these > > people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms of > > activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, but > > it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, > > university faculty and students, and the university administration. > > > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does > > not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an alternative > > representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to figure what > > in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and > > emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its developmental > > spiral. :-)) > > > > mike > > > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth > > these > > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > > > Dear Mike > > > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing > > > this fantastic project. > > > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop theory > > > and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite texts ;-) > > > > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps > > > > to > > bring > > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch > > > > and > > > ponder > > > > too. > > > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children being > > > squeezed > > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. > > > > buses used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > From drrussel@iastate.edu Sun Jan 5 17:38:14 2014 From: drrussel@iastate.edu (David Russell) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 19:38:14 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Scientists find that memories may be passed through DNA In-Reply-To: References: <886A90FA-05F4-44EC-ABEF-D8F9DE8F5991@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks to Jenna for raising this and Mike for providing the 1951 paper. I had to go searching for a more basic description of *transgenerational epigenetic inheritance* in order to understand the debate (and the paper Mike sent along). I think I found a good one (excellent science popularization, in my view), which I share with you here, in case others are both as curious AND uninformed as I. http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/epigenetics.htm David On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:46 PM, mike cole wrote: > Naturally I forgot to attach the paper! > Grrrr. > mike > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:42 PM, mike cole wrote: > > > What a great suggestion to read Waddington, Huw. He is/was a really > > interesting developmental theorist. > > He especially endeared me when he wrote that "A new level of development > > is in fact nothing more than a new relevant context." The attached paper > I > > found online so I assume its ok to send along to any who wish to follow > > up. > > > > > > Such findings sure complicate our notions of epigenesis in interesting > > ways. > > mike > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Huw Lloyd >wrote: > > > >> The systems dimension that I am exploring in relation to CHAT (genetic > >> domains, functional systems) is basically in support of this sort of > >> thing. > >> > >> I'd suggest looking at Waddington's papers on his experiments with > genetic > >> assimilation (assimilation and accommodation are the typical terms) if > >> you're interested in "how" this may come about. > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> On 5 January 2014 17:48, Jenna McWilliams > wrote: > >> > >> > I wonder if any xmca'ers have thoughts on this interesting piece of > >> > research about inheritability of memories. Here's a snippet, with the > >> link > >> > to the full article below. > >> > > >> > New research from Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, has > >> > shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited > >> biologically > >> > through chemical changes that occur in DNA. During the tests they > >> learned > >> > that that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or > >> stressful > >> > experiences ? in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom ? to > >> > subsequent generations. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2014/01/scientists-have-found-that-memories-may.html > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Jenna McWilliams > >> > Cultural-Historical Research SIG Communications Chair > >> > Learning Sciences Program, Indiana University > >> > > >> > ~ > >> > jenmcwil@indiana.edu > >> > jennamcjenna@gmail.com > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > -- David R. Russell, Professor English Department Iowa State University Ames, IA 50011 USA (515) 294-4724 Fax (515) 294-6814 drrussel@iastate.edu http://www.public.iastate.edu/~drrussel/drresume.html From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Sun Jan 5 17:56:28 2014 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 10:56:28 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: <000701cf0a82$846f0bd0$8d4d2370$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Mike, Thank you! Dialogic feedback through the writing takes me through it again with dimension and yes! There is more about Lincoln High, there is more depth here than I know. The tertiary level to pull it up: you said "I think the idea of tertiary artifact works well at the organizational level of the various joint activities. Play/work/caring/winning/losing are somehow bracketed so that within it, the pursuit of romantic science in an environment less grim than a neurosurgical rehabilitiation unit, where play is harder to find, and other motives crowding in. And I have NO IDEA of how one would import such activities into classrooms in the junior or senior colleges around, Not even if those who carried the load were properly paid to do a proper job." Here is the point: I have Korybski's book Science and Sanity but have never read the quote in context. I know it best because of Bateson. It was my father's book from when he studied pre-med Psychology, I guess. He was a romantic scientist, as doctors can be. BUT, all these connections lead to Deutero-learning and set-theory via Gregory Bateson who was doing romantic science - biology to anthropology - cybernetics/general system theory/and COGNITION. So, despite your bowing out: "I am disabled from this conversation by several years of dense experience of Russia's great socialist experiment." Theoretically, the tertiary level or the fifth dimensional level, for that matter, takes the observer out of a particular complex of nested interacting systems to an abstract and hypothetical place where "policy" can be considered in a detached way. That is not an easy mathematical detachment but an earned detachment by what one lived through. T.S. Eliot said: "And what there is to conquer By strength and submission, has already been discovered once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope to emulate, but there is no competition: ... For us there is only the trying. The rest is not our business! (says the poet) But I say, even if I am not invited to the table of the deciders, I may be an educator of deciders. Aristotle was the tutor of Alexander the great. The Greek philosophers were the slave tutors of the Romans. Now my romantic version of General Systems Theory says that any member of a system is participant, next leap, "For want of a nail the shoe was lost." To I Ching: No peace in the heart, home, city, nation .... and back to William Blake "To see the world in a grain of sand." What I am getting at: Am I missing something important in Paolo Freire? -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 9:45 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D Thanks for the long and thoughtful commentary on the film and the discussion around it, Valerie. As a means of retaining the dia-logic nature of this exchange, I will go through and comment in between paragraphs of your text where it seems helpful. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:50 PM, valerie A. Wilkinson < vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> wrote: > Happy New Year! And thank you, Mike, for kicking off with The Video: > The 5thD in 2D. > And here is a clip from Huw's feed-back. " Seeing the mediacy is > perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that > this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns > of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading > activity etc is not seemingly part of the their conscious > orientation." > The there is a tension of going deep vesus going more broadly in representing the flow of activity, which itself is part of a complex socio-cultural ecology, only a small part of which is open to investigation. Therefore, the developmental processes involved are, so to speak, "short circuited." Huw noted this weakness of the representation. I totall agree with him. To overcome this weakness would have required more temporally sustainable infrastructure than we could muster.;... I N THIS MEDIUM. (Note that we have student field notes going back 20 years in the electronic archive). At the moment is an archeological problem which we do not have the time to address yet. > And here is a clip from Mike: "For those of you interested in the line > of work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > once." > > That is a terrible mashing of two thoughts. 1) We needed to have three > in operation at the same time and 2) many different CHAT principles came in to play to motivate this need. > First I want to note that the solitary paid staff, Veverly Anderson, > Director of Town and Country Learning Center, completely grokked the > contribution of the "buddies", their allure, their connections linking > with the kids who participated in the project in similar family > structures, upbringing, and opportunity. She could hope and > appreciate the "dream of university education" that could take kids on > to higher education and bring someone back to take her place. That is > forward looking! I also want to note the reflection of the student > participant who said she wants to "give-back," giving back to the community after it has given her so much. > I > think that is "built-in" to CHAT as I understand, with Mike's avowed > disclaimer in place. The ideal synchronicity that made the drive to > the project 20 minutes instead of hours does not escape my scrutiny, either. > This speaks to constraints on creating the representation given the > materials we were able to muster > AND the constraints on the medium. And you are right on about Ms. Veverly. She is amazing. > > > > I think it fair to say that I misunderstand General Systems Theory, > but I am a practitioner nonetheless. > The beginning of a new year allows one to pause to reflect on the past > year. > Four "thread" from XMCA are big in my mind: > 1) The death of adjunct professor of French at Duquesne who died in > poverty, starved, alone, deeply in debt with medical bills is huge. > As I near the age of 60, I had thought that after retirement I might > also teach in a community college or other institute of higher > learning. Now "adjunct" has become the equivalent of the term "wage > slave" which compares work for gainful employment with slavery. If > the institutions of higher education can demand highest level > credentials for cognitively complex work that is grueling and give NO > benefits or "safety net" it is a national and international scandal. > Helen Worthen, on Sept. 22 said: " So yes, it makes a ghastly a > snapshot but what's also important is the flip side of the story > -- how to change things so that it doesn't happen again and again. > This is not a snapshot. It's a long, long story. But it's the same > story. The two need to be told together." We can shift things. > The project is trying to take this truth seriously. It motivates my > interest in a meso-genetic methodology, because, when we combine > different sources of descriptions, at different levels of the system > of which the activity and its idioculture are (also) constituitive. > > > > 2) I remember the video of Lincoln High and David H. Kirshner's 9/16 > comment: " Mike, There's not much context given, but one assumes this > change in the culture at Lincoln High is a result of a concerted > effort by one or more individuals. > The changes seem to include some pretty dramatic reorientations in > identity structure of some students. These changes seem to have to do > with a social analysis of some sort, reminiscent of Freire's work. The > kids who have changed have come to see themselves as authors of > change. The question I'd like to take up concerns scale-up. Can > whatever was done at Lincoln be transported to other locations?" My > two connected thoughts. A) The video of Lincoln High coupled with the > 5thD in 2D video are a breath of fresh air after the scourge of drugs > and crystal meth devastated communities. We can turn it around! David > Kirshner's questions need to be asked in every institution of higher > learning training the leaders, teachers, and policy makers, including > lawyers and politicians. What incentives can be brought to bear in > communities to train and hire to build healthy productive communities. > Answer: the answer is not money. But it might be that institutions of higher education, in so far as they publicaly espouse a commitment to diversity , in their own espoused self-interest, support this form of undergraduate education? Or not? And if not, why not? With respect to the connections between points A&B. The film created by David Gonzales grew up as one of the focal activities in a U-Clink program that allowed Lincoln hi students in the-then, school of social justice, to make a film with communication students from ucsd. David is doing a multi-modal thesis around the kinds of tensions that come out so clearly when High School kids and College "buddies" collaborate in making a film "from the kid's point of view". B) David mentioned Freire's > work. Freire was also mentioned in the context of the discussion with Dr. > Paul C. Mocombe. > > 3) Dr. Mocombe said, "Contemporarily, the haitian government is > pushing education as the solution to haiti's problems. I disagree. > For me it is part of the problem. It is the violent means by which we > are brought into the dialectic of the capitalist world-system, which > begs the question is there a liberating educational pedagogy? I > disagree with Paulo Freire by the way." The highly enlightening > discussion bounced back and forth for a while. Paul paused on a > pessimistic note. We rushed into year-end activities so I was unable > to frame the question: "What's wrong with Paulo Freire?" I've worked > with The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, also Myles Horton and Paulo Freire > We Make the Road by Walking, and Dewey's Democracy and Education. It > is not so easy to come up with a road map. So what if "The Map is Not > The Territory"(Wittgenstein). With google maps these days you can > change your view of everything by changing the scale of the view. > Academia has scale in its hands, but funding comes from grants, and > grant signify money, money signifies power. The power to grant money > is the power to determine focus. Dr. Mocombe suggests that the > disease of capitalism and therefore violent overthrow is inevitable. > I am committed to disagreeing because of philosophy and wisdom and DIALOGIC development which leads to: > I am disabled from this conversation by several years of dense experience of Russia's great socialist experiment. However, I believe it was Korzybsk who coined the phrase "the map is not the territory." Please check provenance (he wrote, holding a chair whose founder is a devotee of general semantics!) :-) > > 4) How we talked about play! A wide ranging history and survey of > play, games and stage and ventriloquation. I have not got the time to > review all that we said, how it kept on going, how it chimed in with other strands. > My > last words are unconnected and exuberant! The joy and creativity of > the baby using a symbolic key! How do we prove it, how do we discuss > it, how does Waldorf education, Rudolph Steiner, brain wave research > and Suzuki violin training with child and mother all fit together with > experiential learning and CHAT!!! These and other random queries will > encourage me to "plow on" > through another year of teaching Freshmen and Sophomore English. > I think the idea of tertiary artifact works well at the organizational level of the various joint activities. Play/work/caring/winning/losing are somehow bracketed so that within it, the pursuit of romantic science in an environment less grim than a neurosurgical rehabilitiation unit, where play is harder to find, and other motives crowding in. And I have NO IDEA of how one would import such activities into classrooms in the junior or senior colleges around, Not even if those who carried the load were properly paid to do a proper job. I also think I am unbelievably lucky to be able to spend my time thinking about such matters, fully cognizant of how tough it is for all but the very privleged. At last a way to get an insitutional title with some power in it! mike the VP Valerie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 11:19 PM > To: Mike Cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D > > "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in > condensed > form: > > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 > > One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this > development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling > and inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. > Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". > I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions > such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom > development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their > concscious orientation. > > Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) > > Best, > Huw > > > On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > > > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at > > one time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of > > the doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to > > communicate in print. > > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of > > professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the > > way, > so > to speak. > > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards > > themselves, on new year's eve. > > > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will > > assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If > > so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; > > the change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his > > own point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way > > of "shaping" the growth process. > > > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > > once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of > > this line of joint activity between university and community setting. > > I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from > > afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw > > three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter > > is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second > > encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw > > yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. > > Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body within > > which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of > > university and community people/entities." > > > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of > > ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a > > sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a > > representation that could communicate to a broader community? > > > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing > > a multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the > > post-secondary educational institutions in the US. We are so > > predominantly Anglo- and Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. > > So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address > > issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And > > achieve other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical > > activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June > > afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these > > people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms > > of activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, > > but it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, > > university faculty and students, and the university administration. > > > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does > > not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an > > alternative representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to > > figure what in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and > > emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its > > developmental spiral. :-)) > > > > mike > > > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth > > these > > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > > > Dear Mike > > > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing > > > this fantastic project. > > > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop > > > theory and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite > > > texts ;-) > > > > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps > > > > to > > bring > > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch > > > > and > > > ponder > > > > too. > > > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children > > > > being > > > squeezed > > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. > > > > buses used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Sun Jan 5 18:23:40 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 13:23:40 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: <000701cf0a82$846f0bd0$8d4d2370$@shizuoka.ac.jp> References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> <000701cf0a82$846f0bd0$8d4d2370$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: <52CA13AC.4080906@mira.net> valerie A. Wilkinson wrote: > ... William Blake "To see the world in a grain of sand." What I am getting at: Am I missing > something important in Paolo Freire? > That is pure Fiere, Valerie. His method entailed presenting people with a simple artifact and inviting them to investigate it, with the expectation that the entirety of their social situation could be unfolded from that ... "grain of sand". a From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Sun Jan 5 18:43:26 2014 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 11:43:26 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D In-Reply-To: <000701cf0a82$846f0bd0$8d4d2370$@shizuoka.ac.jp> References: <1401900933.42106175.1388525230196.JavaMail.root@jaguar9.sfu.ca> <000c01cf09c9$47d372b0$d77a5810$@shizuoka.ac.jp> <000701cf0a82$846f0bd0$8d4d2370$@shizuoka.ac.jp> Message-ID: <000801cf0a89$13cdde90$3b699bb0$@shizuoka.ac.jp> One more question: May I think of Xmca itself, with Mike Cole as moderator, as a tertiary artifact, is it a higher order of existence that creates artifacts? Various academic populations participate here, it is a clearinghouse for various kinds of academic announcements, it functions as. forum and common room. David Kellogg wrote a letter years ago - a letter in a bottle. So, was the discussion around that hypothetical or real letter a tertiary artifact? Or, since "concrete application" generally implies activity with matter in the physical world, applications of higher level cognitive cooperation would result in artifacts that would nonetheless create ripples in the 3D or 4D world. Or The Hermetic Kybalion. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of valerie A. Wilkinson Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 10:56 AM To: lchcmike@gmail.com; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity' Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D Mike, Thank you! Dialogic feedback through the writing takes me through it again with dimension and yes! There is more about Lincoln High, there is more depth here than I know. The tertiary level to pull it up: you said "I think the idea of tertiary artifact works well at the organizational level of the various joint activities. Play/work/caring/winning/losing are somehow bracketed so that within it, the pursuit of romantic science in an environment less grim than a neurosurgical rehabilitiation unit, where play is harder to find, and other motives crowding in. And I have NO IDEA of how one would import such activities into classrooms in the junior or senior colleges around, Not even if those who carried the load were properly paid to do a proper job." Here is the point: I have Korybski's book Science and Sanity but have never read the quote in context. I know it best because of Bateson. It was my father's book from when he studied pre-med Psychology, I guess. He was a romantic scientist, as doctors can be. BUT, all these connections lead to Deutero-learning and set-theory via Gregory Bateson who was doing romantic science - biology to anthropology - cybernetics/general system theory/and COGNITION. So, despite your bowing out: "I am disabled from this conversation by several years of dense experience of Russia's great socialist experiment." Theoretically, the tertiary level or the fifth dimensional level, for that matter, takes the observer out of a particular complex of nested interacting systems to an abstract and hypothetical place where "policy" can be considered in a detached way. That is not an easy mathematical detachment but an earned detachment by what one lived through. T.S. Eliot said: "And what there is to conquer By strength and submission, has already been discovered once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope to emulate, but there is no competition: ... For us there is only the trying. The rest is not our business! (says the poet) But I say, even if I am not invited to the table of the deciders, I may be an educator of deciders. Aristotle was the tutor of Alexander the great. The Greek philosophers were the slave tutors of the Romans. Now my romantic version of General Systems Theory says that any member of a system is participant, next leap, "For want of a nail the shoe was lost." To I Ching: No peace in the heart, home, city, nation .... and back to William Blake "To see the world in a grain of sand." What I am getting at: Am I missing something important in Paolo Freire? -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 9:45 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D Thanks for the long and thoughtful commentary on the film and the discussion around it, Valerie. As a means of retaining the dia-logic nature of this exchange, I will go through and comment in between paragraphs of your text where it seems helpful. On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 7:50 PM, valerie A. Wilkinson < vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp> wrote: > Happy New Year! And thank you, Mike, for kicking off with The Video: > The 5thD in 2D. > And here is a clip from Huw's feed-back. " Seeing the mediacy is > perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". I like the fact that > this film attends to some of these basic tensions such as the concerns > of the people running the groups, for whom development, leading > activity etc is not seemingly part of the their conscious > orientation." > The there is a tension of going deep vesus going more broadly in representing the flow of activity, which itself is part of a complex socio-cultural ecology, only a small part of which is open to investigation. Therefore, the developmental processes involved are, so to speak, "short circuited." Huw noted this weakness of the representation. I totall agree with him. To overcome this weakness would have required more temporally sustainable infrastructure than we could muster.;... I N THIS MEDIUM. (Note that we have student field notes going back 20 years in the electronic archive). At the moment is an archeological problem which we do not have the time to address yet. > And here is a clip from Mike: "For those of you interested in the line > of work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > once." > > That is a terrible mashing of two thoughts. 1) We needed to have three > in operation at the same time and 2) many different CHAT principles came in to play to motivate this need. > First I want to note that the solitary paid staff, Veverly Anderson, > Director of Town and Country Learning Center, completely grokked the > contribution of the "buddies", their allure, their connections linking > with the kids who participated in the project in similar family > structures, upbringing, and opportunity. She could hope and > appreciate the "dream of university education" that could take kids on > to higher education and bring someone back to take her place. That is > forward looking! I also want to note the reflection of the student > participant who said she wants to "give-back," giving back to the community after it has given her so much. > I > think that is "built-in" to CHAT as I understand, with Mike's avowed > disclaimer in place. The ideal synchronicity that made the drive to > the project 20 minutes instead of hours does not escape my scrutiny, either. > This speaks to constraints on creating the representation given the > materials we were able to muster > AND the constraints on the medium. And you are right on about Ms. Veverly. She is amazing. > > > > I think it fair to say that I misunderstand General Systems Theory, > but I am a practitioner nonetheless. > The beginning of a new year allows one to pause to reflect on the past > year. > Four "thread" from XMCA are big in my mind: > 1) The death of adjunct professor of French at Duquesne who died in > poverty, starved, alone, deeply in debt with medical bills is huge. > As I near the age of 60, I had thought that after retirement I might > also teach in a community college or other institute of higher > learning. Now "adjunct" has become the equivalent of the term "wage > slave" which compares work for gainful employment with slavery. If > the institutions of higher education can demand highest level > credentials for cognitively complex work that is grueling and give NO > benefits or "safety net" it is a national and international scandal. > Helen Worthen, on Sept. 22 said: " So yes, it makes a ghastly a > snapshot but what's also important is the flip side of the story > -- how to change things so that it doesn't happen again and again. > This is not a snapshot. It's a long, long story. But it's the same > story. The two need to be told together." We can shift things. > The project is trying to take this truth seriously. It motivates my > interest in a meso-genetic methodology, because, when we combine > different sources of descriptions, at different levels of the system > of which the activity and its idioculture are (also) constituitive. > > > > 2) I remember the video of Lincoln High and David H. Kirshner's 9/16 > comment: " Mike, There's not much context given, but one assumes this > change in the culture at Lincoln High is a result of a concerted > effort by one or more individuals. > The changes seem to include some pretty dramatic reorientations in > identity structure of some students. These changes seem to have to do > with a social analysis of some sort, reminiscent of Freire's work. The > kids who have changed have come to see themselves as authors of > change. The question I'd like to take up concerns scale-up. Can > whatever was done at Lincoln be transported to other locations?" My > two connected thoughts. A) The video of Lincoln High coupled with the > 5thD in 2D video are a breath of fresh air after the scourge of drugs > and crystal meth devastated communities. We can turn it around! David > Kirshner's questions need to be asked in every institution of higher > learning training the leaders, teachers, and policy makers, including > lawyers and politicians. What incentives can be brought to bear in > communities to train and hire to build healthy productive communities. > Answer: the answer is not money. But it might be that institutions of higher education, in so far as they publicaly espouse a commitment to diversity , in their own espoused self-interest, support this form of undergraduate education? Or not? And if not, why not? With respect to the connections between points A&B. The film created by David Gonzales grew up as one of the focal activities in a U-Clink program that allowed Lincoln hi students in the-then, school of social justice, to make a film with communication students from ucsd. David is doing a multi-modal thesis around the kinds of tensions that come out so clearly when High School kids and College "buddies" collaborate in making a film "from the kid's point of view". B) David mentioned Freire's > work. Freire was also mentioned in the context of the discussion with Dr. > Paul C. Mocombe. > > 3) Dr. Mocombe said, "Contemporarily, the haitian government is > pushing education as the solution to haiti's problems. I disagree. > For me it is part of the problem. It is the violent means by which we > are brought into the dialectic of the capitalist world-system, which > begs the question is there a liberating educational pedagogy? I > disagree with Paulo Freire by the way." The highly enlightening > discussion bounced back and forth for a while. Paul paused on a > pessimistic note. We rushed into year-end activities so I was unable > to frame the question: "What's wrong with Paulo Freire?" I've worked > with The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, also Myles Horton and Paulo Freire > We Make the Road by Walking, and Dewey's Democracy and Education. It > is not so easy to come up with a road map. So what if "The Map is Not > The Territory"(Wittgenstein). With google maps these days you can > change your view of everything by changing the scale of the view. > Academia has scale in its hands, but funding comes from grants, and > grant signify money, money signifies power. The power to grant money > is the power to determine focus. Dr. Mocombe suggests that the > disease of capitalism and therefore violent overthrow is inevitable. > I am committed to disagreeing because of philosophy and wisdom and DIALOGIC development which leads to: > I am disabled from this conversation by several years of dense experience of Russia's great socialist experiment. However, I believe it was Korzybsk who coined the phrase "the map is not the territory." Please check provenance (he wrote, holding a chair whose founder is a devotee of general semantics!) :-) > > 4) How we talked about play! A wide ranging history and survey of > play, games and stage and ventriloquation. I have not got the time to > review all that we said, how it kept on going, how it chimed in with > other strands. > My > last words are unconnected and exuberant! The joy and creativity of > the baby using a symbolic key! How do we prove it, how do we discuss > it, how does Waldorf education, Rudolph Steiner, brain wave research > and Suzuki violin training with child and mother all fit together with > experiential learning and CHAT!!! These and other random queries will > encourage me to "plow on" > through another year of teaching Freshmen and Sophomore English. > I think the idea of tertiary artifact works well at the organizational level of the various joint activities. Play/work/caring/winning/losing are somehow bracketed so that within it, the pursuit of romantic science in an environment less grim than a neurosurgical rehabilitiation unit, where play is harder to find, and other motives crowding in. And I have NO IDEA of how one would import such activities into classrooms in the junior or senior colleges around, Not even if those who carried the load were properly paid to do a proper job. I also think I am unbelievably lucky to be able to spend my time thinking about such matters, fully cognizant of how tough it is for all but the very privleged. At last a way to get an insitutional title with some power in it! mike the VP Valerie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd > Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 11:19 PM > To: Mike Cole; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: xmca-l@ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The 5thD in 2D > > "Potted" in British english also means "preserved" or a to put in > condensed > form: > > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=potted&allowed_in_frame=0 > > One of the challenges, I think, is the question around "how is this > development?" In environments such as these that have a compelling > and inviting immediacey, it requires some work to see the mediacy. > Seeing the mediacy is perhaps as tricky as seeing a "5th dimension". > I like the fact that this film attends to some of these basic tensions > such as the concerns of the people running the groups, for whom > development, leading activity etc is not seemingly part of the their > concscious orientation. > > Those four bits give you 2^4 more variety if you use them right. :) > > Best, > Huw > > > On 3 January 2014 01:46, mike cole wrote: > > > With respect to the Video about conducting three "5thD systems at > > one time." I personally thought that Andy brought out the feel of > > the doing of the work in a way that is quite difficult to > > communicate in print. > > The film was scheduled to coincide with my elevation to rank of > > professor emeritus last June, but life has a way of getting in the > > way, > so > to speak. > > It was nice to have it appear, as if brought by the wizards > > themselves, on new year's eve. > > > > I am not sure the shape of the pot you are thinking of, Huw. I will > > assume its a pot for a plant? A growing thing in its environment. If > > so, I like the idea of the film as a potted version of the 5th D; > > the change in medium and the perspective of a film maker who has his > > own point of view on the whole enterprise, create an interesting way > > of "shaping" the growth process. > > > > For those of you interested in the line of work, it is probably > > relevant that we began arrangements for this film several years ago, > > at a time when we could show three living systems created on > > principles of CHAT as I misunderstand them were all in operation at > > once. The rule of threes is big in my life, and three is the minimum > > number we needed to represent the overall conceptual foundations of > > this line of joint activity between university and community setting. > > I knew this from personal experience-- whenever a visitor came from > > afar to see "The" 5thD I would always make sure that the person saw > > three such systems as a minimum. The reaction to the first encounter > > is "Oh,so that is how *IT*is done." The reaction to the second > > encounter is "What? How is the one the same as that one I saw > > yesterday?" The reaction to the third encounter is "Oh, I get it. > > Each is its own thing, living as part of the social body within > > which it has "taken root," "planted there" by some mixture of > > university and community people/entities." > > > > I can report that in a message such as this, but what kind of > > ridiculous evidence would that be? So how about a narrative by a > > sympathetic outsider with the skills needed to provide a > > representation that could communicate to a broader community? > > > > In the film, the community is UCSD. My residence. UCSD is undergoing > > a multitude of simultaneous changes along with 99% of the > > post-secondary educational institutions in the US. We are so > > predominantly Anglo- and Asian American in our makeup that it is now officially embarrassing. > > So one audience here was my colleagues at UCSD. Couldn't we address > > issues of diversity very effectively through such courses? And > > achieve other presumably valued pedagogical goals at the same time? > > > > A second audience were those who fancied such modes of pedagogical > > activity in higher education a walk in the park on a breezy June > > afternoon. Its a long walk through sometimes rough terrain. To these > > people we want to provide a demonstration proof of that such forms > > of activity can be created and sustained. We do not go into detail, > > but it requires at least the combined efforts of local citizens, > > university faculty and students, and the university administration. > > > > The third audience are those among you who are interested in the > > relationship of all this work to Vygotsky and CHAT. For you it does > > not suffice as theoretically explicated. Rather, it is an > > alternative representation (perhaps an anecdote) that enables you to > > figure what in the hell is behind the fourbit words in the academic stuff we write. > > Note however, when Jay starts to professorize about cognition and > > emotion he is a whole lot easier to understand than his writing. > > > > And, if you want the written stuff, there it sits on its > > developmental spiral. :-)) > > > > mike > > > > PS- (Fourbits is how much the price of a scientific concept is worth > > these > > days) (In 1950 terms it was four > > quarters or one dollar). :-) > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Luisa Aires wrote: > > > > > Dear Mike > > > > > > This is an amazing way to begin the new year.Thank you for sharing > > > this fantastic project. > > > > > > Here, we can find a good way how to think, ground and develop > > > theory and ethics in collaboration. And a good motive to rewrite > > > texts ;-) > > > > > > > > > Happy new year to all XMCAers > > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Lu?sa > > > > > > > > > On 31 December 2013 22:19, Huw Lloyd > wrote: > > > > > > > Its great to have a potted 5d open film. The "simplicity" helps > > > > to > > bring > > > > out the variety of challenges. Its nice to have to simply watch > > > > and > > > ponder > > > > too. > > > > > > > > I had to skip about a bit to work out what "the bus children > > > > being > > > squeezed > > > > out" (15 mins) meant ("bus kids" came from the inner city -- i.e. > > > > buses used for distance rather than safety). > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Huw > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 6 22:22:16 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 17:22:16 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] 5thD movie Message-ID: <52CB9D18.6020605@mira.net> For anyone who might have missed that movie about the 5th Dimension, a copy has been uploaded to vimeo.com: https://vimeo.com/groups/chat/videos/83547133 Andy -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ From lchcmike@gmail.com Tue Jan 7 13:30:12 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 13:30:12 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Help: Luria Autobiography DVD Message-ID: Dear Colleagues-- I am seeking a copy of the DVD that accompanies the re-issue of AR Luria's autobiography. The DVD that Taylor and Francis incluedes is not readable by anyone I have encountered and I am trying to get Taylor and Francis to fix the problem they caused. But nontheless, I have no copy of the DVD and it has historically interesting material on it, never mind sentimental value. If anyone either has a copy of the DVD they could burn or let me borrow, if it can be gotten from local library, I would be most appreciative of your help in getting a decent digital version of the original. thanks mike From lchcmike@gmail.com Tue Jan 7 13:38:56 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 13:38:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] DVD found! Message-ID: An instant hit! Thanks to all for considering the request and especially to Jennifer Vadabancoeur who solved the problem instantly. wow mike From blantonwe@comcast.net Tue Jan 7 13:44:52 2014 From: blantonwe@comcast.net (Bill Blanton) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 21:44:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help: Luria Autobiography DVD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1373985102.10608320.1389131092906.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> Mike, I have one I can burn and send. BB ----- Original Message ----- From: "mike cole" To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 1:30:12 PM Subject: [Xmca-l] Help: Luria Autobiography DVD Dear Colleagues-- I am seeking a copy of the DVD that accompanies the re-issue of AR Luria's autobiography. The DVD that Taylor and Francis incluedes is not readable by anyone I have encountered and I am trying to get Taylor and Francis to fix the problem they caused. But nontheless, I have no copy of the DVD and it has historically interesting material on it, never mind sentimental value. If anyone either has a copy of the DVD they could burn or let me borrow, if it can be gotten from local library, I would be most appreciative of your help in getting a decent digital version of the original. thanks mike From blantonwe@comcast.net Tue Jan 7 13:44:52 2014 From: blantonwe@comcast.net (Bill Blanton) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 21:44:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Help: Luria Autobiography DVD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1373985102.10608320.1389131092906.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> Mike, I have one I can burn and send. BB ----- Original Message ----- From: "mike cole" To: xmca-l@ucsd.edu Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 1:30:12 PM Subject: [Xmca-l] Help: Luria Autobiography DVD Dear Colleagues-- I am seeking a copy of the DVD that accompanies the re-issue of AR Luria's autobiography. The DVD that Taylor and Francis incluedes is not readable by anyone I have encountered and I am trying to get Taylor and Francis to fix the problem they caused. But nontheless, I have no copy of the DVD and it has historically interesting material on it, never mind sentimental value. If anyone either has a copy of the DVD they could burn or let me borrow, if it can be gotten from local library, I would be most appreciative of your help in getting a decent digital version of the original. thanks mike From blantonwe@comcast.net Wed Jan 8 19:27:02 2014 From: blantonwe@comcast.net (Bill Blanton) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 03:27:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Invitation to connect on LinkedIn Message-ID: <1207968274.583988.1389238022462.JavaMail.app@ela4-app2731.prod> LinkedIn ------------ I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. - Bill Bill Blanton Emeritus Professor at Univesity of Miami Miami/Fort Lauderdale Area Confirm that you know Bill Blanton: https://www.linkedin.com/e/mhgtog-hq7gg6k5-5z/isd/19163383517/DQCGCAk9/?hs=false&tok=3_Yv9JkjsLjm41 -- You are receiving Invitation to Connect emails. Click to unsubscribe: http://www.linkedin.com/e/mhgtog-hq7gg6k5-5z/5sTMECAl2tV0pF1iEDejiYayGEtcpQVWXOat/goo/xmca-l%40mailman%2Eucsd%2Eedu/20061/I6220826755_1/?hs=false&tok=0QDKC1t4sLjm41 (c) 2012 LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA. From lchcmike@gmail.com Fri Jan 10 18:37:56 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:37:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: [Air-L] Final Reminder -- CFP for Special Issue on Training/Education for Virtual Teams In-Reply-To: <33CE8A0C01B7284D828BA80FFDB7128256385C33E3@MERCERMAIL.MercerU.local> References: <33CE8A0C01B7284D828BA80FFDB7128256385C33E3@MERCERMAIL.MercerU.local> Message-ID: Interesting sort of thing to think about, I think. mike ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pam Brewer Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:22 PM Subject: [Air-L] Final Reminder -- CFP for Special Issue on Training/Education for Virtual Teams To: "air-l@listserv.aoir.org" Hello all? I am sending final reminder that proposals for the special issue of Connexions entitled Education and Training for Globally Distributed Virtual Teams are due January 15. These proposals are short, and I have copied the text of the call (with the production schedule) below for your convenience. The issue will be published in Dec. 2014. Please consider submitting. Contact me or Kirk if you would like to discuss an idea. Best wishes, Pam Pam Estes Brewer, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Technical Communication Mercer University brewer_pe@mercer.edu 478.301.4146 Associate Fellow, STC Academic SIG Manager, STC Call for Proposals EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR GLOBALLY DISTRIBUTED VIRTUAL TEAMS Preparing the workforce of the future Special Issue Guest editors Pam Estes Brewer Mercer University (email: brewer_pe@mercer.edu) Kirk St.Amant East Carolina University (email: stamantk@ecu.edu) Today, information and communication technologies (ICTs) allow individuals located in different nations to collaborate almost as easily as if they were located in the same physical office. As a result, globally distributed virtual teams now support the work of organizations across the spectrum of products and services. Such teams are used by a range of for-profit and non-profit organizations including businesses, government organizations, military, and educational institutions. These organizations are increasingly employing individuals located in different nations to engage in various types of collabora?tive work via ICTs. As a result of such factors, much of the modern workforce is now migrating toward a virtual model of work, and forces associated with globalization are changing the nature of competitiveness in the new economy. Individuals, in turn, must often adapt rapidly to virtual environments and do so with little or no formal preparation in the types of professional communication practices essential to success in such contexts. As a result, individuals working in internationally distributed teams must generally learn from their mistakes, an effective but often costly approach. Moreover, individuals must also often adapt to working in an environment in which they are regularly paired with new colleagues and clients from different nations, cultures, and language groups. Thus, the modern distributed workplace requires employees to account for and address three central factors?technology, culture, and language?in order to succeed in most work-related tasks. An all-important question arising from this situation is, ?How can we better prepare these individuals for this international, online context?? A 2012 IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication special issue on global training reveals, however, that very little information on training?particularly global virtual communication training?has been published in the major pro?fessional communication journals in the last ten years. Such a gap needs to be closed if educators and trainers alike wish to prepare adult learners to be suc?cessful participants in current (and future) business practices and processes. This special issue on education and training for globally distributed virtual teams seeks to address this topic through articles on how best to prepare individuals to succeed in this new workplace. In particular, the editors are interested in articles that answer questions such as: ? What types of education and training are most desired by managers and participants of global virtual teams? ? How can organizations best prepare virtual team members for working across boundaries of language? What issues affect translation and terminology? What do team members most need to know about World Englishes, English as a Second Language, or English for Specific Purposes? ? How can organizations better prepare employees to collaborate and cooperate online and across cultural boundaries? ? How can social media be used to prepare individuals for working in intercultural online contexts? ? What legal issues can affect or should be included in global virtual team training? What should participants in global virtual teams know about proprietary information and privacy? In addition, the editors of this special issue welcome articles such as: ? Industry commentaries (refer to ?types of articles? below). ? Critical analyses of the many published task/technology models that support global virtual teams. ? Critical analyses of virtual team studies in areas such as technical training, adult education, human resources development, educational technology, human performance technology, technical communication, and user experience design. The guest editors are also interested in discussing other prospective topics with potential contributors. Types of articles connexions publishes four types of articles: ? Original research articles of 5,000 to 7,000 words in length ? Review articles of 3,000 to 5,000 words in length ? Focused commentary and industry perspectives articles of 500 to 3,000 words in length ? Teaching cases of 3,000 to 5,000 words in length Submission Guidelines Interested individuals should send a 150-200 word proposal to connexionsspecialissue@gmail.com Proposals should be sent as a .docx, .doc, or .rtf file attached to an email message with the subject line: ?Proposal for Special Issue on Globally Distributed Virtual Teams.? All proposals should include the submitter?s name, affiliation, and email address as well as a working title for the proposed article. Production Schedule The schedule for the special issue is as follows: ? 15 Jan. 2014 ?Proposals due ? 15 Feb. 2014 ? Decisions on proposals sent to proposal submitters ? 15 June 2014 ? Manuscripts due ? 15 Aug. 2014 ? Reviewer comments to authors ? 15 Oct. 2014 ? Final manuscripts due to editors ? Dec. 2014 ? Publication of special issue Contact Information Completed proposals or questions about either proposal topics or this special issue should be sent to Pam Estes Brewer and Kirk St.Amant at connexionsspecialissue@gmail.com connexions ? international professional communication journal (ISSN 2325-6044) _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sat Jan 11 16:17:55 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:17:55 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] MOOC on Language Behavior Message-ID: I will be teaching a MOOC along with Mary Lahman and Steve Stockdale on the long lost field of General Semantics (I should mention that I'm playing third fiddle - Steve and Mary have been wonderful in taking the lead). General Semantics is a field that was started by Alfred Korzybski in the 1930's in the U.S. and has had a big (if forgotten) impact on the field of Communication here in the United States. In addition, the notion of semiotic mediation plays an important role in General Semantics so there is an interesting kinship with many CHAT ideas. I will be teaching Module 4 (i.e., week 4) and will be teaching about the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis (aka, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) particularly as it relates to General Semantics. If interested, the course is completely free and you can sign up online at: https://www.canvas.net/courses/general-semantics-an-approach-to-effective-language-behavior (and I've attached a flyer too) Recognizing that mooc enrollment numbers don't mean a great deal, it nonetheless seems of interest that there are currently over 700 students enrolled from at least 25 different countries. I'm looking forward to my first MOOC experience and I hope that some of you will be able to join me. Should be an interesting ride! Very best. -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GS-MOOC-announcement.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 659785 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140111/dc338f22/attachment.pdf From noreply+1854083355@badoo.com Mon Jan 13 04:54:25 2014 From: noreply+1854083355@badoo.com (Mortimer) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 12:54:25 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?utf-8?q?=E2=98=85_eXtended_Mind=2C_Culture=2C_Activity=2C_Mort?= =?utf-8?q?imer_left_a_message_for_you?= Message-ID: <201401131254.s0DCsnsH022609@mailman.ucsd.edu> You can instantly reply using our message exchange system. Check your message http://eu1.badoo.com/0313742455/in/3ZqRJoMAd9E/?lang_id=3&g=57-0-4&m=61&mid=52d3e201000000000003000002e44f010011c5480004 Some other people in the area: If clicking the links in this message does not work, copy and paste them into the address bar of your browser. You have received this email from Badoo Trading Limited (postal address below). If you do not wish to receive further email communications from Badoo click here to opt out: https://eu1.badoo.com/impersonation.phtml?lang_id=3&email=xmca-l%40mailman.ucsd.edu&block_code=da01fa&m=61&mid=52d3e201000000000003000002e44f010011c5480004&g=0-0-4. Badoo Trading Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales under CRN 7540255 with its registered office at Media Village, 131 - 151 Great Titchfield Street, London, W1W 5BB. From sandoval@gseis.ucla.edu Mon Jan 13 08:50:15 2014 From: sandoval@gseis.ucla.edu (Bill Sandoval) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 08:50:15 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Call for Proposals to Host ICLS2016 Message-ID: <37215864-BC87-4193-AF90-6E85875FB54A@gseis.ucla.edu> [Apologies for cross-posting.] Call for proposals to host ICLS 2016 The International Society for the Learning Sciences (ISLS) invites proposals from organizations interested in hosting the International Conference of the Learning Sciences in 2016. The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) series is dedicated to the advancement of the sciences and practices of learning, as they occur in schools, homes, workplaces and communities. The series promotes emerging research across the entire spectrum of the learning sciences, bringing together scholars from psychology, cognitive science, educational psychology, computer science, anthropology, sociology, information sciences, neurosciences, education, design studies, instructional design, and other fields. ICLS has been held biennially since 1996. Recent conference sites include Utrecht, The Netherlands, Chicago, USA, and Sydney, Australia. ISLS invites proposals from around the world, although we are especially interested for 2016 in sites outside of North America. ISLS attempts to vary regional hosts so that the ICLS conference is accessible to researchers throughout the international learning sciences community. Letter of interest: Interested potential organizers are asked to submit a one-page letter of interest that should include a brief statement of the proposed theme for the conference, a range of dates that can be accommodated, strengths of the organizers, advantages of the proposed hosting institution, benefits of the location, and any special opportunities offered by the surrounding areas. Letters of interest must be submitted by February 28, 2012. All letters of interest will be evaluated the ISLS Conference Committee. Full proposal: As many as 3 potential organizers may be invited to submit a full proposal. Detailed guidelines for full proposals will be provided by ISLS to those invited to submit a full proposal. One PDF copy of the completed proposal, together with a signed cover letter from the local organizer(s) should be submitted by April 30, 2014. The winning bid to host ICLS 2016 will be publicly announced at ICLS2014, to be held 23 ? 27 June, 2014 in Boulder, Colorado, USA. Interested organizations should submit letters of intent to William Sandoval, ISLS Conference Committee chair, at sandoval@gseis.ucla.edu. Guidelines for proposals are available upon request. Please contact Prof. Sandoval with any questions. NOTE: Only ISLS members in good standing are eligible to submit proposals to host Society sponsored conferences. William Sandoval ISLS Conference Committee Chair Graduate School of Education & Information Studies University of California, Los Angeles, USA 310.794.5431 (voice) 310.206.6293 (fax) http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/sandoval/ From mcole@ucsd.edu Mon Jan 13 08:50:46 2014 From: mcole@ucsd.edu (mike cole) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 08:50:46 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: AERA Div C Awards & Seminar Applications Due 1/15 & 1/20 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Note that the Scribner and Hawkins awards are both up for nomination. If you are not a member of AERA but have someone to nominate, you can probably find co-conspirators here on xmca. mike On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 6:10 AM, Christine Greenhow wrote: > > Just a friendly reminder that applications for the following awards & > mentoring seminars are fast-approaching: January 15th and January 20th. > Please consider applying or passing this along to those who may be > interested. Thank you. > > > *2014 CALL for AWARD APPLICATIONS* > > > > Deadline: *January 20, 2014* > > > > Applications are now being accepted for the following awards: > > > > *Sylvia Scribner Award > * > *Jan Hawkins Early Career Award > * > > *2014 AERA Division C Early Career Award > * > > *2014 Division C Graduate Student Research Award > * > > > > > Application instructions for these awards are now available via the AERA > Division C Website: > > http://www.aera.net/DivisionC/NewsAnnouncements/tabid/11182/Default.aspx > > > > > > *AERA 2014 **CALL for APPLICATIONS:* > > > *NEW FACULTY SEMINAR & GRADUATE STUDENT SEMINAR* > > > Deadline: *January 15, 2014* > > > Applications are now being accepted for the following competitive > professional development seminars: > > > > Applications for the *Division C New Faculty Mentoring Seminar* > > Please see application instructions on the AERA Division C website: > > > http://www.aera.net/DivisionC/ProfessionalDevelopmentOpportunities/tabid/11180/Default.aspx > > > > Applications for the *Division C Graduate Student Seminar* > > Please see application instructions on the AERA Division C website: > > > http://www.aera.net/DivisionC/ProfessionalDevelopmentOpportunities/tabid/11180/Default.aspx > > > We encourage you to share this email with students and colleagues who may > be eligible and/or interested. > > Thank you! > Chris > > Christine Greenhow > Assistant Professor > Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education > College of Education > Michigan State University > greenhow@msu.edu > Website: http://www.cgreenhow.org > Twitter: @chrisgreenhow > Facebook: christinegreenhow > * LinkedIn: christinegreenhow > > An American Educational Research Association List If you need assistance > with this list, please send an email to listadmin@aera.net. From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Mon Jan 13 13:51:27 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 21:51:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn In-Reply-To: <1207968274.583988.1389238022462.JavaMail.app@ela4-app2731.prod> References: <1207968274.583988.1389238022462.JavaMail.app@ela4-app2731.prod> Message-ID: FAO Bill Blanton Hi Bill I am on Linked In but as you can see from my inadequate 'Profile' I am not taking it very seriously - I am ten years retired and while I am interested in politics and psycho-linguistics (among other interests) I am usually over-faced by the complexity of the discussions on the wmca-l site. All that said, I am happy to be Linked-In with you. Yours Tom Richardson Middlesbrough - steel/chemicals/transport hub with port/claes oldenburg piece 'bottle of notes' in centre park/ UK On 9 January 2014 03:27, Bill Blanton wrote: > LinkedIn > ------------ > > > > I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. > > - Bill > > Bill Blanton > Emeritus Professor at Univesity of Miami > Miami/Fort Lauderdale Area > > Confirm that you know Bill Blanton: > > https://www.linkedin.com/e/mhgtog-hq7gg6k5-5z/isd/19163383517/DQCGCAk9/?hs=false&tok=3_Yv9JkjsLjm41 > > -- > You are receiving Invitation to Connect emails. Click to unsubscribe: > > http://www.linkedin.com/e/mhgtog-hq7gg6k5-5z/5sTMECAl2tV0pF1iEDejiYayGEtcpQVWXOat/goo/xmca-l%40mailman%2Eucsd%2Eedu/20061/I6220826755_1/?hs=false&tok=0QDKC1t4sLjm41 > > (c) 2012 LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, > USA. > > > > From bazerman@education.ucsb.edu Tue Jan 14 00:21:51 2014 From: bazerman@education.ucsb.edu (Charles Bazerman) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:21:51 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] My new books Message-ID: Here are two new open access books which synthesize much of my thinking over the years. Lots of Vygotsky and Activity theory, of course, along with phenomenology, pragmatism, structurational sociology, interactionism, language, writing studies, etc. Chuck A Rhetoric of Literate Action: Literate Action Volume 1, by Charles Bazerman A Rhetoric of Literate Action is written for "the experienced writer with a substantial repertoire of skills, [who] now would find it useful to think in more fundamental strategic terms about what they want their texts to accomplish, what form the texts might take, how to develop specific contents, and how to arrange the work of writing." The reader is offered a framework for identifying and understanding the situations writing comes out of and is directed toward; a consideration of how a text works to transform a situation and achieve the writer's motives; and advice on how to bring the text to completion and "how to manage the work and one's own emotions and energies so as to accomplish the work most effectively." Available on the WAC Clearinghouse at http://wac.colostate.edu/books/literateaction/v1/. Available at Parlor Press at http://parlorpress.com/bazerman_rhetoric. A Theory of Literate Action: Literate Action Volume 2, by Charles Bazerman A Theory of Literate Action draws on work from the social sciences?and in particular sociocultural psychology, phenomenological sociology, and the pragmatic tradition of social science?to "reconceive rhetoric fundamentally around the problems of written communication rather than around rhetoric's founding concerns of high stakes, agonistic, oral public persuasion" (p. 3). An expression of more than a quarter-century of reflection and scholarly inquiry, this volume represents a significant contribution to contemporary rhetorical theory. Available on the WAC Clearinghouse at http://wac.colostate.edu/books/literateaction/v2/. Available at Parlor Press at http://parlorpress.com/bazerman_theory. About Charles Bazerman Charles Bazerman, Professor of Education at the University of California, Santa Barbara, is the author of numerous research articles and books on the social role of writing, academic genres, and textual analysis, as well as textbooks on the teaching of writing. About the Publishers The WAC Clearinghouse has supported teachers of writing across the disciplines since 1997. Since 2000, it has made scholarly books and journals available in open-access format. Currently, more than 50 books and seven journals are available on the site. The Clearinghouse receives support from Colorado State University and from its editorial staff, editorial review board, and members who, through their collaborative efforts, make the site possible. Parlor Press is an independent publisher and distributor of scholarly and trade books in high quality print and digital formats. It was founded in 2002 to address the need for an alternative scholarly, academic press attentive to emergent ideas and forms while maintaining the highest possible standards of quality, credibility, and integrity. The Press's primary goal is to publish outstanding writing in a variety of subjects. From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 05:30:38 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:30:38 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Race and class distinctions within black communities: a racial caste in class Message-ID: New book release, please forward the attached... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Race and Class Distinctions UK Flyer-2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 977505 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140114/9be28346/attachment-0002.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Race and Class Distinctions US Flyer-2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 938578 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140114/9be28346/attachment-0003.pdf From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 05:30:38 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:30:38 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Race and class distinctions within black communities: a racial caste in class Message-ID: New book release, please forward the attached... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Race and Class Distinctions UK Flyer-2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 977505 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140114/9be28346/attachment-0006.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Race and Class Distinctions US Flyer-2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 938578 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140114/9be28346/attachment-0007.pdf From jherazo4@hotmail.com Tue Jan 14 06:47:06 2014 From: jherazo4@hotmail.com (jose david herazo) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:47:06 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] is the mind a function of the brain? Message-ID: Dear all, I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? Any suggestions and comments are welcome, JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - Colombia) Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 www.unicordoba.edu.co From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 06:57:53 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:57:53 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Message-ID: <79iydgsr7ydbgi3uj0a0bwkj.1389711214894@email.android.com> Jose...have you explored philosophy of mind? ?The concept of mind by ryle. ?John searle's work...in my own work I am attempting to synthesize quantum mechanics with phenomenology, structural marxism, and the later wittgenstein's notion of language games. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: jose david herazo Date:01/14/2014 9:47 AM (GMT-05:00) To: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] is the mind a function of the brain? Dear all, I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? Any suggestions and comments are welcome, JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - Colombia) Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel:? 7860500 - 7909800 www.unicordoba.edu.co ?? ? From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 06:57:53 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:57:53 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Message-ID: <79iydgsr7ydbgi3uj0a0bwkj.1389711214894@email.android.com> Jose...have you explored philosophy of mind? ?The concept of mind by ryle. ?John searle's work...in my own work I am attempting to synthesize quantum mechanics with phenomenology, structural marxism, and the later wittgenstein's notion of language games. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: jose david herazo Date:01/14/2014 9:47 AM (GMT-05:00) To: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] is the mind a function of the brain? Dear all, I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? Any suggestions and comments are welcome, JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - Colombia) Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel:? 7860500 - 7909800 www.unicordoba.edu.co ?? ? From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 07:02:55 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:02:55 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Message-ID: Also sociocultural theorists such as habermas, giddens, bourdieu, and marshall sahlins I would argue with their notion of practical consciousness assume the notion of 'higher order semiotic consciousness'...it is the postmodernist and poststructuralist I believe would contradict that position not necessarily the aforementioned theorists? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: jose david herazo Date:01/14/2014 9:47 AM (GMT-05:00) To: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] is the mind a function of the brain? Dear all, I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? Any suggestions and comments are welcome, JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - Colombia) Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel:? 7860500 - 7909800 www.unicordoba.edu.co ?? ? From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 14 07:02:55 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:02:55 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Message-ID: Also sociocultural theorists such as habermas, giddens, bourdieu, and marshall sahlins I would argue with their notion of practical consciousness assume the notion of 'higher order semiotic consciousness'...it is the postmodernist and poststructuralist I believe would contradict that position not necessarily the aforementioned theorists? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: jose david herazo Date:01/14/2014 9:47 AM (GMT-05:00) To: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] is the mind a function of the brain? Dear all, I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? Any suggestions and comments are welcome, JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - Colombia) Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel:? 7860500 - 7909800 www.unicordoba.edu.co ?? ? From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 07:35:33 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:35:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 14 January 2014 14:47, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > Dear Jose, For SCT (CHAT in particular) mind is socially mediated. Pretty much any classical CHAT text will touch upon this. If you are seeking some kind of binary (artificial) distinction between brain and mind, the circumstances of blind-deaf children may be appropriate. See, for example, Meshcheryakov in "Awakening to Life" (1979, p. 309): "It has been demonstrated and proven through this experiemnt that scientifically organised instruction of children held back by what might seem an insuperable obstacle -- namely the lack of sight and hearing -- could equip a deaf-blind child for human development in the full sense of the word and shape a mind of the highest level, that would give him access to the treasure house of human culture and knowledge and enable him to achieve the fruition of all his capacities and talents." Best, Huw > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 07:35:33 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:35:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 14 January 2014 14:47, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > Dear Jose, For SCT (CHAT in particular) mind is socially mediated. Pretty much any classical CHAT text will touch upon this. If you are seeking some kind of binary (artificial) distinction between brain and mind, the circumstances of blind-deaf children may be appropriate. See, for example, Meshcheryakov in "Awakening to Life" (1979, p. 309): "It has been demonstrated and proven through this experiemnt that scientifically organised instruction of children held back by what might seem an insuperable obstacle -- namely the lack of sight and hearing -- could equip a deaf-blind child for human development in the full sense of the word and shape a mind of the highest level, that would give him access to the treasure house of human culture and knowledge and enable him to achieve the fruition of all his capacities and talents." Best, Huw > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Tue Jan 14 07:55:38 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:55:38 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Jose, I would say that sociocultural theory has a range of opinions on this. Some view mind as an inner space that is produced as a result of participation in sociocultural practices. Others seem to assume that mind exists at birth. Others say that most of us grow up with an ethnopsychology that assumes that each of us has a private and personal inner space, but that this cannot be the basis for a scientific psychology. Some assume that conscious experience is "in the mind," others that consciousness is an aspect of our active, practical relationship with the world. You pays your money, you makes your choice. Martin On Jan 14, 2014, at 9:47 AM, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co From lspopov@bgsu.edu Tue Jan 14 08:00:42 2014 From: lspopov@bgsu.edu (Lubomir Savov Popov) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:00:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9d2ccad3388640aebfd3fc5bd8e9653a@BY2PR05MB758.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Hello everyone, In Historical Materialism, the brain is an organ, while the mind/consciousness is a function of this organ. (By the way, there is a difference between the concepts of mind and consciousness, but in this case I used them as substitutes to save time.) In some way, the brain is the hardware, although I will agree that this is a pretty simplistic metaphor. These issues are resolved differently in different paradigms. However, considering that CHAT is a product of a historical materialist thinking, it seems to me that when we involve CHAT in such discussions, we might wish to refer to Historical Materialism as a foundation. The mind/consciousness has a long history of emergence. It is not only a product of the functioning of the brain; it is shaped by the social reality and the sociocultural situations in which the human individual is involved. The emergence of consciousness is one of the major thematic circles in Dialectical and Historical Materialism. There is a lot of literature on this. Historical Materialism treats a number of issues related to the human condition very differently compared to the other paradigm. Many of you might be astonished to hear that personality emerged after the Renaissance. Before that, humans didn't have that clear self-articulation from the community at large. They strongly identified themselves with their immediate communities. A week ago, I read in a popular magazine article that fish has personality and the scientists expect to discover personality in plants. Well, from historical materialist position this doesn't make sense. Certain phenomena and concepts are reserved only for human beings. Any other uses are metaphorical. Best wishes, Lubomir -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? On 14 January 2014 14:47, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both > sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of > my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something > called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk > in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The > language of > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of > the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, > consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > Dear Jose, For SCT (CHAT in particular) mind is socially mediated. Pretty much any classical CHAT text will touch upon this. If you are seeking some kind of binary (artificial) distinction between brain and mind, the circumstances of blind-deaf children may be appropriate. See, for example, Meshcheryakov in "Awakening to Life" (1979, p. 309): "It has been demonstrated and proven through this experiemnt that scientifically organised instruction of children held back by what might seem an insuperable obstacle -- namely the lack of sight and hearing -- could equip a deaf-blind child for human development in the full sense of the word and shape a mind of the highest level, that would give him access to the treasure house of human culture and knowledge and enable him to achieve the fruition of all his capacities and talents." Best, Huw > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - > Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co From lspopov@bgsu.edu Tue Jan 14 08:00:42 2014 From: lspopov@bgsu.edu (Lubomir Savov Popov) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:00:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9d2ccad3388640aebfd3fc5bd8e9653a@BY2PR05MB758.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Hello everyone, In Historical Materialism, the brain is an organ, while the mind/consciousness is a function of this organ. (By the way, there is a difference between the concepts of mind and consciousness, but in this case I used them as substitutes to save time.) In some way, the brain is the hardware, although I will agree that this is a pretty simplistic metaphor. These issues are resolved differently in different paradigms. However, considering that CHAT is a product of a historical materialist thinking, it seems to me that when we involve CHAT in such discussions, we might wish to refer to Historical Materialism as a foundation. The mind/consciousness has a long history of emergence. It is not only a product of the functioning of the brain; it is shaped by the social reality and the sociocultural situations in which the human individual is involved. The emergence of consciousness is one of the major thematic circles in Dialectical and Historical Materialism. There is a lot of literature on this. Historical Materialism treats a number of issues related to the human condition very differently compared to the other paradigm. Many of you might be astonished to hear that personality emerged after the Renaissance. Before that, humans didn't have that clear self-articulation from the community at large. They strongly identified themselves with their immediate communities. A week ago, I read in a popular magazine article that fish has personality and the scientists expect to discover personality in plants. Well, from historical materialist position this doesn't make sense. Certain phenomena and concepts are reserved only for human beings. Any other uses are metaphorical. Best wishes, Lubomir -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Huw Lloyd Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 10:36 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: xmca list list Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? On 14 January 2014 14:47, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > second language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both > sociocultural theory and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of > my committee members suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something > called the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk > in terms of 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The > language of > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of > the brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, > consciousness? Has anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > Dear Jose, For SCT (CHAT in particular) mind is socially mediated. Pretty much any classical CHAT text will touch upon this. If you are seeking some kind of binary (artificial) distinction between brain and mind, the circumstances of blind-deaf children may be appropriate. See, for example, Meshcheryakov in "Awakening to Life" (1979, p. 309): "It has been demonstrated and proven through this experiemnt that scientifically organised instruction of children held back by what might seem an insuperable obstacle -- namely the lack of sight and hearing -- could equip a deaf-blind child for human development in the full sense of the word and shape a mind of the highest level, that would give him access to the treasure house of human culture and knowledge and enable him to achieve the fruition of all his capacities and talents." Best, Huw > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba (Monter?a - > Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 08:09:20 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:09:20 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jose, I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and historical in the mind/brain. But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT folks and get 10 different theories of mind. One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. -greg On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a second > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory and > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms of > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? Has > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > www.unicordoba.edu.co -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From smago@uga.edu Tue Jan 14 08:48:18 2014 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] tools of the trade Message-ID: http://mag.uchicago.edu/arts-humanities/working-over-time?msource=MAG10 Some might find this exhibit to be of interest, given its thesis that modern tools have ancient roots. For sale, they offer an accompanying book (http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/catalog/oimp/oimp36.html). p From lchcmike@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 09:52:02 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:52:02 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] U of Cal Free books Message-ID: Enjoy reading! http://www.openculture.com/2014/01/read-700-free-ebooks-made-available-by-the-university-of-california-press.html From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 11:35:02 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:35:02 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: Celebrate Black Male Achievement Week with American Promise! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thought this film might be of interest to some. I saw it while in chicago and got to meet the film-maker/mother of one of the boys. It is about two young African-American boys who get accepted into one of New York's elite prep schools. It is particularly interesting b.c. it follows them across 12 years of their lives. And in the U.S., PBS is airing it on Feb. 3. -greg ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mich?le Stephenson & Joe Brewster Date: Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:47 AM Subject: Celebrate Black Male Achievement Week with American Promise! To: Greg Promise's Kept is on sale today! View this email in your browser Dear Friends, 2013 was a year of great milestones for us, after fourteen years of filming, editing, and building our campaign, we were thrilled and honored to release *American Promise *and see our family grow from the two who embarked on this journey in 1999, to the thousands of families, caregivers, educators, and citizens who have joined us and have demonstrated their commitment to fully realizing the *American Promise* for all children. As we usher in 2014, we?re excited to share new important milestones. First, is another decade-long work-in-progress: our book, *Promises Kept: Raising Black Boys to Success in School and in Life is on shelves now at Amazon , Barnes & Noble , Indiebound , and iBookstore .* Purchase it today and join us online tonight at 9pm ET for a Twitter chat, along with coauthor Hilary Beard (@HilaryBeard) and moderated by @RaisingGreatMen, to discuss the book. If you have a question that you?d like us to answer post it hereor tweet us at @promisefilm with the hashtag #PromisesKept. In February, *Black History Month, PBS **will premiere American Promise on POV on Monday the 3rd at 10 pm ET (check local listings).* We hope to use TV broadcast to spark a national conversation on Black Male Achievement and we are declaring the week of *February 3 ?February 9th, Black Male Achievement Week. *Please join us in using this week to lift up the achievements of black boys and the work being done to support our communities. Below are some suggested ways that you can make a difference in your community, even an action as small as committing to watching on February 3 and sharing on social media will help us make an IMPACT! *Take Action:* 1. Plan an *American Promise* Premiere Partyat your local community center, school, or at home. 2. Educators: Share and discuss our professional development curriculawith school faculty. 3. Parents and Caregivers: Plan a *Promises Kept* Book Club party or an inaugural Promise Clubmeeting. 4. Host a panel on black male achievementin your community. 5. Spread the word on social media and invite members of your community to participate: - Post this to Facebook: Ready to take action towards closing the achievement gap in YOUR community? Tune in to the premiere of #AmericanPromise on @POVDocsand host a community event during Black Male Achievement Week this February 3rd-9th! Learn more about ways to get involved here: http://bit.ly/1imHM45 - Click to tweet this: Tune in to #AmericanPromise on @povdocs & join Black Male Achievement Week this Feb. 3-9! Get involved here: http://bit.ly/1imHM45 Looking forward to working, learning, and growing with you in 2014, Mich?le Stephenson, Joe Brewster + the *American Promise* Team *P.S.: Have you seen American Promise? We want to hear from YOU! Please take our audience questionnaire and give us feedback: http://svy.mk/1aCDMFM * Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Tumblr *Copyright ? 2014 American Promise, All rights reserved.* You are receiving this email because you expressed interest in American Promise. *Our mailing address is:* American Promise 254 Adelphi Street Brooklyn, NY 11205 Add us to your address book unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lchcmike@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 11:52:56 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:52:56 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: Request for Articles for New RSF Journal In-Reply-To: <300.0.15.4F6.1CF1161BC7E1044.6B0DC@me-ss2-vsujbl.mailengine1.com> References: <300.0.15.4F6.1CF1161BC7E1044.6B0DC@me-ss2-vsujbl.mailengine1.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Russell Sage Foundation Date: Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:49 AM Subject: Request for Articles for New RSF Journal To: mcole@ucsd.edu Click here to view this message in a browser . [image: Image] *PROPOSAL FOR RSF: THE RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION JOURNAL OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES ISSUE AND CONFERENCE ON SEVERE DEPRIVATION IN AMERICA* *Request for Articles: Severe Deprivation in America * Since 2000, the U.S. poverty rate has increased and the poor have become poorer. Along with hardships brought on by the Great Recession, welfare reform, the prison boom, the rise of short-term and low-wage jobs, political decisions at the federal level, declines in union membership, and high rates of joblessness have all contributed to deepening poverty in America. At the same time poor families saw their incomes drop or stagnate, their cost of housing rose substantially. Median asking monthly rent for vacant units has increased by more than 70 percent since 1990. At the same time, fewer new households were receiving government assistance. Cash assistance caseloads have fallen from 12.3 million recipients per month in 1996 to 4.5 million in 2011. Today, only one in ten adults living below the poverty line receives cash welfare. On the other hand, some federal programs have grown substantially over the last two decades: namely, the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Large-scale changes in federal poverty policy have created new winners and losers. Some low-income families now fare much better; others fare much worse. If conditions have worsened for many poor Americans, how do they endure conditions of severe economic deprivation? What is life like on the fringes of the economy? What are the coping mechanisms and survival strategies of families with very low incomes? What are the effects of poverty-related traumas on adults and children? The fact that millions are living on so little and experiencing various forms of severe deprivation presents several analytical and methodological challenges to policy-relevant research. When it comes to documenting the complexity and effects of acute material hardship, explaining how and why different disadvantages cluster, or comparing sub-populations of the poor with similar incomes but vastly different lived realities-standard methods, theories, and concepts often are ill-equipped. Many statistical methods favor isolating the effect of a single treatment on a single outcome, but the lives of the extreme poor are characterized by correlated and compounding disadvantages. And much social-scientific data do not sufficiently capture the experiences of vulnerable citizens, who often are left out of survey samples or infrequently show up in administrative databases. The language of "poverty," meanwhile, can be fuzzy and imprecise. Social-scientific terminology groups all families below a certain income threshold into a single category: the poor. But doing so can flatten crucial differences in how material scarcity is experienced. Some fall into poverty from relatively stable backgrounds; for others, poverty courses through the generations. Some low-income Americans have experienced incarceration, hunger, violence, addiction, and eviction; others know nothing of these traumas. What, then, do we mean by "poverty"? How can this term-central to both social science and social policy-be refined or redefined? How can we capture with more precision variations or degrees of scarcity and social suffering among low-income families? And what are the implications of severe deprivation for urban ethnography, measurement, survey design, causal inference, or experiments? In devoting an issue to Severe Deprivation in America, RSF: The Russell Sage Journal of the Social Sciences is interested in publishing research that investigates these questions. We are interested in studies-from multiple disciplines and employing multiple methods-that analyze the causes, conditions, and consequences of severe deprivation in the United States. By severe deprivation, we have in mind economic hardship that is (1) acute, (2) compounded, and (3) chronic. (1) Acute: deep poverty; the poverty of those far below the poverty line characterized by scarcity of critical resources and material hardship. (2) Compounded: poverty "plus" or correlated adversity; the clustering of different kinds of disadvantage across multiple dimensions (psychological, social, material) and institutions (work, family, prison). (3) Chronic: enduring disadvantage; the lasting effects early-life trauma or deprivation experienced over long stretches, lifetimes, or generations-and therefore often impervious to change. Please click here for a link to a more detailed description of the proposal *Anticipated Timeline* Prospective contributors should submit a CV and a one-page abstract of their study no later than February 24th to *journals@rsage.org *. Please put Severe Deprivation in the subject line and address the email to Suzanne Nichols, Director of Publications. Only abstracts submitted to *journals@rsage.org * will be considered. Each paper will receive a $1,000 honorarium when the issue is published. The journal issue is being edited by Matthew Desmond, Assistant Professor of Sociology and Social Studies at Harvard University, but all questions should be directed to *journals@rsage.org *. A conference will be organized at RSF in New York City in early fall of 2014. The contributors will gather for a one-day workshop to present preliminary findings and receive feedback from the other contributors. Travel costs, food, and lodging will be covered by the foundation. Papers will be circulated before the conference. After the conference, the authors will submit their final drafts on or before November 15, 2014. The papers will then be sent out to two additional scholars for peer reviews. Having received feedback from reviewers and the RSF board, authors will revise their papers before March 15, 2015. The full and final issue will be submitted for publication in the fall of 2015. Papers will be published open access on the foundations website as well as in several digital repositories, including JSTOR and UPCC/Project Muse. Please click here for a link to a more detailed description of the topics covered in this call for papers. ------------------------------ * Order RSF Books | Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | Contact Us Russell Sage Foundation ? 112 East 64th Street, New York, NY 10065 ? (212) 750-6000* Update Profile / Unsubscribe From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Jan 14 08:26:54 2014 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:26:54 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: A very brief bio and summary of Elliot Eisner's (March 10, 1933 - January 10, 2014) work. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Elliot W. Eisner From* Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia* Elliot Eisner (March 10, 1933 - January 10, 2014) was a professor of Art and Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, and one of the United State's leading academic minds. He was active in several fields including arts education, curriculum reform, qualitative research, and was the recipient of a University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award in 2005 for his work in education as well as the Brock International Prize in 2004 ? ? In 1992, he became the recipient of the Jos? Vasconcelos World Award of Education in recognition to his 30 years of scholarly and professional work, particularly his contribution in the formulation of educational policy to better understand the potential of the arts in the educational development of the young ?.? He was the 1997 recipient of the Sir Herbert Read Award of the International Society for Education through Art (INSEA). Biography Elliot Eisner was born on March 10, 1933, to a family of Russian Jewish immigrants. His father, Louis Eisner (originally Label Iznuk), was born in the shtetl of Pavoloch in the Russian Empire (now present-day Ukraine), and came to America around 1916 or 1917. He was a Oxen harness maker and a leatherworker, as well as a member of the International Fur & Leather Workers Union and an ardent Socialist, who personally met Eugene Debs at a Socialist convention for his campaign for the Election of 1920. His mother, Eva Perzhoff, was from the shtetl of Chechersk in present-day Belarus, and was also a Socialist. Elliot Eisner received his Ph.D. in education from the University of Chicago in the 1960s, where he studied with Joseph Schwab, Bruno Bettelheim, and Phillip Jackson. His work has supported Discipline-Based Art Education, and he developed the importance of forms of representation in education. During the 1980s, he had a number of exchanges with Denis C. Phillips regarding the status of qualitative research for educational understanding. Eisner also had a well-known debate with Howard Gardner as to whether a work of fiction such as a novel could be submitted as a dissertation (Eisner believed it could, and some novels have since been successfully submitted). He published regularly; his works included hundreds of articles and over a dozen books. He also frequently spoke before teachers, administrators, and at professional conferences. He served as president of many professional organizations, including the American Educational Research Association, the National Art Education Association, the International Society for Education through Art (InSEA) and the John Dewey Society. Elliot Eisner died on January 10, 2014, from complications of both Parkinson's Disease, as well as Pneumonia. ? (See attached poster PDF for *Ten Lessons the Arts Teach*). Eisner, E. (2002). *The Arts and the Creation of Mind, *In Chapter 4, What the Arts Teach and How It Shows. (pp. 70-92). Yale University Press. -- *Robert Lake Ed.D.*Associate Professor Social Foundations of Education Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading Georgia Southern University P. O. Box 8144 Phone: (912) 478-0355 Fax: (912) 478-5382 Statesboro, GA 30460 *Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its midwife.* *-*John Dewey. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Eisner_10_Lessons_2013.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 148424 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20140114/483d3f25/attachment.pdf From lchcmike@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 17:14:23 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:14:23 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: A very brief bio and summary of Elliot Eisner's (March 10, 1933 - January 10, 2014) work. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Robert. The ten lessons are a fitting way to remember Elliot's legacy by. Seems like people who adhere to a STEAM as opposed to STEM mode of thinking about "education for the future" could benefit from pinning that document up on their walls. mike PS- But in the spirit of passing along the 10 lessons and allowing for creativity, I might want to push Elliot a little on #7. Seems like the imagined and the real, even in art, cannot be placed in a linear order. As Eugene would say, "what do you think?" Or was it Bakhtin who said that? On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Robert Lake wrote: > Elliot W. Eisner > > From* Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia* > > > Elliot Eisner (March 10, 1933 - January 10, 2014) was a professor of Art > and Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, and one of the > United State's leading academic minds. He was active in several fields > including arts education, curriculum reform, qualitative research, and was > the recipient of a University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award in 2005 for > his work in education as well as the Brock International Prize in 2004 > > In 1992, he became the recipient of the Jos? Vasconcelos World Award of > Education in recognition to his 30 years of scholarly and professional > work, particularly his contribution in the formulation of educational > policy to better understand the potential of the arts in the educational > development of the young > . > He was the 1997 recipient of the Sir Herbert Read Award of the > International Society for Education through Art (INSEA). > > Biography > > Elliot Eisner was born on March 10, 1933, to a family of Russian Jewish > immigrants. His father, Louis Eisner (originally Label Iznuk), was born in > the shtetl of Pavoloch in the Russian Empire (now present-day Ukraine), and > came to America around 1916 or 1917. He was a Oxen harness maker and a > leatherworker, as well as a member of the International Fur & Leather > Workers Union and an ardent Socialist, who personally met Eugene Debs at a > Socialist convention for his campaign for the Election of 1920. His mother, > Eva Perzhoff, was from the shtetl of Chechersk in present-day Belarus, and > was also a Socialist. > > Elliot Eisner received his Ph.D. in education from the University of > Chicago in the 1960s, where he studied with Joseph Schwab, Bruno > Bettelheim, and Phillip Jackson. > > His work has supported Discipline-Based Art Education, and he developed the > importance of forms of representation in education. During the 1980s, he > had a number of exchanges with Denis C. Phillips regarding the status of > qualitative research for educational understanding. Eisner also had a > well-known debate with Howard Gardner as to whether a work of fiction such > as a novel could be submitted as a dissertation (Eisner believed it could, > and some novels have since been successfully submitted). > > He published regularly; his works included hundreds of articles and over a > dozen books. He also frequently spoke before teachers, administrators, and > at professional conferences. He served as president of many professional > organizations, including the American Educational Research Association, the > National Art Education Association, the International Society for Education > through Art (InSEA) and the John Dewey Society. > > Elliot Eisner died on January 10, 2014, from complications of both > Parkinson's Disease, as well as Pneumonia. > (See attached poster PDF for *Ten Lessons the Arts Teach*). > > Eisner, E. (2002). *The Arts and the Creation of Mind, *In Chapter 4, What > the Arts Teach > and How It Shows. (pp. 70-92). Yale University Press. > > > > > > -- > > *Robert Lake Ed.D.*Associate Professor > Social Foundations of Education > Dept. of Curriculum, Foundations, and Reading > Georgia Southern University > P. O. Box 8144 > Phone: (912) 478-0355 > Fax: (912) 478-5382 > Statesboro, GA 30460 > > *Democracy must be born anew in every generation, and education is its > midwife.* > *-*John Dewey. > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 20:11:22 2014 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (Larry Purss) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:11:22 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of what mind *is*. The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective phenomena. [second person perspective.] It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts of what mind *is* As Martin said, "you pays your money, you make your choice" On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Jose, > I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a > non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are > not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also > suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may > be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't > reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and > historical in the mind/brain. > > But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT > folks and get 10 different theories of mind. > > One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's > book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement > with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as > much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. > > -greg > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > second > > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory > and > > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms > of > > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? > Has > > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > > > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > > > www.unicordoba.edu.co > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 20:11:22 2014 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (Larry Purss) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:11:22 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of what mind *is*. The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective phenomena. [second person perspective.] It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts of what mind *is* As Martin said, "you pays your money, you make your choice" On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Jose, > I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a > non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are > not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also > suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may > be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't > reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and > historical in the mind/brain. > > But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT > folks and get 10 different theories of mind. > > One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's > book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement > with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as > much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. > > -greg > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > second > > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory > and > > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms > of > > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? > Has > > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > > > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > > > www.unicordoba.edu.co > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Tue Jan 14 20:11:22 2014 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (Larry Purss) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:11:22 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of what mind *is*. The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective phenomena. [second person perspective.] It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts of what mind *is* As Martin said, "you pays your money, you make your choice" On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > Jose, > I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a > non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are > not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also > suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may > be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't > reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and > historical in the mind/brain. > > But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT > folks and get 10 different theories of mind. > > One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's > book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement > with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as > much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. > > -greg > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > > academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > second > > language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory > and > > systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > > suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > > SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > > the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms > of > > 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > > science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > > brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? > Has > > anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > > > > Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > > > > JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > > > > Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > > (Monter?a - Colombia) > > > > Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > > > > www.unicordoba.edu.co > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From jaana.pirkkalainen@kolumbus.fi Wed Jan 15 00:35:39 2014 From: jaana.pirkkalainen@kolumbus.fi (Jaana Pirkkalainen) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:35:39 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> Hi Jose, more from a natural science perspective on the question of "the mind" I would recommend you works of Daniel C. Dennett. - Jaana Pirkkalainen 15.01.2014 06:11, Larry Purss kirjoitti: > The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple > *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* > object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing > what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, > and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on > this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends > *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of > what mind *is*. > > The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative > thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from > [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective > phenomena. [second person perspective.] > > It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all > abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. > Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the > modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in > dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts > of what mind *is* > > As Martin said, > "you pays your money, you make your choice" > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > >> Jose, >> I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a >> non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are >> not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also >> suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may >> be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't >> reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and >> historical in the mind/brain. >> >> But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT >> folks and get 10 different theories of mind. >> >> One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's >> book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement >> with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as >> much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. >> >> -greg >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >> wrote: >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of >>> academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a >> second >>> language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory >> and >>> systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members >>> suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. >>> SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called >>> the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms >> of >>> 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of >>> science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the >>> brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? >> Has >>> anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? >>> >>> Any suggestions and comments are welcome, >>> >>> JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA >>> >>> Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba >>> (Monter?a - Colombia) >>> >>> Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 >>> >>> www.unicordoba.edu.co >> >> >> >> -- >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >> Visiting Assistant Professor >> Department of Anthropology >> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >> Brigham Young University >> Provo, UT 84602 >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >> From lsmolucha@hotmail.com Wed Jan 15 10:04:56 2014 From: lsmolucha@hotmail.com (larry smolucha) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:04:56 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> References: , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> Message-ID: The mind might be a function of the brain but the soul is not. > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:35:39 +0200 > From: jaana.pirkkalainen@kolumbus.fi > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? > > Hi Jose, > > more from a natural science perspective on the question of "the mind" I > would recommend you works of Daniel C. Dennett. > > - Jaana Pirkkalainen > > > > > 15.01.2014 06:11, Larry Purss kirjoitti: > > The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple > > *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* > > object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing > > what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, > > and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on > > this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends > > *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of > > what mind *is*. > > > > The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative > > thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from > > [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective > > phenomena. [second person perspective.] > > > > It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all > > abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. > > Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the > > modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in > > dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts > > of what mind *is* > > > > As Martin said, > > "you pays your money, you make your choice" > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > > > >> Jose, > >> I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a > >> non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are > >> not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also > >> suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may > >> be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't > >> reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and > >> historical in the mind/brain. > >> > >> But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT > >> folks and get 10 different theories of mind. > >> > >> One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's > >> book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement > >> with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as > >> much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. > >> > >> -greg > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >>> wrote: > >>> Dear all, > >>> > >>> I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > >>> academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > >> second > >>> language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory > >> and > >>> systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > >>> suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > >>> SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > >>> the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms > >> of > >>> 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > >>> science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > >>> brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? > >> Has > >>> anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > >>> > >>> Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > >>> > >>> JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > >>> > >>> Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > >>> (Monter?a - Colombia) > >>> > >>> Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > >>> > >>> www.unicordoba.edu.co > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > >> Visiting Assistant Professor > >> Department of Anthropology > >> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > >> Brigham Young University > >> Provo, UT 84602 > >> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > >> > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Wed Jan 15 10:35:19 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:35:19 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: References: , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> Message-ID: <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> I'm inclined to say that both mind and soul are aspects of folk psychology. >From Charles Taylor's 'Sources of the Self': We think of our thoughts, ideas, or feelings as being ?within? us, while the objects in the world which these mental states bear on are ?without??. But as strong as this partitioning of the world appears to us, as solid as this location may seem, and anchored in the very nature of the human agent, it is in large part a feature of our world, the world of modern, Western people. The localization is not a universal one, which human beings recognize as a matter of course, as they do for instance that their heads are above their torsos. Rather it is a function of a historically limited mode of self interpretation, one which has become dominant in the modern West and which may indeed spread thence to other parts of the globe, but which had a beginning in time and space and may have an end. (Taylor, 1098, p. 111) Martin On Jan 15, 2014, at 1:04 PM, larry smolucha wrote: > The mind might be a function of the brain but the soul is not. > >> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:35:39 +0200 >> From: jaana.pirkkalainen@kolumbus.fi >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? >> >> Hi Jose, >> >> more from a natural science perspective on the question of "the mind" I >> would recommend you works of Daniel C. Dennett. >> >> - Jaana Pirkkalainen >> >> >> >> >> 15.01.2014 06:11, Larry Purss kirjoitti: >>> The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple >>> *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* >>> object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing >>> what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, >>> and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on >>> this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends >>> *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of >>> what mind *is*. >>> >>> The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative >>> thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from >>> [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective >>> phenomena. [second person perspective.] >>> >>> It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all >>> abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. >>> Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the >>> modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in >>> dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts >>> of what mind *is* >>> >>> As Martin said, >>> "you pays your money, you make your choice" >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: >>> >>>> Jose, >>>> I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a >>>> non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are >>>> not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also >>>> suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may >>>> be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't >>>> reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and >>>> historical in the mind/brain. >>>> >>>> But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT >>>> folks and get 10 different theories of mind. >>>> >>>> One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's >>>> book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement >>>> with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as >>>> much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. >>>> >>>> -greg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >>>> wrote: >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of >>>>> academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a >>>> second >>>>> language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory >>>> and >>>>> systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members >>>>> suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. >>>>> SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called >>>>> the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms >>>> of >>>>> 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of >>>>> science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the >>>>> brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? >>>> Has >>>>> anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? >>>>> >>>>> Any suggestions and comments are welcome, >>>>> >>>>> JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA >>>>> >>>>> Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba >>>>> (Monter?a - Colombia) >>>>> >>>>> Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 >>>>> >>>>> www.unicordoba.edu.co >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. >>>> Visiting Assistant Professor >>>> Department of Anthropology >>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower >>>> Brigham Young University >>>> Provo, UT 84602 >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson >>>> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 15 14:56:00 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:56:00 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> References: , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: <52D71200.1000509@mira.net> Great quote, Martin! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Martin John Packer wrote: > I'm inclined to say that both mind and soul are aspects of folk psychology. > > >From Charles Taylor's 'Sources of the Self': > > We think of our thoughts, ideas, or feelings as being ?within? us, while the objects in the world which these mental states bear on are ?without??. But as strong as this partitioning of the world appears to us, as solid as this location may seem, and anchored in the very nature of the human agent, it is in large part a feature of our world, the world of modern, Western people. The localization is not a universal one, which human beings recognize as a matter of course, as they do for instance that their heads are above their torsos. Rather it is a function of a historically limited mode of self interpretation, one which has become dominant in the modern West and which may indeed spread thence to other parts of the globe, but which had a beginning in time and space and may have an end. (Taylor, 1098, p. 111) > > Martin > > From carolmacdon@gmail.com Wed Jan 15 22:02:16 2014 From: carolmacdon@gmail.com (carolmacdon@gmail.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:02:16 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <52D71200.1000509@mira.net> References: , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> <52D71200.1000509@mira.net> Message-ID: <833468905-1389852128-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1710803163-@b17.c11.bise7.blackberry> Hi That is a stunning quote, something which articulates what we know about western thinking but said in words that we can quote. Do you have the full details of the quote? Thanks Carol Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! -----Original Message----- From: Andy Blunden Sender: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:56:00 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Reply-To: ablunden@mira.net, "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Great quote, Martin! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Martin John Packer wrote: > I'm inclined to say that both mind and soul are aspects of folk psychology. > > >From Charles Taylor's 'Sources of the Self': > > We think of our thoughts, ideas, or feelings as being ?within? us, while the objects in the world which these mental states bear on are ?without??. But as strong as this partitioning of the world appears to us, as solid as this location may seem, and anchored in the very nature of the human agent, it is in large part a feature of our world, the world of modern, Western people. The localization is not a universal one, which human beings recognize as a matter of course, as they do for instance that their heads are above their torsos. Rather it is a function of a historically limited mode of self interpretation, one which has become dominant in the modern West and which may indeed spread thence to other parts of the globe, but which had a beginning in time and space and may have an end. (Taylor, 1098, p. 111) > > Martin > > From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Thu Jan 16 03:59:11 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:59:11 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <833468905-1389852128-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1710803163-@b17.c11.bise7.blackberry> References: , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> <52D71200.1000509@mira.net>, <833468905-1389852128-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1710803163-@b17.c11.bise7.blackberry> Message-ID: <66a4efa68f65467b8809c1822b05e192@BL2PR08MB161.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> Hi Carol, Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. Harvard University Press. It's on page 111. Martin ________________________________________ De: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu en nombre de carolmacdon@gmail.com Enviado: jueves, 16 de enero de 2014 01:02 a.m. Para: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Asunto: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? Hi That is a stunning quote, something which articulates what we know about western thinking but said in words that we can quote. Do you have the full details of the quote? Thanks Carol From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Thu Jan 16 09:43:45 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:43:45 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <66a4efa68f65467b8809c1822b05e192@BL2PR08MB161.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> References: <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi> <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> <52D71200.1000509@mira.net> <833468905-1389852128-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1710803163-@b17.c11.bise7.blackberry> <66a4efa68f65467b8809c1822b05e192@BL2PR08MB161.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: I like the date better. Considering the content of the quote, it would have ben cool if someone said something like that in 1089... prescient... -greg On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Martin John Packer wrote: > Hi Carol, > > Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. > Harvard University Press. > > It's on page 111. > > Martin > ________________________________________ > De: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu en > nombre de carolmacdon@gmail.com > Enviado: jueves, 16 de enero de 2014 01:02 a.m. > Para: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Asunto: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? > > Hi > > That is a stunning quote, something which articulates what we know about > western thinking but said in words that we can quote. Do you have the full > details of the quote? > > Thanks > Carol > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lchcmike@gmail.com Thu Jan 16 09:58:24 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:58:24 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: tools of the trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So 2600 BCE for the earliest real estate transaction record? Neat pics, Thanks Peter. mike On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > http://mag.uchicago.edu/arts-humanities/working-over-time?msource=MAG10 > > Some might find this exhibit to be of interest, given its thesis that > modern tools have ancient roots. For sale, they offer an accompanying book ( > http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/catalog/oimp/oimp36.html). p > From lchcmike@gmail.com Thu Jan 16 09:58:24 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:58:24 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: tools of the trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So 2600 BCE for the earliest real estate transaction record? Neat pics, Thanks Peter. mike On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > http://mag.uchicago.edu/arts-humanities/working-over-time?msource=MAG10 > > Some might find this exhibit to be of interest, given its thesis that > modern tools have ancient roots. For sale, they offer an accompanying book ( > http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/catalog/oimp/oimp36.html). p > From thehangedman@gmail.com Thu Jan 16 14:05:38 2014 From: thehangedman@gmail.com (Matt Brown) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 16:05:38 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] CFP: 2014 Conference on Values in Medicine, Science, and Technology Message-ID: <963EBD97-4C83-4184-844D-F67CA889AE42@gmail.com> Announcing the 4th Annual Values in Medicine, Science, and Technology Conference At the Center for Values in Medicine, Science, and Technology The University of Texas at Dallas May 20-23, 2014 http://values.utdallas.edu Keynote Speaker: * Hugh Lacey, Swarthmore College & University of S?o Paulo * Author of _Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding._ Science, technology, and medicine unquestionably have a major impact on our lives. We live with constant technological innovation and scientific discovery, and this changes the conditions that we live in, as well as the way we understand ourselves and the world around us. Science, technology, and medicine are thus entangled with our values, our culture, and our politics, and they have an important impact on policymaking and action. We invite proposals for papers that engage with these issues from a variety of disciplinary and theoretical approaches, including philosophy of science, technology, & medicine, epistemology, ethics and political philosophy, history, science and technology studies, policy studies, and natural and social sciences. We will consider proposals for individual papers, but also thematic panel sessions and more informal formats. Please feel free to contact us early to discuss potential panel formats at values@utdallas.edu Suggested topics for papers and panels include: * The role of values in scientific inquiry * Sexism and racism in technology culture * Sex and gender in medical research or practice * Disability studies * The philosophy of food (agriculture, nutrition, diet) * The politics of genetically modified organisms * Democratization of science * Models of science advising * Historical studies of values in science * Commercialization of science and the public good * The aims of science and choice of research priorities * Obstacles to socially or politically responsible science * The politics of science and technology education * The influence of science on ethical values, and political ideals * Ethics of human enhancement * Science communication For contributed papers, please submit a 250-500 word abstract. For symposia and other multi-participant panels, submit an abstract up to 250 words describing the topic of the panel and descriptions of up to 100 words describing each participant's contribution. Submit your proposals here: http://tinyurl.com/ScienceValues2014 Please do not submit more than once for each presentation format (so you can submit as part of a group symposium as well as an individual paper, but not two papers). Participants will generally only be able to appear on the program once in any capacity. Papers that are not accepted for presentation will be automatically considered in our poster session. **Deadline is 16th of February, 2014.** -- Matthew J. Brown Director, Center for Values in Medicine, Science, and Technology The University of Texas at Dallas Home: http://utdallas.edu/~mattbrown Center: http://values.utdallas.edu Mail: 800 W. Campbell Rd., JO 31 / Richardson, TX 75080 Appointments: http://doodle.com/mattbrown From lsmolucha@hotmail.com Thu Jan 16 21:40:23 2014 From: lsmolucha@hotmail.com (larry smolucha) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:40:23 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? In-Reply-To: <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> References: , , , , , <52D6485B.1050606@kolumbus.fi>, , <0028D1CA-4676-40C1-BEC0-54FAD39F8839@uniandes.edu.co> Message-ID: I think that the 'modern Western' view of mind and soul as being within us,might have been the prevailing view among Western intellectuals for a time.But it always existed alongside Western transcendenatlism (Emerson) andChristian mysticism, that viewed the soul as part of an oversoul that encompassed all of nature (objects in the world). [Plato's writings even suggest this.]Today, in the post-modern West, many intellectuals even see the metaphysical in quantum mechanics. For example, there is an interesting book on Molecular Consciousness by Francoise Tibika (2013 Park street Press.) > From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co > To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:35:19 +0000 > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? > > I'm inclined to say that both mind and soul are aspects of folk psychology. > > >From Charles Taylor's 'Sources of the Self': > > We think of our thoughts, ideas, or feelings as being ?within? us, while the objects in the world which these mental states bear on are ?without??. But as strong as this partitioning of the world appears to us, as solid as this location may seem, and anchored in the very nature of the human agent, it is in large part a feature of our world, the world of modern, Western people. The localization is not a universal one, which human beings recognize as a matter of course, as they do for instance that their heads are above their torsos. Rather it is a function of a historically limited mode of self interpretation, one which has become dominant in the modern West and which may indeed spread thence to other parts of the globe, but which had a beginning in time and space and may have an end. (Taylor, 1098, p. 111) > > Martin > > On Jan 15, 2014, at 1:04 PM, larry smolucha wrote: > > > The mind might be a function of the brain but the soul is not. > > > >> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:35:39 +0200 > >> From: jaana.pirkkalainen@kolumbus.fi > >> To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: is the mind a function of the brain? > >> > >> Hi Jose, > >> > >> more from a natural science perspective on the question of "the mind" I > >> would recommend you works of Daniel C. Dennett. > >> > >> - Jaana Pirkkalainen > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 15.01.2014 06:11, Larry Purss kirjoitti: > >>> The consensus seems to be that there is a long history and multiple > >>> *traditions* explaining what mind *is*. It may be that *mind* as an *is* > >>> object is an abstraction from the continually developing genres describing > >>> what mind *is*. By tracing the multiple explanations [and interpretations, > >>> and evaluations] of mind as an *is* we may gain a deeper perspective on > >>> this abstracting process itself that points beyond *mind* and extends > >>> *mind* into emerging sociohistorical figurations [and re-figurations] of > >>> what mind *is*. > >>> > >>> The book [Between Ourselves] by Evan Thompson offers another alternative > >>> thesis explaining that mind as a scientific *object* is an abstraction from > >>> [and therefore presupposes] consciousness as implicitly an intersubjective > >>> phenomena. [second person perspective.] > >>> > >>> It may be that 1st person and 2nd person and 3rd person accounts are all > >>> abstractions from a process that extends beyond any of these reductions. > >>> Therefore, we return to *traditions* of mind as multiple genres and the > >>> modern scientific explanations of *mind* as needing to be re-figured in > >>> dialogue with these multiple genres that have become sedimented artifacts > >>> of what mind *is* > >>> > >>> As Martin said, > >>> "you pays your money, you make your choice" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Greg Thompson wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jose, > >>>> I've always thought a strength of SCT/CHAT has been the commitment to a > >>>> non-dualist ontology - meaning that mind and body (ideal and material) are > >>>> not split apart. In some ways this sounds similar to SFL, but I would also > >>>> suspect that the SFL approach is more of a materialist approach, but I may > >>>> be wrong about that. SCT's other great strength is that it isn't > >>>> reductively materialist. Rather, SCT/CHAT includes the social and > >>>> historical in the mind/brain. > >>>> > >>>> But having said that, you could probably talk to 10 different SCT/CHAT > >>>> folks and get 10 different theories of mind. > >>>> > >>>> One of my favorite explanations, though, can be found in Martin Packer's > >>>> book The Science of Qualitative Research. In it you will find an engagement > >>>> with the long history of dualist and non-dualist ontologies. There isn't as > >>>> much explicitly about mind in the book, but it's in there. > >>>> > >>>> -greg > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM, jose david herazo >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> Dear all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm writing the final chapter of my PhD dissertation about the role of > >>>>> academic concepts in students' oral production and development of a > >>>> second > >>>>> language (L2 ). Since my study is grounded on both sociocultural theory > >>>> and > >>>>> systemic functional linguistics (SFL), one of my committee members > >>>>> suggested a possible contradiction in what each theory views as mind. > >>>>> SFLers, for instance, consider that there is no need for something called > >>>>> the mind that is different from the brain. They prefer to talk in terms > >>>> of > >>>>> 'higher order semiotic consciousness' (HAlliday, 2004: The language of > >>>>> science) rather than mind. On their terms, the mind is a function of the > >>>>> brain. What is the mind for SCT? Is it the inner plane, consciousness? > >>>> Has > >>>>> anybody discussed what this concept refers to in sociocultural theory? > >>>>> > >>>>> Any suggestions and comments are welcome, > >>>>> > >>>>> JOSE DAVID HERAZO RIVERA > >>>>> > >>>>> Foreign Languages Department, Universidad de C?rdoba > >>>>> (Monter?a - Colombia) > >>>>> > >>>>> Carrera 6 No. 76-103. Tel: 7860500 - 7909800 > >>>>> > >>>>> www.unicordoba.edu.co > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > >>>> Visiting Assistant Professor > >>>> Department of Anthropology > >>>> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > >>>> Brigham Young University > >>>> Provo, UT 84602 > >>>> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > >>>> > >> > > > > From l.woods@iicedu.org Sat Jan 18 16:34:44 2014 From: l.woods@iicedu.org (L inda Woods) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 00:34:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Ireland International Conference on Education (IICE-2014): Call for Submissions! Message-ID: <303029935.517550.1390091684271.open-xchange@email.1and1.co.uk> Apologies for cross-postings Kindly email this call for papers to your colleagues, faculty members and postgraduate students. Call for Papers, Extended Abstracts, Posters, Tutorials and Workshops! ******************************************************************* Ireland International Conference on Education (IICE-2014) April 28-30, 2014, Dublin, Ireland www.iicedu.org ******************************************************************* The IICE is an international refereed conference dedicated to the advancement of the theory and practices in education. The IICE promotes collaborative excellence between academicians and professionals from Education. The aim of IICE is to provide an opportunity for academicians and professionals from various educational fields with cross-disciplinary interests to bridge the knowledge gap, promote research esteem and the evolution of pedagogy. The IICE 2014 invites research papers that encompass conceptual analysis, design implementation and performance evaluation. All the accepted papers will appear in the proceedings and modified version of selected papers will be published in special issues peer reviewed journals. The topics in IICE-2014 include but are not confined to the following areas: *Academic Advising and Counselling *Art Education *Adult Education *APD/Listening and Acoustics in Education Environment *Business Education *Counsellor Education *Curriculum, Research and Development *Competitive Skills *Continuing Education *Distance Education *Early Childhood Education *Educational Administration *Educational Foundations *Educational Psychology *Educational Technology *Education Policy and Leadership *Elementary Education *E-Learning *E-Manufacturing *ESL/TESL *E-Society *Geographical Education *Geographic information systems *Health Education *Higher Education *History *Home Education *Human Computer Interaction *Human Resource Development *Indigenous Education *ICT Education *Internet technologies *Imaginative Education *Kinesiology & Leisure Science *K12 *Language Education *Mathematics Education *Mobile Applications *Multi-Virtual Environment *Music Education *Pedagogy *Physical Education (PE) *Reading Education *Writing Education *Religion and Education Studies *Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) *Rural Education *Science Education *Secondary Education *Second life Educators *Social Studies Education *Special Education *Student Affairs *Teacher Education *Cross-disciplinary areas of Education *Ubiquitous Computing *Virtual Reality *Wireless applications *Other Areas of Education - You can submit your research paper at http://www.iicedu.org/IICE-2014%20April/Paper%20Submission.html or email it to papers-2014@iicedu.org Important Dates: *Research Paper, Student Paper, Case Study, Report Submission Date: January 30, 2014 *Extended Abstract (Work in Progress) Submission Date: January 25, 2014 *Proposal for Workshops Submission Date: January 20, 2014 *Notification of Workshop Acceptance/Rejection: January 31, 2014 *Posters Proposal Submission Date: January 25, 2014 *Notification of Posters Acceptance/Rejection: January 30, 2014 *Notification of Extended Abstract (Work in Progress) Acceptance/Rejection: February 01, 2014 *Notification of Research Paper, Student Paper, Case Study, Report Acceptance/Rejection: February 10, 2014 *Camera Ready Paper Due: February 28, 2014 *Early Bird Registration (Authors and Participants): December 30, 2013 - March 15, 2014 *Late Bird Registration Deadline (Authors only): March 16, 2014 - March 30, 2014 *Late Bird Registration Deadline (Participants only): March 16, 2014 - April 14, 2014 *Conference Dates: April 28-30, 2014 For further information please visit IICE-2014 at www.iicedu.org From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Sun Jan 19 20:15:07 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 01:15:07 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <5E7731DA-4C27-4BD2-AEE8-33EE989AA92F@gmail.com> This will interest (and upset) people in this list. Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. David http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality From the OXFAM's website: "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a global scale. This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of ordinary people. In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of inequality." David Preiss, Ph.D. Director Escuela de Psicolog?a Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 7820436 Macul Santiago, Chile Fono: (562) 3544605 Fax: (562) 3544844 web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 02:21:35 2014 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (rjsp2) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:21:35 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <5E7731DA-4C27-4BD2-AEE8-33EE989AA92F@gmail.com> References: <5E7731DA-4C27-4BD2-AEE8-33EE989AA92F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <52DCF8AF.7060604@open.ac.uk> Even the World Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a problem, which suggests that the push for change has allies in some unusual places: "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global Risks Report 2014" http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm Rob On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > This will interest (and upset) people in this list. > Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. > Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. > David > > http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality > > From the OXFAM's website: > > "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a global scale. > > This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of ordinary people. > > In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of inequality." > > David Preiss, Ph.D. > Director > Escuela de Psicolog?a > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile > Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 > 7820436 Macul > Santiago, Chile > > Fono: (562) 3544605 > Fax: (562) 3544844 > > web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Mon Jan 20 02:33:42 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:33:42 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DCF8AF.7060604@open.ac.uk> References: <5E7731DA-4C27-4BD2-AEE8-33EE989AA92F@gmail.com> <52DCF8AF.7060604@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: re: WEF as 'allies' for change: lord help us if we take their self-serving intention to 'look at' inequality as anything other than a hoped-for stabilising mechanism in the face of global revolt. Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 20 January 2014 10:21, rjsp2 wrote: > Even the World Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a > problem, which suggests that the push for change has allies in some > unusual places: > > "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global > Risks Report 2014" > http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm > > Rob > > > On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > >> This will interest (and upset) people in this list. >> Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. >> Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. >> David >> >> http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality >> >> From the OXFAM's website: >> >> "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of >> the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where >> economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic >> Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, >> impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a >> global scale. >> >> This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer >> people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, >> and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. >> Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments >> overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of >> ordinary people. >> >> In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, with >> examples of policies from around the world which have reduced inequality >> and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both rich and >> poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at Davos to >> make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of inequality." >> >> David Preiss, Ph.D. >> Director >> Escuela de Psicolog?a >> Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile >> Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 >> 7820436 Macul >> Santiago, Chile >> >> Fono: (562) 3544605 >> Fax: (562) 3544844 >> >> web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC > 038302). > > From r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 02:48:32 2014 From: r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk (rjsp2) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:48:32 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <5E7731DA-4C27-4BD2-AEE8-33EE989AA92F@gmail.com> <52DCF8AF.7060604@open.ac.uk> Message-ID: <52DCFF00.9020400@open.ac.uk> Of course one has to be realistic, but it does mean the door is slightly ajar. Rob On 20/01/2014 10:33, Tom Richardson wrote: > re: WEF as 'allies' for change: lord help us if we take their self-serving > intention to 'look at' inequality as anything other than a hoped-for > stabilising mechanism in the face of global revolt. > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough > UK > > > On 20 January 2014 10:21, rjsp2 wrote: > >> Even the World Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a >> problem, which suggests that the push for change has allies in some >> unusual places: >> >> "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global >> Risks Report 2014" >> http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm >> >> Rob >> >> >> On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: >> >>> This will interest (and upset) people in this list. >>> Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. >>> Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. >>> David >>> >>> http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality >>> >>> From the OXFAM's website: >>> >>> "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of >>> the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where >>> economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic >>> Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, >>> impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a >>> global scale. >>> >>> This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer >>> people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, >>> and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. >>> Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments >>> overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of >>> ordinary people. >>> >>> In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, with >>> examples of policies from around the world which have reduced inequality >>> and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both rich and >>> poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at Davos to >>> make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of inequality." >>> >>> David Preiss, Ph.D. >>> Director >>> Escuela de Psicolog?a >>> Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile >>> Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 >>> 7820436 Macul >>> Santiago, Chile >>> >>> Fono: (562) 3544605 >>> Fax: (562) 3544844 >>> >>> web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an >> exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC >> 038302). >> >> -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Mon Jan 20 03:59:02 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 06:59:02 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> Fear of the rise of a global class revolution underpinning their (WEF) concerns...too bad the left has no real global revolutionary leaders remaining to confront this current crisis. ?The leaders of the postcolonial world are seeking equality of opportunity, recognition, and distribution within the framework of the global capitalist world system. ? As such, a few of them are getting wealthy at the expense of the masses of colored people getting poorer so that the few can drive fancy automobiles (W.E.B. Du Bois' s observation prior to moving to ghana).? In the meantime, the leaders of the left are old and dying off. ?So in essence, the postcolonial world is supporting the very system put in place at the Paris conference to undermine their sovereignty. ? Outside a handful of leaders in Latin America can anyone name any others in africa, Southeast asia, fighting against the vagaries of global capitalism? ?On the continent of Africa (outside of Robert mugabe) corrupt and greedy leaders armed by their former colonial masters are too busy killing each other over resources in order to accumulate individual wealth, and southeast asia has become the model for capitalist development in a world environmentally threaten by the accumulative logic of of the capitalist world-system. This is truly an insane world! Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: rjsp2
Date:01/20/2014 5:21 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Even the World Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a problem, which suggests that the push for change has allies in some unusual places: "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global Risks Report 2014" http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm Rob On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > This will interest (and upset) people in this list. > Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. > Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. > David > > http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality > >? From the OXFAM's website: > > "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a global scale. > > This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of ordinary people. > > In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of inequality." > > David Preiss, Ph.D. > Director > Escuela de Psicolog?a > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile > Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 > 7820436 Macul > Santiago, Chile > > Fono: (562) 3544605 > Fax: (562) 3544844 > > web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Mon Jan 20 08:08:58 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:08:58 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?iso-8859-1?q?La_ciencia_de_la_investigaci=F3n_cualitativa?= In-Reply-To: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> Message-ID: <4C91E7D1-64C6-4549-BF24-D22C6A0DFBDB@uniandes.edu.co> For those with an interest in such things, my attempt to make sense of qualitative research - The Science of Qualitative Research - is now translated into Spanish and available online, for the equivalent of about US$30: Martin From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Mon Jan 20 08:28:33 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:28:33 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: NCBS 2014 Conference - Acceptance of Submission Message-ID: <0x9fxbkatpw96m96w1s9ahvf.1390235038282@email.android.com> For those interested, i will be presenting my new article below at the ncbs conference March 5th-8th... Also a panel discussion will take place on my new book, "race and class distinctions within black communities: a racial caste in class" Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: DO_NOT_REPLY@allacademic.com
Date:01/20/2014 10:09 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: pmocombe@mocombeian.com
Subject: NCBS 2014 Conference - Acceptance of Submission
Dear Paul Mocombe, Thank you for your abstract submission to the National Council for Black Studies 38th Annual Conference.? On behalf of our Conference Program Committee, it is my pleasure to inform you that your proposal titled, "The African Americanization of the Black Diaspora in Globalization or the Contemporary Capitalist World-System" has been accepted for presentation at the 2014 conference. All presenters must make their pre-registration payment for the conference by January 31st, to ensure that your name will appear in the conference program (1. check numbers must be provided if paying by check; 2. American Express users: please include an additional $5.00 for fees).? Please note that NCBS membership is strongly encouraged for all conference presenters. If you have already paid for membership and/or conference registration, please disregard this portion of the letter. We will notify you as to when the date and time of your presentation will be posted on our website. Please register online by going to http://www.ncbsonline.org/conference_registration_for_members by February 6, 2014 in order to take advantage of the discounted early bird registration rates.? Additionally, we urge you to make your hotel reservations with the Miami Marriott Dadeland Hotel before 5:00 pm February 6, 2014 to ensure the room/board rate ($159.00/day) and availability.? To make your reservations with the Miami Marriott Dadeland Hotel, please utilize the following link: http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/miadd-miami-marriott-dadeland/?toDate=3/11/14&groupCode=ncbncba&stop_mobi=yes&fromDate=3/2/14&app=resvlink Please make sure to enter the all the data for EACH presenter (full name [no all caps, no all lower caps], full address, phone number with e-mail address).? We look forward to your presentation at the 38th Annual National Conference of the National Council for Black Studies, March 05-08, 2014 in Miami, Florida. Our apologies if you have already received this notification.? Please share with your colleagues that submissions will be accepted until January 31st. Sincerely, Georgene Bess-Montgomery, Vice President, Conference Committee Chair? NCBS 2014 NCBS Conference Committee ???????? From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Mon Jan 20 08:29:29 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:29:29 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Fwd: NCBS 2014 Conference - Acceptance of Submission Message-ID: <7v5vvdtfmfrhlxglk0kh6sa2.1390235369826@email.android.com> Panel discussion... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: DO_NOT_REPLY@allacademic.com
Date:01/20/2014 9:46 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: pmocombe@mocombeian.com
Cc: cecile.wright@nottingham.ac.uk,info@caroltomlin.com
Subject: NCBS 2014 Conference - Acceptance of Submission
Dear Paul Mocombe, Thank you for your abstract submission to the National Council for Black Studies 38th Annual Conference.? On behalf of our Conference Program Committee, it is my pleasure to inform you that your proposal titled, "Race and Class Distinctions Within Black Communities: A Racial Caste in Class" has been accepted for presentation at the 2014 conference. All presenters must make their pre-registration payment for the conference by January 31st, to ensure that your name will appear in the conference program (1. check numbers must be provided if paying by check; 2. American Express users: please include an additional $5.00 for fees).? Please note that NCBS membership is strongly encouraged for all conference presenters. If you have already paid for membership and/or conference registration, please disregard this portion of the letter. We will notify you as to when the date and time of your presentation will be posted on our website. Please register online by going to http://www.ncbsonline.org/conference_registration_for_members by February 6, 2014 in order to take advantage of the discounted early bird registration rates.? Additionally, we urge you to make your hotel reservations with the Miami Marriott Dadeland Hotel before 5:00 pm February 6, 2014 to ensure the room/board rate ($159.00/day) and availability.? To make your reservations with the Miami Marriott Dadeland Hotel, please utilize the following link: http://www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/miadd-miami-marriott-dadeland/?toDate=3/11/14&groupCode=ncbncba&stop_mobi=yes&fromDate=3/2/14&app=resvlink Please make sure to enter the all the data for EACH presenter (full name [no all caps, no all lower caps], full address, phone number with e-mail address).? We look forward to your presentation at the 38th Annual National Conference of the National Council for Black Studies, March 05-08, 2014 in Miami, Florida. Our apologies if you have already received this notification.? Please share with your colleagues that submissions will be accepted until January 31st. Sincerely, Georgene Bess-Montgomery, Vice President, Conference Committee Chair? NCBS 2014 NCBS Conference Committee ???????? From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Mon Jan 20 15:07:32 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 16:07:32 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Piazza anyone? Message-ID: (apologies for cross-posting...) In putting together a mooc, I have come to realize that the mooc provider Canvas (by Instructure) is not a collaboration-friendly platform. I find it really strange that they don't seem to care about creating collaboration among students - they are very much caught up in that good old transmission model of education: teacher delivers information to students. Anyway, in looking around, I came across this platform called Piazza and was wondering if anyone had heard anything about it or if you have any familiarity with it? Here is an overview of the product: https://piazza.com/product/overview and here is the link with the backstory: https://piazza.com/about/story I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have. Thanks, -greg -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lchcmike@gmail.com Mon Jan 20 17:07:19 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 17:07:19 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> Message-ID: I guess my response is to be found here in the box marked in red. http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/MCole/index.html I think it speaks to the mentalities that are beginning to notice that this increasingly dire global situation may spoil their way of life-- and everyone else's too. Dickens' is not a hopeful response. But probably too optimistic (Influenced here by reading "Beyond the Beautiful Forever" perhaps). Martin Luther King day here in the U.S. And King died where? In memphis. worrying about sanitation workers. Nicely timed report. mike On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe < pmocombe@mocombeian.com> wrote: > Fear of the rise of a global class revolution underpinning their (WEF) > concerns...too bad the left has no real global revolutionary leaders > remaining to confront this current crisis. The leaders of the postcolonial > world are seeking equality of opportunity, recognition, and distribution > within the framework of the global capitalist world system. As such, a > few of them are getting wealthy at the expense of the masses of colored > people getting poorer so that the few can drive fancy automobiles (W.E.B. > Du Bois' s observation prior to moving to ghana). > > In the meantime, the leaders of the left are old and dying off. So in > essence, the postcolonial world is supporting the very system put in place > at the Paris conference to undermine their sovereignty. Outside a handful > of leaders in Latin America can anyone name any others in africa, Southeast > asia, fighting against the vagaries of global capitalism? On the continent > of Africa (outside of Robert mugabe) corrupt and greedy leaders armed by > their former colonial masters are too busy killing each other over > resources in order to accumulate individual wealth, and southeast asia has > become the model for capitalist development in a world environmentally > threaten by the accumulative logic of of the capitalist world-system. > > This is truly an insane world! > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: rjsp2 < > r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk>
Date:01/20/2014 5:21 AM > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | Oxfam International
>
Even the World Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality > as a > problem, which suggests that the push for change has allies in some > unusual places: > > "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global > Risks Report 2014" > http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm > > Rob > > On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > > This will interest (and upset) people in this list. > > Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. > > Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. > > David > > > > http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequality > > > > From the OXFAM's website: > > > > "Almost half of the world?s wealth is now owned by just one percent of > the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where > economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World Economic > Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to human progress, > impacting social stability within countries and threatening security on a > global scale. > > > > This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of fewer > people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic systems, > and compounds other inequalities ? such as those between women and men. > Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments > overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites ? to the detriment of > ordinary people. > > > > In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, > with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced > inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, both > rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic Forum at > Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing tide of > inequality." > > > > David Preiss, Ph.D. > > Director > > Escuela de Psicolog?a > > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile > > Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 > > 7820436 Macul > > Santiago, Chile > > > > Fono: (562) 3544605 > > Fax: (562) 3544844 > > > > web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC > 038302). > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Mon Jan 20 20:03:12 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:03:12 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> Message-ID: <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for More The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces+dkirsh=lsu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+dkirsh=lsu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 7:07 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I guess my response is to be found here in the box marked in red. http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/MCole/index.html I think it speaks to the mentalities that are beginning to notice that this increasingly dire global situation may spoil their way of life-- and everyone else's too. Dickens' is not a hopeful response. But probably too optimistic (Influenced here by reading "Beyond the Beautiful Forever" perhaps). Martin Luther King day here in the U.S. And King died where? In memphis. worrying about sanitation workers. Nicely timed report. mike On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe < pmocombe@mocombeian.com> wrote: > Fear of the rise of a global class revolution underpinning their (WEF) > concerns...too bad the left has no real global revolutionary leaders > remaining to confront this current crisis. The leaders of the > postcolonial world are seeking equality of opportunity, recognition, and distribution > within the framework of the global capitalist world system. As such, a > few of them are getting wealthy at the expense of the masses of > colored people getting poorer so that the few can drive fancy automobiles (W.E.B. > Du Bois' s observation prior to moving to ghana). > > In the meantime, the leaders of the left are old and dying off. So in > essence, the postcolonial world is supporting the very system put in place > at the Paris conference to undermine their sovereignty. Outside a handful > of leaders in Latin America can anyone name any others in africa, > Southeast asia, fighting against the vagaries of global capitalism? > On the continent of Africa (outside of Robert mugabe) corrupt and > greedy leaders armed by their former colonial masters are too busy > killing each other over resources in order to accumulate individual > wealth, and southeast asia has become the model for capitalist > development in a world environmentally threaten by the accumulative logic of of the capitalist world-system. > > This is truly an insane world! > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: rjsp2 < > r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk>
Date:01/20/2014 5:21 AM > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for > the Few | Oxfam International
Even the World > Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a problem, > which suggests that the push for change has allies in some unusual > places: > > "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global > Risks Report 2014" > http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm > > Rob > > On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > > This will interest (and upset) people in this list. > > Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. > > Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. > > David > > > > http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequali > > ty > > > > From the OXFAM's website: > > > > "Almost half of the world's wealth is now owned by just one percent > > of > the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where > economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World > Economic Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to > human progress, impacting social stability within countries and > threatening security on a global scale. > > > > This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of > > fewer > people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic > systems, and compounds other inequalities - such as those between women and men. > Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments > overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites - to the > detriment of ordinary people. > > > > In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, > with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced > inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, > both rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic > Forum at Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing > tide of inequality." > > > > David Preiss, Ph.D. > > Director > > Escuela de Psicolog?a > > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 > > 7820436 Macul > > Santiago, Chile > > > > Fono: (562) 3544605 > > Fax: (562) 3544844 > > > > web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), > an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in > Scotland (SC 038302). > > > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 20 20:29:23 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 15:29:23 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. That's what I think. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: > The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for More > > The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. > > The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. > > I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > David > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Mon Jan 20 20:53:56 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:53:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> Message-ID: <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Andy, Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. That's what I think. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: > The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the > Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for > More > > The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. > > The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. > > I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > David > > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 20 21:06:24 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 16:06:24 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: <52DE0050.8020406@mira.net> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh past 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > Andy, > Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. > Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. > > First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: > The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. > People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. > > That's what I think. > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for >> More >> >> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >> >> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >> >> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >> David >> >> >> > > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Mon Jan 20 21:27:54 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 05:27:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DE0050.8020406@mira.net> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DE0050.8020406@mira.net> Message-ID: The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh past 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > Andy, > Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. > Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. > > First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: > The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. > People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. > > That's what I think. > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for >> More >> >> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >> >> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >> >> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >> David >> >> >> > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Mon Jan 20 22:12:58 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:12:58 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DE0050.8020406@mira.net> Message-ID: <52DE0FEA.8010308@mira.net> I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh past > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> Andy, >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >> That's what I think. >> Andy >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for >>> More >>> >>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>> >>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>> >>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Mon Jan 20 23:50:00 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 07:50:00 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DE0FEA.8010308@mira.net> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DDF7A3.7050409@mira.net> <6c9b97d663c9421387d2af3000a70879@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <52DE0050.8020406@mira.net> <52DE0FEA.8010308@mira.net> Message-ID: <1e73876f8e8a406d9cb49fd9a4a3eb4d@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Andy, I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. Thanks. David dkirsh@lsu.edu -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > past > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. > > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> Andy, >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >> That's what I think. >> Andy >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>> for More >>> >>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>> >>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>> >>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 04:11:33 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 07:11:33 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Andy and david, It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... ?Can such a counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? ? I ask because, ?it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently refuse. ?Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Andy, I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. Thanks. David dkirsh@lsu.edu -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > past > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. > > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: >?? >> Andy, >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >> That's what I think. >> Andy >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>?? >>???? >>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>> for More >>> >>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>> >>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>> >>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>> >>> David >>>?? >>> >>>???? >>>?????? >> >>?? >>???? > > > >?? From lisayl@utk.edu Tue Jan 21 06:08:02 2014 From: lisayl@utk.edu (Lisa Yamagata-Lynch) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:08:02 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tuesday, January 21, 2014, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Andy and david, > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be > anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, > anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come from > a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? > > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a > class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it > recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 > years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical > measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all > dead we just do not know it yet. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner < > dkirsh@lsu.edu >
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM > (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net ,"eXtended > Mind, Culture, Activity" > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >
>
Andy, > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the > human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than > as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think > it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by > societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind > of political leverage for ordinary citizens. > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, > please reply, on-line or off-. > Thanks. > David > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in > acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure > however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would > somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of > itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot > will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this > conundrum, Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn > Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in > all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and > completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > > past > > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical > project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the > theoretical project are one and the same. > > > > Andy > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> Andy, > >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective > in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical > project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the > real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly > endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort > to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For > others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with > theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical > project. > >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call > for. > >> David > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam Inter -- Lisa Yamagata-Lynch, Associate Professor Chancellor's Administrative Intern and IT Online Program Coordinator Educational Psychology and Counseling A532 Bailey Education Complex University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996 Phone: 865-974-7712 From dkirsh@lsu.edu Tue Jan 21 06:47:33 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:47:33 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > It would appear ... Doesn't appear that way to me. In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at all. The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Andy and david, It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... ?Can such a counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? ? I ask because, ?it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently refuse. ?Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Andy, I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. Thanks. David dkirsh@lsu.edu -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > past > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. > > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: >?? >> Andy, >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >> That's what I think. >> Andy >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>?? >>???? >>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>> for More >>> >>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>> >>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>> >>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>> >>> David >>>?? >>> >>>???? >>>?????? >> >>?? >>???? > > > >?? From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 07:11:22 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:11:22 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <50gdgt0bmir0ojx7tarphdqx.1390317082636@email.android.com> David, You highlight an interesting argument which dates back to marx, I.e., the distinction between theory and praxis, to carve out a theoretical space for your agenda....i believe that space in academia has been usurped by bourgeois science and makes your aim ineffective. ?I maybe wrong, but I doubt it. ?This is a bit Althusserian on my part, but I just do not see any solutions coming out of an ideological apparatus. However, I am no daoist so inaction is not a solution for me. ?We either change or the earth forces us to change.... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 9:47 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
> It would appear ... Doesn't appear that way to me. In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at all. The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? David -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Andy and david, It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... ?Can such a counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? ? I ask because, ?it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently refuse. ?Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Andy, I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. Thanks. David dkirsh@lsu.edu -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: > The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > past > 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. > > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: >?? >> Andy, >> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >> That's what I think. >> Andy >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>?? >>???? >>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>> for More >>> >>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>> >>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>> >>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>> >>> David >>>?? >>> >>>???? >>>?????? >> >>?? >>???? > > > >?? From jrosen@msu.edu Tue Jan 21 07:25:19 2014 From: jrosen@msu.edu (Joshua Rosenberg) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:25:19 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Piazza anyone? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Greg, I am a member of an instructional team for an online course (not a MOOC) that has used Piazza for the past few years. We have used it exclusively as a discussion forum, and it instructors and students have liked it. I cannot say for sure how useful it would be as an LMS (if you were to use it in place of Canvas), but it might be limited. Josh -- Joshua M. Rosenberg Educational Psychology and Educational Technology (EPET) Ph.D. Program College of Education Michigan State University http://joshuamrosenberg.com On Jan 20, 2014 6:07 PM, "Greg Thompson" wrote: > (apologies for cross-posting...) > > In putting together a mooc, I have come to realize that the mooc provider > Canvas (by Instructure) is not a collaboration-friendly platform. I find it > really strange that they don't seem to care about creating collaboration > among students - they are very much caught up in that good old transmission > model of education: teacher delivers information to students. > Anyway, in looking around, I came across this platform called Piazza and > was wondering if anyone had heard anything about it or if you have any > familiarity with it? > > Here is an overview of the product: > https://piazza.com/product/overview > > and here is the link with the backstory: > https://piazza.com/about/story > > I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have. > Thanks, > -greg > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From jrosen@msu.edu Tue Jan 21 07:25:19 2014 From: jrosen@msu.edu (Joshua Rosenberg) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:25:19 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Piazza anyone? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Greg, I am a member of an instructional team for an online course (not a MOOC) that has used Piazza for the past few years. We have used it exclusively as a discussion forum, and it instructors and students have liked it. I cannot say for sure how useful it would be as an LMS (if you were to use it in place of Canvas), but it might be limited. Josh -- Joshua M. Rosenberg Educational Psychology and Educational Technology (EPET) Ph.D. Program College of Education Michigan State University http://joshuamrosenberg.com On Jan 20, 2014 6:07 PM, "Greg Thompson" wrote: > (apologies for cross-posting...) > > In putting together a mooc, I have come to realize that the mooc provider > Canvas (by Instructure) is not a collaboration-friendly platform. I find it > really strange that they don't seem to care about creating collaboration > among students - they are very much caught up in that good old transmission > model of education: teacher delivers information to students. > Anyway, in looking around, I came across this platform called Piazza and > was wondering if anyone had heard anything about it or if you have any > familiarity with it? > > Here is an overview of the product: > https://piazza.com/product/overview > > and here is the link with the backstory: > https://piazza.com/about/story > > I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have. > Thanks, > -greg > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Jan 21 09:53:32 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:53:32 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Piazza anyone? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Josh, that's helpful. Yeah, I was thinking of using it "inside" of a Canvas course. The Canvas discussions are not really built for discussion. Or, you might say it is more of a cacophony of voices rather than an organized turn-by-turn conversation that anyone can make sense of. -greg On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Joshua Rosenberg wrote: > Hi Greg, > I am a member of an instructional team for an online course (not a MOOC) > that has used Piazza for the past few years. > > We have used it exclusively as a discussion forum, and it instructors and > students have liked it. I cannot say for sure how useful it would be as an > LMS (if you were to use it in place of Canvas), but it might be limited. > > Josh > > -- > > Joshua M. Rosenberg > > Educational Psychology and Educational Technology (EPET) Ph.D. Program > > College of Education > > Michigan State University > > http://joshuamrosenberg.com > > On Jan 20, 2014 6:07 PM, "Greg Thompson" > wrote: > > > (apologies for cross-posting...) > > > > In putting together a mooc, I have come to realize that the mooc provider > > Canvas (by Instructure) is not a collaboration-friendly platform. I find > it > > really strange that they don't seem to care about creating collaboration > > among students - they are very much caught up in that good old > transmission > > model of education: teacher delivers information to students. > > Anyway, in looking around, I came across this platform called Piazza and > > was wondering if anyone had heard anything about it or if you have any > > familiarity with it? > > > > Here is an overview of the product: > > https://piazza.com/product/overview > > > > and here is the link with the backstory: > > https://piazza.com/about/story > > > > I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have. > > Thanks, > > -greg > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Visiting Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Jan 21 09:53:32 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:53:32 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Piazza anyone? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Josh, that's helpful. Yeah, I was thinking of using it "inside" of a Canvas course. The Canvas discussions are not really built for discussion. Or, you might say it is more of a cacophony of voices rather than an organized turn-by-turn conversation that anyone can make sense of. -greg On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Joshua Rosenberg wrote: > Hi Greg, > I am a member of an instructional team for an online course (not a MOOC) > that has used Piazza for the past few years. > > We have used it exclusively as a discussion forum, and it instructors and > students have liked it. I cannot say for sure how useful it would be as an > LMS (if you were to use it in place of Canvas), but it might be limited. > > Josh > > -- > > Joshua M. Rosenberg > > Educational Psychology and Educational Technology (EPET) Ph.D. Program > > College of Education > > Michigan State University > > http://joshuamrosenberg.com > > On Jan 20, 2014 6:07 PM, "Greg Thompson" > wrote: > > > (apologies for cross-posting...) > > > > In putting together a mooc, I have come to realize that the mooc provider > > Canvas (by Instructure) is not a collaboration-friendly platform. I find > it > > really strange that they don't seem to care about creating collaboration > > among students - they are very much caught up in that good old > transmission > > model of education: teacher delivers information to students. > > Anyway, in looking around, I came across this platform called Piazza and > > was wondering if anyone had heard anything about it or if you have any > > familiarity with it? > > > > Here is an overview of the product: > > https://piazza.com/product/overview > > > > and here is the link with the backstory: > > https://piazza.com/about/story > > > > I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have. > > Thanks, > > -greg > > > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > > Visiting Assistant Professor > > Department of Anthropology > > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > > Brigham Young University > > Provo, UT 84602 > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson > > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Tue Jan 21 10:19:02 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:19:02 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> References: <5d71d4pj843alwot5ub4wk5s.1390219142622@email.android.com> <663e1c898a894acab2fcf79b8f04429b@BN1PR06MB008.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Hello David Kirshner Your project is interesting indeed, and Andy B.'s caveats are concepts I think I agree with. But I am wondering off the top of my head after reading these posts several things: 1.] what is the nature / character of the 'wealth' of the ultra-wealthy, i.e in terms of money but not capital? 2.] to what extent are the ultra-wealthy benefitting without conscious intention from capital's brutal profit-producing logics 1.] unpicking the question - while the trillions of US$s owned by the top 0.01% (or whatever) that are stashed in banks are 10 time times the global annual GDP, this is not capital =, i.e. productive investment which will socially reproduce constant capital (C) and labour-power (V) - I'm not sure if it is technically 'fictitious capital', but it certainly does not at present have that 'real' status. But crucially for my question, the process which is able to produce these huge treasure stores, is not one which is originally intended 'greedily' to produce a bigger pile, but 2.] unpicked - was originally the result of the normal 'profit' production (surplus value from the production process) which continues to be built up, helped by every current trick in the exploitation book - zero-hours contracts/off-shoring at super-exploitation wages/ etc. This build up - I cannot call it accumulation since is is simply no longer being invested in production, and that is the non-greedy intention of capital, accumulating to increase 'C' , once capitalists start indulgent spending, we should smell a rat? So, the hoards are obviously reaping interest rewards and so Marx's great 'fairytale-error of compound interest' comes into play. The question to my mind becomes, perhaps, not only one of social psychology, if it is that at all (Andy B.'s caveat) , but rather, at what point in the immiseration of both Eastern and Western working-classes/middle-classes? will productive investment become again the chosen method of increasing 'wealth' (theirs). One historical method to retrieve that moment has been the destruction of capital values through war. This is being used at present, securing resources and squandering profits in state spending on arms. The risk of further interglobal conflict (WW3) can be seen growing IMO. Greed is undoubtedly an unpleasant human emotion / drive, but its role as *the* driver of the development of the current global situation is questionable, IMO. Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 21 January 2014 04:03, David H Kirshner wrote: > I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and > write, a paper tentatively titled: > The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the Planet, > Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest for More > > The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material > well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the > comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I > believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large > and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for > the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they > can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. > > The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in > political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in > disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The > conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our > political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. > > I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to > the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative > effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv > as co-authors. > > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces+dkirsh=lsu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces+dkirsh=lsu.edu@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 7:07 PM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I guess my response is to be found here in the box marked in red. > http://lchc.ucsd.edu/People/MCole/index.html > I think it speaks to the mentalities that are beginning to notice that > this increasingly dire global situation may spoil their way of life-- and > everyone else's too. > > Dickens' is not a hopeful response. But probably too optimistic > (Influenced here by reading "Beyond the Beautiful Forever" perhaps). > > Martin Luther King day here in the U.S. And King died where? In memphis. > worrying about sanitation workers. > > Nicely timed report. > > mike > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe < > pmocombe@mocombeian.com> wrote: > > > Fear of the rise of a global class revolution underpinning their (WEF) > > concerns...too bad the left has no real global revolutionary leaders > > remaining to confront this current crisis. The leaders of the > > postcolonial world are seeking equality of opportunity, recognition, and > distribution > > within the framework of the global capitalist world system. As such, a > > few of them are getting wealthy at the expense of the masses of > > colored people getting poorer so that the few can drive fancy > automobiles (W.E.B. > > Du Bois' s observation prior to moving to ghana). > > > > In the meantime, the leaders of the left are old and dying off. So in > > essence, the postcolonial world is supporting the very system put in > place > > at the Paris conference to undermine their sovereignty. Outside a > handful > > of leaders in Latin America can anyone name any others in africa, > > Southeast asia, fighting against the vagaries of global capitalism? > > On the continent of Africa (outside of Robert mugabe) corrupt and > > greedy leaders armed by their former colonial masters are too busy > > killing each other over resources in order to accumulate individual > > wealth, and southeast asia has become the model for capitalist > > development in a world environmentally threaten by the accumulative > logic of of the capitalist world-system. > > > > This is truly an insane world! > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: rjsp2 < > > r.j.s.parsons@open.ac.uk>
Date:01/20/2014 5:21 AM > > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for > > the Few | Oxfam International
Even the World > > Economic Forum sees our current level of inequality as a problem, > > which suggests that the push for change has allies in some unusual > > places: > > > > "Worsening wealth gap seen as biggest risk facing the world - Global > > Risks Report 2014" > > http://www.zurich.com/insight/global-issues/wef/globalrisks.htm > > > > Rob > > > > On 20/01/2014 04:15, David Preiss wrote: > > > This will interest (and upset) people in this list. > > > Nothing that we don't know of, unfortunately. > > > Just new reasons to keep working/thinking/worrying/protesting, I guess. > > > David > > > > > > http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/working-for-the-few-economic-inequali > > > ty > > > > > > From the OXFAM's website: > > > > > > "Almost half of the world's wealth is now owned by just one percent > > > of > > the population, and seven out of ten people live in countries where > > economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years. The World > > Economic Forum has identified economic inequality as a major risk to > > human progress, impacting social stability within countries and > > threatening security on a global scale. > > > > > > This massive concentration of economic resources in the hands of > > > fewer > > people presents a real threat to inclusive political and economic > > systems, and compounds other inequalities - such as those between women > and men. > > Left unchecked, political institutions are undermined and governments > > overwhelmingly serve the interests of economic elites - to the > > detriment of ordinary people. > > > > > > In this paper, Oxfam shows how extreme inequality is not inevitable, > > with examples of policies from around the world which have reduced > > inequality and developed more representative politics, benefiting all, > > both rich and poor. Oxfam calls on leaders at the 2014 World Economic > > Forum at Davos to make the commitments needed to counter the growing > > tide of inequality." > > > > > > David Preiss, Ph.D. > > > Director > > > Escuela de Psicolog?a > > > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Av Vicu?a Mackenna - 4860 > > > 7820436 Macul > > > Santiago, Chile > > > > > > Fono: (562) 3544605 > > > Fax: (562) 3544844 > > > > > > web: https://sites.google.com/site/daviddpreiss/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), > > an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in > > Scotland (SC 038302). > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 15:36:52 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:36:52 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52DF0494.90100@mira.net> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually engaged in that struggle in any formm about how best to further that struggle. Not the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are taking up the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my reflections on your object-concept, as others have and will. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: >> It would appear ... >> > > Doesn't appear that way to me. > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at all. > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Andy and david, > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? > > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>
Andy, > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > Thanks. > David > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh >> past >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. >> >> Andy >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >>> Andy, >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >>> David >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >>> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >>> >>> That's what I think. >>> Andy >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >>> -- >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>>> for More >>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>>> >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 15:57:01 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:57:01 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden
Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually engaged in that struggle in any formm about how best to further that struggle. Not the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are taking up the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my reflections on your object-concept, as others have and will. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David H Kirshner wrote: >> It would appear ... >>???? > > Doesn't appear that way to me. > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at all. > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Andy and david, > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can such a counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle?? > > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>
Andy, > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for ordinary citizens. > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > Thanks. > David > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: >?? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh >> past >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the theoretical project are one and the same. >> >> Andy >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>??? >>???? >>> Andy, >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical project. >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call for. >>> David >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >>> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >>> >>> That's what I think. >>> Andy >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >>> -- >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>??? >>>????? >>>?????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >>>> for More >>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>>> >>>> David >>>>??? >>>> >>>>????? >>>>??????? >>>>???????? >>>??? >>>????? >>>?????? >> >>??? >>???? > > > > > > >?? From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 16:07:57 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:07:57 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. Andy http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I agree with > Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have seen happen to > black america has really disappointed me. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is > by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is > feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such > disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the > proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of > the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by > criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing > of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the > saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual shift in > political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in > disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, > David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The > wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has > always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that > class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project > aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument > about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the > protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually engaged in > that struggle in any formm about how best to further that struggle. Not > the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are taking up > the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my reflections on > your object-concept, as others have and will. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> It would appear ... > >> > > > > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a > practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, > at all. > > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right > doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift > frame of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move > people forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the > necessary way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of > fully worked out foundational perspectives (and given the need to > address the world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Andy and david, > > > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be > anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, > anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come > from a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce > individual wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the > masses of poor around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > lifestyle? > > > > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as > a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it > recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last > 100 years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to > dialectical measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., > to attempt to resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic > and the spirit of capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > ontology. > > > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we > are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: David H > Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM > (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: > Working for the Few | Oxfam International
> >
Andy, > > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of > the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people > (rather than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the > start. Still, I think it provides a way to understand the individual > pursuit of wealth, carried to its limits, as anti-social and > destructive; an effective counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal > of the individual unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage for > ordinary citizens. > > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a > paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > Thanks. > > David > > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. > > > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to > failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which > would somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not > conceive of itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one > true world which everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The > plot lies implicit in the opening chapter, but it is always far from > easy to see how the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > story-lines entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by > Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest > is in all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken > and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > >> David > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh > >> past > >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical > project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and > the theoretical project are one and the same. > >> > >> Andy > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> -- > >> *Andy Blunden* > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Andy, > >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be > effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader > theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a > distraction from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true > mission of that scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a > legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to > understand from the larger project. For others, still, perhaps simply > a political activity undertaken with theoretical tools, but with > little actual relation to the theoretical project. > >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times > call for. > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>> > >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was > a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. > >>> > >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: > >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid > for making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. > And in general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social > psychology." People do not of course govern their behaviour by > evidence-based investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. > >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more > wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be > understood (I would contend) within the contexts of the projects to > which they are committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the > enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course relative). People make > judgments according to the norms of the project in which they are > participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and practical > norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of one > task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > That requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > collaborate with one another. > >>> > >>> That's what I think. > >>> Andy > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> -- > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>> > >>> > >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to > research and write, a paper tentatively titled: > >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the > >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest > >>>> for More > >>>> > >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of > material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past > wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to > that of others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of > social psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a > bigger economy which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this > is what would provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that > maximizes disparity. > >>>> > >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift > in political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains > in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and > self-destructive behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent > housing bubble that created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > back control of our political systems so we can set more rational > policies for the economy. > >>>> > >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. > situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a > collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the > whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > >>>> > >>>> David > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Jan 21 16:39:18 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 00:39:18 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> Message-ID: Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems to me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure living in a bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity required to sustain it. I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or desired. This, it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. Best, Huw On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden wrote: > But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through literacy. > "Every step of real movement is more important than a dozen programmes," as > one very serious theorist said. > Andy > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I agree with >> Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have seen happen to black >> america has really disappointed me. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity and the >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual shift in >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually engaged in >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that struggle. Not >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are taking up >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my reflections on >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> It would appear ... >> >> > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a >> practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at >> all. >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right >> doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame >> of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people >> forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary >> way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked >> out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as >> we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of >> inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> > David >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Andy and david, >> > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be >> anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, >> anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come from >> a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual >> wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a >> class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it >> recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 >> years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical >> measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are >> all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: David H >> Kirshner
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM >> (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: >> Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>> >
Andy, >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of >> the human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather >> than as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I >> think it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >> carried to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by >> societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind >> of political leverage for ordinary citizens. >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form of a paper, >> please reply, on-line or off-. >> > Thanks. >> > David >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate >> in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure >> however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would >> somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of >> itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot >> will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this >> conundrum, Andy >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by >> Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >> prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in >> all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be undertaken and >> completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> >> David >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh >> >> past >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical >> project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the >> theoretical project are one and the same. >> >> >> >> Andy >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> -- >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be >> effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader >> theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction >> from the real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that >> scholarly endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if >> imperfect) effort to apply what one has come to understand from the larger >> project. For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken >> with theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical >> project. >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call >> for. >> >>> David >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>> >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a >> teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >> >>> >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for >> making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in >> general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." >> People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based >> investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth >> than someone else". The thinking of an individual has to be understood (I >> would contend) within the contexts of the projects to which they are >> committed. That is the reason for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth >> (which is itself of course relative). People make judgments according to >> the norms of the project in which they are participating, and that means >> semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding the psychology of >> political economy is as of one task with that of building a project to >> overthrow the existing political economic arrangements and build >> sustainable arrangements. That requires a multitude of projects all >> willikng and able to collaborate with one another. >> >>> >> >>> That's what I think. >> >>> Andy >> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> - >> >>> -- >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not >> yet had time to research and write, a paper tentatively titled: >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In the Quest >> >>>> for More >> >>>> >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of >> material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, >> but the comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of >> others. (I believe this is a well-established principle of social >> psychology.) So, for example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >> which requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide >> more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the >> middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >> >>>> >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >> behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The >> conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our >> political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. >> situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a >> collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole >> XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >>>> >> >>>> David >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 16:46:05 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:46:05 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> Message-ID: <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is meaningful only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it goes, but is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Huw Lloyd wrote: > Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems > to me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > living in a bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the > immaturity required to sustain it. > > I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather > it is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > desired. This, it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more > rewarding exercise. > > Best, > Huw > > > > On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > Andy > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have > seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of > theory is > by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > list this is > feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > that such > disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > raising the > proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > formation of > the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by > criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the > writing > of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > and the > saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > shift in > political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the > gains in > disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, > David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The > wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has > always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few > of that > class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > project > aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the > argument > about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, > but the > protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > engaged in > that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > struggle. Not > the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > taking up > the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > reflections on > your object-concept, as others have and will. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> It would appear ... > >> > > > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > foundational issues, at all. > > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations > right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a > make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > foundation to move people forward (collectively and > individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in > any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] On Behalf Of Dr. > Paul C. Mocombe > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Andy and david, > > > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a > counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward > mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > lifestyle? > > > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian > terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to > change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our > problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: > David H Kirshner > >
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >
To: ablunden@mira.net > ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International
> >
Andy, > > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own > past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides > a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > for ordinary citizens. > > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > Thanks. > > David > > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. > > > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had > to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how > the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > >> David > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > over teh > >> past > >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > same. > >> > >> Andy > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> -- > >> *Andy Blunden* > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> >> >>> Andy, > >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can > be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would > constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to > apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. > For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > relation to the theoretical project. > >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > times call for. > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>> > >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, > you know. > >>> > >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > well-being: > >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for > social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the > likely results of their behaviour. > >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself > of course relative). People make judgments according to the > norms of the project in which they are participating, and that > means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding > the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > that of building a project to overthrow the existing political > economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That > requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > collaborate with one another. > >>> > >>> That's what I think. > >>> Andy > >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> -- > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>> > >>> > >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > tentatively titled: > >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > Despoiling the > >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > the Quest > >>>> for More > >>>> > >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense > of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth > in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > that maximizes disparity. > >>>> > >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). > The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > control of our political systems so we can set more rational > policies for the economy. > >>>> > >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > >>>> > >>>> David > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From billkerr@gmail.com Tue Jan 21 17:15:36 2014 From: billkerr@gmail.com (Bill Kerr) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 11:45:36 +1030 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> Message-ID: My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: 1) General increase in standard of living 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor 3) Instability: periodic economic crises If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to grasp why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk about (1) and ignore the other aspects. See http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained then people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall Street movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories such as Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we just don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money and the very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd simplification on my part. On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is meaningful > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that "Do unto > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it goes, but > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems to >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure living in a >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity required to >> sustain it. >> >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or desired. This, >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> Andy >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of >> theory is >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >> list this is >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is >> that such >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >> raising the >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> formation of >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the >> writing >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >> and the >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >> shift in >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the >> gains in >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few >> of that >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >> project >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the >> argument >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, >> but the >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >> engaged in >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >> struggle. Not >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are >> taking up >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> reflections on >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> It would appear ... >> >> > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >> foundational issues, at all. >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> > David >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Andy and david, >> > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >> lifestyle? > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: >> David H Kirshner > >> >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > >> >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International
>> >
Andy, >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >> for ordinary citizens. >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > Thanks. >> > David >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> > >> > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> >> David >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures >> over teh >> >> past >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the >> same. >> >> >> >> Andy >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> >> -- >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >> relation to the theoretical project. >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate >> times call for. >> >>> David >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >>> >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, >> you know. >> >>> >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and >> well-being: >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the >> likely results of their behaviour. >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and that >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing political >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >> collaborate with one another. >> >>> >> >>> That's what I think. >> >>> Andy >> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> --------- >> >>> - >> >>> -- >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >> tentatively titled: >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> Despoiling the >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In >> the Quest >> >>>> for More >> >>>> >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >> that maximizes disparity. >> >>>> >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational >> policies for the economy. >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >>>> >> >>>> David >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Tue Jan 21 17:21:07 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 01:21:07 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> Message-ID: I think in practical terms, it equates to things like turning off the television etc. The hopeful thing about a connected world is that we're somewhat more able to look out for each other which we can do irrespective of whose bank account has the big numbers in it. I think the ethic aspect is actually an ethical aspect. True education is more than fashion-ethics, such as a "work-ethic" etc. Ethical appreciation comes with maturity. And, personally speaking, it is relations in recognition of this that establish the richest kind of capital... Best, Huw On 22 January 2014 00:46, Andy Blunden wrote: > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is meaningful > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that "Do unto > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it goes, but > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems to >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure living in a >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity required to >> sustain it. >> >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or desired. This, >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> Andy >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of >> theory is >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >> list this is >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is >> that such >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >> raising the >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> formation of >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the >> writing >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >> and the >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >> shift in >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the >> gains in >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few >> of that >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >> project >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the >> argument >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, >> but the >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >> engaged in >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >> struggle. Not >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are >> taking up >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> reflections on >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> It would appear ... >> >> > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >> foundational issues, at all. >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> > David >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Andy and david, >> > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >> lifestyle? > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: >> David H Kirshner > >> >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > >> >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International
>> >
Andy, >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >> for ordinary citizens. >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > Thanks. >> > David >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> > >> > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> >> David >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures >> over teh >> >> past >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the >> same. >> >> >> >> Andy >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> >> -- >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >> relation to the theoretical project. >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate >> times call for. >> >>> David >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >>> >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, >> you know. >> >>> >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and >> well-being: >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the >> likely results of their behaviour. >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and that >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing political >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >> collaborate with one another. >> >>> >> >>> That's what I think. >> >>> Andy >> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> --------- >> >>> - >> >>> -- >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >> tentatively titled: >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> Despoiling the >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In >> the Quest >> >>>> for More >> >>>> >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >> that maximizes disparity. >> >>>> >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational >> policies for the economy. >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >>>> >> >>>> David >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 17:42:52 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:42:52 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> Message-ID: <52DF221C.8050208@mira.net> Two points in response, Bill. (1) All the social progress which has taken place under capitalism (well almost all) has occurred thanks only to those struggling against capitalism or other forms of institutionalised inequality, not by those privileged in those arrangements (not seeing this was Hegel's big mistake btw). (2) Capitalism can only be transcended by the self-conscious self-regulation of behaviour. "Collapse" has always and will always mean only war, destruction of social fabric and ... more capitalism and inequality. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Bill Kerr wrote: > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > 1) General increase in standard of living > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > grasp why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just > talk about (1) and ignore the other aspects. > See http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is > interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > then people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism > can maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy > Wall Street movement suggested to me that it was time to do some > serious study of Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other > economic theories such as Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et > al) which recognise the inherent instability of capitalism. My > tentative conclusion is that we just don't understand capitalism and > it is very hard to understand. eg. if capitalists can muddle through > the downturns by printing more money and the very serious economic > downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great Depression to 2008) then > that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd simplification on my part. > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the > maxim is always "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is > meaningful, I believe only within some collaborative endeavour. My > relationship to you is meaningful only in connection of what we > do, as we, together. I believe that "Do unto others as you would > have them do unto you," is fine as far as it goes, but is > inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, > it seems to me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I > am not sure living in a bubble is such a nice thing, > especially given the immaturity required to sustain it. > > I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > rather it is the inane notion that this is something to be > admired or desired. This, it seems to me, is a more > obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > Best, > Huw > > > > On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >> wrote: > > But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > than a > dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > Andy > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but > what I have > seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > David, you are quite correct that agreement on > fundamentals of > theory is > by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > xmca > list this is > feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > "collaboration" is > that such > disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > raising the > proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > formation of > the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > invitation by > criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > propsed the > writing > of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand > that "the > ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > prosperity > and the > saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > shift in > political control of the economy over the past 50 > years by the > ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > which the > gains in > disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > actual > self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > hardly news, > David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > centuries. The > wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > progress has > always been only in the teeth of opposition from all > but a few > of that > class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > actual > project > aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > participate in the > argument > about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years > of such > participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > participation, > but the > protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > engaged in > that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > struggle. Not > the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > you are > taking up > the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > reflections on > your object-concept, as others have and will. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> It would appear ... > >> > > > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > Paul, > that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > foundational issues, at all. > > The fact that social psychology may not have the > foundations > right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, > or that a > make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > enough > foundation to move people forward (collectively and > individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > forward in > any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > worked out > foundational perspectives (and given the need to > address the > world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > parameters)? > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >] On Behalf Of Dr. > Paul C. Mocombe > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > ablunden@mira.net > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > > > Andy and david, > > > > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > have to > be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... > Can such a > counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > wealth, upward > mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > lifestyle? > > > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > marxian > terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > humanity to > change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > it's > being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > fracking, > carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our > problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > spirit of > capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that > in this > case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: > David H Kirshner >> > >
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >> > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam > International
> >
Andy, > > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > relative to other people (rather than as relative to > one's own > past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > provides > a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > carried > to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > effective > counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > individual > unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > leverage > for ordinary citizens. > > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > the form > of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > Thanks. > > David > > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > > > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > read and > participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > narrative. > > > > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > doomed > to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > expansion which would somehow bypass social and > ideological > differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a > project at > all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had > to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > implicit in > the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > see how > the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > story-lines > entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > context, > dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > society. What is in their best interest is in all of > our best > interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > project? > >> David > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >> > >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > measures > over teh > >> past > >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > practical project and the theoretical project are one > and the > same. > >> > >> Andy > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> -- > >> *Andy Blunden* > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > >> > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> >> >>> Andy, > >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > that can > be effective in the here and now, one has to step > outside of > the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, > this would > constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > violation of the true mission of that scholarly > endeavor. For > others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > effort to > apply what one has come to understand from the larger > project. > For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > relation to the theoretical project. > >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > desperate > times call for. > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>> > >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > challenges, too, > you know. > >>> > >>> First off, these observations about social > psychology and > well-being: > >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > which is > as valid for making observations about psychology as > it is for > social theory. And in general, this is lacking for > what goes > by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > course > govern their behaviour by evidence-based > investigations of the > likely results of their behaviour. > >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > "have > more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > individual > has to be understood (I would contend) within the > contexts of > the projects to which they are committed. That is the > reason > for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which > is itself > of course relative). People make judgments according > to the > norms of the project in which they are participating, > and that > means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > Understanding > the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political > economic arrangements and build sustainable > arrangements. That > requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > collaborate with one another. > >>> > >>> That's what I think. > >>> Andy > >>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> -- > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >>> > >>> > >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > tentatively titled: > >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > Despoiling the > >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > Culture In > the Quest > >>>> for More > >>>> > >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of > our sense > of material well-being is not accumulation, relative > to our > own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our > own wealth > in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is > what would > provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), > they are > eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > strategy > that maximizes disparity. > >>>> > >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > dramatic > as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > Hence, we > see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > behavior by > the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > that > created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). > The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > back > control of our political systems so we can set more > rational > policies for the economy. > >>>> > >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > beyond the > U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > appeals, I > would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > that > somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > >>>> > >>>> David > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 17:46:46 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 20:46:46 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <4hambveb034oc8lfawru4jtm.1390354585206@email.android.com> Bill, You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the free market. ?No such thing as ?Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going amidst it's crises. ?The question becomes can we have a humanist capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first century socialists. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Bill Kerr
Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: 1) General increase in standard of living 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor 3) Instability: periodic economic crises If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to grasp why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk about (1) and ignore the other aspects. See http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained then people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall Street movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories such as Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we just don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money and the very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd simplification on my part. On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is meaningful > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that "Do unto > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it goes, but > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems to >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure living in a >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity required to >> sustain it. >> >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or desired.? This, >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>???? Andy >>???? http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >>???? *Andy Blunden* >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> >> >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>???????? President >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>???????? www.mocombeian.com >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>???????? >> >> >>???????? -------- Original message -------- >>???????? From: Andy Blunden >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of >>???????? theory is >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >>???????? list this is >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is >>???????? that such >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >>???????? raising the >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >>???????? formation of >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the >>???????? writing >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >>???????? and the >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >>???????? shift in >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the >>???????? gains in >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few >>???????? of that >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >>???????? project >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the >>???????? argument >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, >>???????? but the >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >>???????? engaged in >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >>???????? struggle. Not >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are >>???????? taking up >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>???????? reflections on >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >>???????? Andy >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >>???????? *Andy Blunden* >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: >>???????? >> It would appear ... >>???????? >>??? > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >>???????? foundational issues, at all. >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? >>???????? > David >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >>???????? >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>???????? > >>???????? > Andy and david, >>???????? > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can such a >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>???????? lifestyle? > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >>???????? > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>???????? > President >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>???????? >> >>???????? > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: >>???????? David H Kirshner > >> >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>???????? > >> >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>???????? International
>>???????? >
Andy, >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >>???????? for ordinary citizens. >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>???????? > Thanks. >>???????? > David >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy >>???????? Blunden >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>???????? > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >>???????? > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>???????? > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >>???????? >> David >>???????? >> >>???????? >> >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy >>???????? Blunden >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>???????? >> >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures >>???????? over teh >>???????? >> past >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one and the >>???????? same. >>???????? >> >>???????? >> Andy >>???????? >> >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >>???????? >> -- >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>???????? >> >>???????? >> >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate >>???????? times call for. >>???????? >>> David >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy >>???????? Blunden >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>???????? International >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, >>???????? you know. >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and >>???????? well-being: >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and that >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing political >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >>???????? collaborate with one another. >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> That's what I think. >>???????? >>> Andy >>???????? >>> >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> --------- >>???????? >>> - >>???????? >>> -- >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >>???????? tentatively titled: >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>???????? Despoiling the >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In >>???????? the Quest >>???????? >>>> for More >>???????? >>>> >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >>???????? that maximizes disparity. >>???????? >>>> >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more rational >>???????? policies for the economy. >>???????? >>>> >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>???????? >>>> >>???????? >>>> David >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> >>???????? >>?? >>??? > >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > >>???????? > >> >> >> > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 18:00:25 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:00:25 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <4hambveb034oc8lfawru4jtm.1390354585206@email.android.com> References: <4hambveb034oc8lfawru4jtm.1390354585206@email.android.com> Message-ID: <52DF2639.9030909@mira.net> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the social process. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Bill, > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > century socialists. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Bill Kerr > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > 1) General increase in standard of living > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to grasp > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk about > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained then > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall Street > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories such as > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > just > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > and the > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > simplification on my part. > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > meaningful > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > "Do unto > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > goes, but > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > seems to > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > living in a > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > required to > >> sustain it. > >> > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > desired. This, > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > >> Andy > >> > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >> *Andy Blunden* > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > >> > >> > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> President > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >> www.mocombeian.com > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >> > >> > >> > >> -------- Original message -------- > >> From: Andy Blunden > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of > >> theory is > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > >> list this is > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > >> that such > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > >> raising the > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > >> formation of > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > invitation by > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the > >> writing > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > >> and the > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > >> shift in > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the > >> gains in > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > hardly news, > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > centuries. The > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > progress has > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few > >> of that > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > >> project > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the > >> argument > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, > >> but the > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > >> engaged in > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > >> struggle. Not > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > >> taking up > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > >> reflections on > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > >> > >> Andy > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >> *Andy Blunden* > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> >> It would appear ... > >> >> > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > >> foundational issues, at all. > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > >> > David > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. > >> Paul C. Mocombe > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > >> > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >> > > >> > Andy and david, > >> > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > >> lifestyle? > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > >> > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > >> > > >> > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> > President > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >> > www.mocombeian.com > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >> > >> > >> > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: > >> David H Kirshner > > >> > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >> > > >> > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >> International
> >> >
Andy, > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > >> for ordinary citizens. > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > >> > Thanks. > >> > David > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > >> Blunden > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >> > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > narrative. > >> > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >> > *Andy Blunden* > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > >> >> David > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > >> Blunden > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >> >> > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > >> over teh > >> >> past > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > >> same. > >> >> > >> >> Andy > >> >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ---------- > >> >> -- > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > >> relation to the theoretical project. > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > >> times call for. > >> >>> David > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > >> Blunden > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >> International > >> >>> > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, > >> you know. > >> >>> > >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > >> well-being: > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the > >> likely results of their behaviour. > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and that > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing political > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > >> collaborate with one another. > >> >>> > >> >>> That's what I think. > >> >>> Andy > >> >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> --------- > >> >>> - > >> >>> -- > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > >> tentatively titled: > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > >> Despoiling the > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > >> the Quest > >> >>>> for More > >> >>>> > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > >> that maximizes disparity. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational > >> policies for the economy. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> David > >> >>>> >>>> > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >> >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 18:15:16 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:15:16 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? ?Where are they? ?They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin america? ?I am with althusser on this one. ?The majority have been interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present capitalism as the nature of reality as such. ?The masses think they can all be and live?like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta housewives, and basketball wives. ?They love capitalism more than the capitalists.... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Andy Blunden Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the social process. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Bill, > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > century socialists. > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Bill Kerr > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > 1) General increase in standard of living > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to grasp > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk about > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained then > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall Street > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories such as > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > just > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > and the > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > simplification on my part. > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to speak, > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is always > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > meaningful > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > "Do unto > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > goes, but > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > seems to > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > living in a > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > required to > >> sustain it. > >> > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather it > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > desired.? This, > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > >> > >> Best, > >> Huw > >> > >> > >> > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >> > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > >>???? Andy > >>???? > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > >> > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > >> > >> > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>???????? President > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>???????? > >> > >> > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of > >>???????? theory is > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > >>???????? list this is > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > >>???????? that such > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > >>???????? raising the > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > >>???????? formation of > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > invitation by > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the > >>???????? writing > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > >>???????? and the > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > >>???????? shift in > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the > >>???????? gains in > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > hardly news, > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > centuries. The > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > progress has > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few > >>???????? of that > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > >>???????? project > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the > >>???????? argument > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, > >>???????? but the > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > >>???????? engaged in > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > >>???????? struggle. Not > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > >>???????? taking up > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > >>???????? reflections on > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > >> > >>???????? Andy > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >> > >> > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > >>???????? >>??? > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? > >>???????? > David > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > >>???????? > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>???????? > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > >>???????? > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can such a > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > >>???????? lifestyle? > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > >>???????? > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>???????? > President > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>???????? > >> > >>???????? > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: > >>???????? David H Kirshner > > >> > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>???????? > > >> > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>???????? International
> >>???????? >
Andy, > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > >>???????? > Thanks. > >>???????? > David > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > >> > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > >>???????? Blunden > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>???????? > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > narrative. > >>???????? > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > >>???????? > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ------------ > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? > >>???????? >> David > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > >>???????? Blunden > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > >>???????? over teh > >>???????? >> past > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > >>???????? same. > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> Andy > >>???????? >> > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> ---------- > >>???????? >> -- > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > >>???????? times call for. > >>???????? >>> David > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > >>???????? Blunden > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>???????? International > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, > >>???????? you know. > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > >>???????? well-being: > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and that > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing political > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > >>???????? >>> Andy > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> --------- > >>???????? >>> - > >>???????? >>> -- > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >> > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > >>???????? tentatively titled: > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > >>???????? Despoiling the > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > >>???????? the Quest > >>???????? >>>> for More > >>???????? >>>> > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > >>???????? >>>> > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more rational > >>???????? policies for the economy. > >>???????? >>>> > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > >>???????? >>>> > >>???????? >>>> David > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > > >> > >> > >> > > > From ablunden@mira.net Tue Jan 21 18:33:46 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:33:46 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52DF2E0A.3000903@mira.net> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > capitalists.... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > social process. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Bill, > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > century socialists. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Bill Kerr > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > grasp > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > about > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > then > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > Street > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > such as > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > just > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > and the > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > always > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > meaningful > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > "Do unto > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > goes, but > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > seems to > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > living in a > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > required to > > >> sustain it. > > >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > rather it > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > desired. This, > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Huw > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > >> Andy > > >> > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > >> > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > have > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > >> > > >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >> President > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > >> > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > fundamentals of > > >> theory is > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > >> list this is > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > > >> that such > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > >> raising the > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > >> formation of > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > invitation by > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > propsed the > > >> writing > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > >> and the > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > >> shift in > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > by the > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > which the > > >> gains in > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > hardly news, > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > centuries. The > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > progress has > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > a few > > >> of that > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > >> project > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > in the > > >> argument > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > participation, > > >> but the > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > >> engaged in > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > >> struggle. Not > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > > >> taking up > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > >> reflections on > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >> It would appear ... > > >> >> > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > foundations > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > that a > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > forward in > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > parameters)? > > >> > David > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > >> > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> > > > >> > Andy and david, > > >> > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > such a > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > upward > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > >> lifestyle? > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > humanity to > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > >> > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >> > President > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > >> David H Kirshner > > > >> > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >> > > > >> > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >> International
> > >> >
Andy, > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > one's own > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > provides > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > >> > Thanks. > > >> > David > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > narrative. > > >> > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > see how > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > project? > > >> >> David > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> >> > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > > >> over teh > > >> >> past > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > > >> same. > > >> >> > > >> >> Andy > > >> >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ---------- > > >> >> -- > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > that can > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > would > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > effort to > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > project. > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > > >> times call for. > > >> >>> David > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >> International > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > too, > > >> you know. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > > >> well-being: > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > is for > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > of the > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > itself > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and > that > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > Understanding > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > That > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > >> collaborate with one another. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > >> >>> Andy > > >> >>> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> --------- > > >> >>> - > > >> >>> -- > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > >> tentatively titled: > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > >> Despoiling the > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > > >> the Quest > > >> >>>> for More > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > sense > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > wealth > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational > > >> policies for the economy. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> David > > >> >>>> >>>> > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >> >> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Tue Jan 21 18:49:36 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:49:36 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: I agree with you that structuralism is the paradigm of ?the ideology of modern capitalism...that is precisely what althusser was trying to highlight, hence his call for scientific marxism...in any case, I just wish the collaborative project you are calling for does not go the way of the tea party or black american civil rights movement.... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Andy Blunden Date:01/21/2014 9:33 PM (GMT-05:00) To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the > capitalists.... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > social process. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Bill, > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > century socialists. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Bill Kerr > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > grasp > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > about > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > then > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > Street > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > such as > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > just > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > and the > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > always > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > meaningful > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > "Do unto > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > goes, but > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > seems to > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > living in a > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > required to > > >> sustain it. > > >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > rather it > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > desired.? This, > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Huw > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > >>???? Andy > > >>??? > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > >> > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > >> > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > have > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? President > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>???????? > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > >> > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > fundamentals of > > >>???????? theory is > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > >>???????? list this is > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > > >>???????? that such > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > >>???????? raising the > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > >>???????? formation of > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > invitation by > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > propsed the > > >>???????? writing > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > >>???????? and the > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > >>???????? shift in > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > by the > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > which the > > >>???????? gains in > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > hardly news, > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > centuries. The > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > progress has > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > a few > > >>???????? of that > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > >>???????? project > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > in the > > >>???????? argument > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > participation, > > >>???????? but the > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > >>???????? engaged in > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > > >>???????? taking up > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > >>???????? reflections on > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > >> > > >>???????? Andy > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > >>???????? >>??? > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > foundations > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > that a > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > forward in > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > parameters)? > > >>???????? > David > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > such a > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > upward > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > humanity to > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? > President > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>???????? > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > >>???????? David H Kirshner > > > >> > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>???????? > > > >> > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >>???????? International
> > >>???????? >
Andy, > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > one's own > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > provides > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > >>???????? > David > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > narrative. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > see how > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > project? > > >>???????? >> David > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > > >>???????? over teh > > >>???????? >> past > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > > >>???????? same. > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> Andy > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ---------- > > >>???????? >> -- > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > that can > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > would > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > effort to > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > project. > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > > >>???????? times call for. > > >>???????? >>> David > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >>???????? International > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > too, > > >>???????? you know. > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > > >>???????? well-being: > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > is for > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > of the > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > itself > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and > that > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > Understanding > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > That > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> --------- > > >>???????? >>> - > > >>???????? >>> -- > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > > >>???????? the Quest > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > sense > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > wealth > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more rational > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> David > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From dkirsh@lsu.edu Tue Jan 21 22:46:21 2014 From: dkirsh@lsu.edu (David H Kirshner) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 06:46:21 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52DF0BDD.9010102@mira.net> <52DF14CD.3010406@mira.net> Message-ID: <18a9253bdeb841b98e99a4c88ba3c81d@CO1PR06MB013.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Reflecting on a range of recent posts on this topic, I see my Marxist credentials aren't quite up to snuff. Bill, your characterization of capitalism, and your related questions, don't seem to pay any attention to the political setting within which a capitalist economy is lodged. It seems to me your 1st characteristic, "General increase in standard of living," may not be inevitable--was the industrial revolution characterized by a general increase in the standard of living, or does that characteristic depend on a democratic infrastructure? Similarly, are your second and third characteristics--"Increasing gap b/w rich and poor" and "Instability: periodic economic crises"--an inevitable result of capitalism, or do these effects reflect a breakdown in democratic institutions? As I see it, the political culture of the U.S. is under assault from capitalists, and has been for a long time, with rising income inequality and instability a result of that assault. (For instance, the Tea Party, which arose as popular dissent against the bankers who trashed the economy was quickly coopted and redirected into libertarian discontent by the Koch brothers who had paid operatives in all 50 states. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html.) This, in itself, suggests there is a battle to be waged; if capitalism, itself, produced these negative effects, then capitalists wouldn't need to engage in political sabotage. The paper I'm proposing eventually seeks to restore democratic institutions by countering the pervasive (and perhaps brilliant) campaign that capitalists have waged to control the political discourse. Ultimately, this means eliminating private funding of electoral campaigns, and stemming the intrusion of private capital into public discussion in connection with political campaigns--by the way, happy 4th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizen's United travesty. But the underlying engine of this capitalist campaign has been the successful purveying of libertarian ideals--government is bad, taxes are bad, regulation of any sort is bad, only the unfettered individual working in their own self-interest is good. Social psychology's analysis of our sense of material well-being as relative to other people, rather than as relative to one's own past wealth, reveals the destructive undertone of that last libertarian tenet: income disparity and economic instability are a result of unfettered capitalism, not of capitalism itself. I think this narrative can provide an effective counter to the libertarian credo. But clearly this agenda, while against the perceived self-interest of the ultra-wealthy capitalists, is not anti-capitalist, per se, and so likely will not appeal to many on this list. But perhaps it appeals to some--let me know if you would like to collaborate on this paper. David dkirsh@lsu.edu -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Kerr Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:16 PM To: Andy Blunden; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: 1) General increase in standard of living 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor 3) Instability: periodic economic crises If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to grasp why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk about (1) and ignore the other aspects. See http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained then people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall Street movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories such as Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we just don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money and the very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd simplification on my part. On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim > is always "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I > believe only within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to > you is meaningful only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I > believe that "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is > fine as far as it goes, but is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > Andy > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it seems >> to me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >> living in a bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the >> immaturity required to sustain it. >> >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, rather >> it is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >> desired. This, it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> >> Best, >> Huw >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> Andy >> >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I have >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of >> theory is >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >> list this is >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is >> that such >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >> raising the >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> formation of >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the >> writing >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >> and the >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >> shift in >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the >> gains in >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is hardly news, >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. The >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few >> of that >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >> project >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the >> argument >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length participation, >> but the >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >> engaged in >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >> struggle. Not >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are >> taking up >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> reflections on >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> It would appear ... >> >> > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >> foundational issues, at all. >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way forward in >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> > David >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Andy and david, >> > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, upward >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >> lifestyle? > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for humanity to >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to resolve our >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: >> David H Kirshner > >> >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > >> >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International
>> >
Andy, >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to one's own >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it provides >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >> for ordinary citizens. >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > Thanks. >> > David >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which everyone had >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> > >> > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical project? >> >> David >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures >> over teh >> >> past >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the >> same. >> >> >> >> Andy >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> >> -- >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this would >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort to >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >> relation to the theoretical project. >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate >> times call for. >> >>> David >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> ] On Behalf Of Andy >> Blunden >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >>> >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, >> you know. >> >>> >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and >> well-being: >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it is for >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations of the >> likely results of their behaviour. >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and that >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. Understanding >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing political >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >> collaborate with one another. >> >>> >> >>> That's what I think. >> >>> Andy >> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> --------- >> >>> - >> >>> -- >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >> tentatively titled: >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> Despoiling the >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In >> the Quest >> >>>> for More >> >>>> >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own wealth >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >> that maximizes disparity. >> >>>> >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational >> policies for the economy. >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> >>>> >> >>>> David >> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > From rakahu@utu.fi Wed Jan 22 02:13:49 2014 From: rakahu@utu.fi (Rauno Huttunen) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:13:49 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DF2E0A.3000903@mira.net> References: <52DF2E0A.3000903@mira.net> Message-ID: Hello, I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's theory of science and social theory are very interesting (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's social theory. Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians really don't care about working class, their intentions, their feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that they represents the objective interests of working class but actually they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian party ideology. Rauno Huttunen -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > capitalists.... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > social process. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Bill, > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > century socialists. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Bill Kerr > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > grasp > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > about > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > then > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > Street > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > such as > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > just > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > and the > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > always > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > meaningful > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > "Do unto > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > goes, but > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > seems to > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > living in a > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > required to > > >> sustain it. > > >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > rather it > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > desired. This, > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Huw > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > >> Andy > > >> > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > >> > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > have > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > >> > > >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >> President > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > >> > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > fundamentals of > > >> theory is > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > >> list this is > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > > >> that such > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > >> raising the > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > >> formation of > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > invitation by > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > propsed the > > >> writing > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > >> and the > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > >> shift in > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > by the > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > which the > > >> gains in > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > hardly news, > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > centuries. The > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > progress has > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > a few > > >> of that > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > >> project > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > in the > > >> argument > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > participation, > > >> but the > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > >> engaged in > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > >> struggle. Not > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > > >> taking up > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > >> reflections on > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > >> > > >> Andy > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >> It would appear ... > > >> >> > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > foundations > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > that a > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > forward in > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > parameters)? > > >> > David > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > >> > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> > > > >> > Andy and david, > > >> > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > such a > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > upward > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > >> lifestyle? > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > humanity to > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > >> > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >> > President > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > >> David H Kirshner > > > >> > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >> > > > >> > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >> International
> > >> >
Andy, > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > one's own > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > provides > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > >> > Thanks. > > >> > David > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > narrative. > > >> > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > see how > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > project? > > >> >> David > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >> >> > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > > >> over teh > > >> >> past > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > > >> same. > > >> >> > > >> >> Andy > > >> >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ---------- > > >> >> -- > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > that can > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > would > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > effort to > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > project. > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > > >> times call for. > > >> >>> David > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >> Blunden > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >> International > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > too, > > >> you know. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > > >> well-being: > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > is for > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > of the > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > itself > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and > that > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > Understanding > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > That > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > >> collaborate with one another. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > >> >>> Andy > > >> >>> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> --------- > > >> >>> - > > >> >>> -- > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > >> tentatively titled: > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > >> Despoiling the > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > > >> the Quest > > >> >>>> for More > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > sense > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > wealth > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more rational > > >> policies for the economy. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> David > > >> >>>> >>>> > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >> >> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 22 02:21:04 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 21:21:04 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52DF2E0A.3000903@mira.net> Message-ID: <52DF9B90.7010803@mira.net> I agree Rauno, that Althusser has something to say to us, and I got a lot out of reading him. Others also among those who you mention, most of whom had something to teach us. But that does not alter my assessment of Althusser as essentially a reactionary. If you see the world as a system and people as individuals who have been "subjectified," then really there is nothing better to do than have as much pleasure as you can and then die. I don't accept that advice. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Rauno Huttunen wrote: > Hello, > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's theory of science and social theory are very interesting (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's social theory. > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians really don't care about working class, their intentions, their feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that they represents the objective interests of working class but actually they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian party ideology. > > Rauno Huttunen > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the >> capitalists.... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, >> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of >> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality >> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am >> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and >> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the >> social process. >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>> Bill, >>> >>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the >>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going >>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" >>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first >>> century socialists. >>> >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> President >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> www.mocombeian.com >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Bill Kerr >>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: >>> >>> 1) General increase in standard of living >>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>> >>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to >>> >> grasp >> >>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >>> >> about >> >>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>> >>> >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >> >>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this >>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>> >>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained >>> >> then >> >>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >>> >> Street >> >>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of >>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >>> >> such as >> >>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we >>> just >>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if >>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >>> and the >>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd >>> simplification on my part. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>> >> wrote: >> >>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >>>> >> speak, >> >>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >>>> >> always >> >>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only >>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >>>> >>> meaningful >>> >>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >>>> >>> "Do unto >>> >>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >>>> >>> goes, but >>> >>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >>>>> >>> seems to >>> >>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >>>>> >>> living in a >>> >>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >>>>> >>> required to >>> >>>>> sustain it. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >>>>> >> rather it >> >>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>> >>> desired. This, >>> >>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Huw >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>> Andy >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ------------ >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>> >>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I >>>>> >> have >> >>>>> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> President >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> >> International >> >>>>> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>> >> fundamentals of >> >>>>> theory is >>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >>>>> list this is >>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is >>>>> that such >>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >>>>> raising the >>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >>>>> formation of >>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >>>>> >>> invitation by >>> >>>>> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>> >> propsed the >> >>>>> writing >>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the >>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >>>>> and the >>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >>>>> shift in >>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >>>>> >> by the >> >>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >>>>> >> which the >> >>>>> gains in >>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >>>>> >>> hardly news, >>> >>>>> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>> >>> centuries. The >>> >>>>> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >>>>> >>> progress has >>> >>>>> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >>>>> >> a few >> >>>>> of that >>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >>>>> project >>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >>>>> >> in the >> >>>>> argument >>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such >>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>> >> participation, >> >>>>> but the >>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >>>>> engaged in >>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >>>>> struggle. Not >>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are >>>>> taking up >>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>>>> reflections on >>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ------------ >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>> >> It would appear ... >>>>> >> > >>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >>>>> foundational issues, at all. >>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>> >> foundations >> >>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >>>>> >> that a >> >>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >>>>> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>> >> forward in >> >>>>> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out >>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the >>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>> >> parameters)? >> >>>>> > David >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> ] On Behalf Of Dr. >>>>> Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >>>>> >>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> >>> International >>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Andy and david, >>>>> > >>>>> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to >>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >>>>> >> such a >> >>>>> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >>>>> >> upward >> >>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>>>> lifestyle? > >>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian >>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>> >> humanity to >> >>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, >>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>> >> resolve our >> >>>>> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >>>>> > >>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this >>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> > President >>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> > www.mocombeian.com >>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >
-------- Original message --------
From: >>>>> David H Kirshner > >>>>> >>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> International
>>>>> >
Andy, >>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>>>> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >>>>> >> one's own >> >>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >>>>> >> provides >> >>>>> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual >>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >>>>> for ordinary citizens. >>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form >>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>> > Thanks. >>>>> > David >>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> ] On Behalf Of Andy >>>>> Blunden >>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> >>> International >>> >>>>> > >>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and >>>>> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >>>>> >>> narrative. >>> >>>>> > >>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed >>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>> >> everyone had >> >>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >>>>> >> see how >> >>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>> > >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ------------ >>>>> > *Andy Blunden* >>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, >>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best >>>>> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >>>>> >> project? >> >>>>> >> David >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> ] On Behalf Of Andy >>>>> Blunden >>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> >>> International >>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures >>>>> over teh >>>>> >> past >>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are one and the >>>>> same. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Andy >>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> ---------- >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, >>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >>>>> >> that can >> >>>>> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of >>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >>>>> >> would >> >>>>> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For >>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >>>>> >> effort to >> >>>>> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >>>>> >> project. >> >>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >>>>> relation to the theoretical project. >>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate >>>>> times call for. >>>>> >>> David >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> >>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> ] On Behalf Of Andy >>>>> Blunden >>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> International >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, >>>>> >> too, >> >>>>> you know. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and >>>>> well-being: >>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is >>>>> as valid for making observations about psychology as it >>>>> >> is for >> >>>>> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes >>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >>>>> >> of the >> >>>>> likely results of their behaviour. >>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have >>>>> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual >>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of >>>>> the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >>>>> >> itself >> >>>>> of course relative). People make judgments according to the >>>>> norms of the project in which they are participating, and >>>>> >> that >> >>>>> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>> >> Understanding >> >>>>> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>>> >> political >> >>>>> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. >>>>> >> That >> >>>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >>>>> collaborate with one another. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> That's what I think. >>>>> >>> Andy >>>>> >>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> --------- >>>>> >>> - >>>>> >>> -- >>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my >>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >>>>> tentatively titled: >>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>>>> Despoiling the >>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In >>>>> the Quest >>>>> >>>> for More >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >>>>> >> sense >> >>>>> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >>>>> >> wealth >> >>>>> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would >>>>> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >>>>> that maximizes disparity. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic >>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we >>>>> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by >>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>> >> Recession). >> >>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >>>>> control of our political systems so we can set more rational >>>>> policies for the economy. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the >>>>> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >>>>> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >>>>> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> David >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Wed Jan 22 05:19:44 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:19:44 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <8v9cxagv9o413do7h3lsko4s.1390396784073@email.android.com> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. ?How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? ?Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or self-conscious individual being. ?The latter two want to establish society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." ? So it appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? ?In what sense? ?How will you reproduce them? ?How will they be defined? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Rauno Huttunen
Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Hello, I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's theory of science and social theory are very interesting (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's social theory. Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians really don't care about working class, their intentions, their feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that they represents the objective interests of working class but actually they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian party ideology. Rauno Huttunen -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the > capitalists.... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > social process. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Bill, > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > century socialists. > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Bill Kerr > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > grasp > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > about > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > then > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > Street > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > such as > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > just > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > and the > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) Absurd > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > speak, > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > always > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe only > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > meaningful > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > "Do unto > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > goes, but > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > seems to > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > living in a > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > required to > > >> sustain it. > > >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > rather it > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > desired.? This, > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Huw > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > >> > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > >>???? Andy > > >>??? > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > >> > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > >> > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > have > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? President > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>???????? > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > > >> > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > fundamentals of > > >>???????? theory is > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > >>???????? list this is > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is > > >>???????? that such > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > >>???????? raising the > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > >>???????? formation of > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > invitation by > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > propsed the > > >>???????? writing > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > >>???????? and the > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > >>???????? shift in > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > by the > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > which the > > >>???????? gains in > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > hardly news, > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > centuries. The > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > progress has > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > a few > > >>???????? of that > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > >>???????? project > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > in the > > >>???????? argument > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > participation, > > >>???????? but the > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > >>???????? engaged in > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you are > > >>???????? taking up > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > >>???????? reflections on > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > >> > > >>???????? Andy > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > >>???????? >>??? > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > foundations > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > that a > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > forward in > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked out > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > parameters)? > > >>???????? > David > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > >>???????? > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > such a > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > upward > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > humanity to > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, fracking, > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > resolve our > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >>???????? > President > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>???????? > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > >>???????? David H Kirshner > > > >> > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >>???????? > > > >> > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >>???????? International
> > >>???????? >
Andy, > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > one's own > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > provides > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the form > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > >>???????? > David > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > narrative. > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > everyone had > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > see how > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ------------ > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of our best > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > project? > > >>???????? >> David > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures > > >>???????? over teh > > >>???????? >> past > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one and the > > >>???????? same. > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> Andy > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> ---------- > > >>???????? >> -- > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > that can > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside of > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > would > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. For > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > effort to > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > project. > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate > > >>???????? times call for. > > >>???????? >>> David > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > >>???????? Blunden > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > >>???????? International > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > too, > > >>???????? you know. > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social psychology and > > >>???????? well-being: > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > is for > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what goes > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > of the > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an individual > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts of > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > itself > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and > that > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > Understanding > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > political > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > That > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > >> --------- > > >>???????? >>> - > > >>???????? >>> -- > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture In > > >>???????? the Quest > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > sense > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > wealth > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what would > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, we > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior by > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > Recession). > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more rational > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > >>???????? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>> David > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 22 05:50:45 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 00:50:45 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <8v9cxagv9o413do7h3lsko4s.1390396784073@email.android.com> References: <8v9cxagv9o413do7h3lsko4s.1390396784073@email.android.com> Message-ID: <52DFCCB5.9010801@mira.net> Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. Science is always for a purpose. Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Rauno Huttunen > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Hello, > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > social theory. > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > party ideology. > > Rauno Huttunen > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > > capitalists.... > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Andy Blunden > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > > social process. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > Bill, > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > > grasp > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > about > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > > then > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > Street > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > such as > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > > just > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > and the > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > Absurd > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > speak, > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > always > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > only > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > meaningful > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > "Do unto > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > goes, but > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > seems to > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > > living in a > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > required to > > > >> sustain it. > > > >> > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > rather it > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > desired. This, > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > > >> > > > >> Best, > > > >> Huw > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > >> Andy > > > >> > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > >> > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > > have > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > >> President > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > > >> > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > fundamentals of > > > >> theory is > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > > >> list this is > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > "collaboration" is > > > >> that such > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > > >> raising the > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > >> formation of > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > invitation by > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > propsed the > > > >> writing > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > "the > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > > >> and the > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > > >> shift in > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > by the > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > which the > > > >> gains in > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > actual > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > hardly news, > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > centuries. The > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > progress has > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > a few > > > >> of that > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > > >> project > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > in the > > > >> argument > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > such > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > participation, > > > >> but the > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > > >> engaged in > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > > >> struggle. Not > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > you are > > > >> taking up > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > >> reflections on > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > >> > > > >> Andy > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > >> >> > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > foundations > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > that a > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > forward in > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > worked out > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > address the > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > parameters)? > > > >> > David > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > > >> > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >> > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > >> > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > have to > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > > such a > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > upward > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > humanity to > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > fracking, > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > resolve our > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > spirit of > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > >> > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > this > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > >> > President > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > > >> David H Kirshner > > > > >> > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity" > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam > > > >> International
> > > >> >
Andy, > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > one's own > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > provides > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > carried > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > individual > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > the form > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > >> > Thanks. > > > >> > David > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >> Blunden > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >> > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > read and > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > narrative. > > > >> > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > doomed > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > everyone had > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > implicit in > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > see how > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > >> > > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > context, > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > our best > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > project? > > > >> >> David > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >> Blunden > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >> >> > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > measures > > > >> over teh > > > >> >> past > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one > and the > > > >> same. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Andy > > > >> >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ---------- > > > >> >> -- > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > that can > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > outside of > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > would > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > endeavor. For > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > effort to > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > project. > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > desperate > > > >> times call for. > > > >> >>> David > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >> Blunden > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > >> International > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > > too, > > > >> you know. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > psychology and > > > >> well-being: > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > which is > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > is for > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > goes > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > of the > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > "have > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > individual > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > contexts of > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > reason > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > itself > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and > > that > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > Understanding > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > political > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > > That > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > >> >>> Andy > > > >> >>> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> --------- > > > >> >>> - > > > >> >>> -- > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > >> Despoiling the > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > Culture In > > > >> the Quest > > > >> >>>> for More > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > sense > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > wealth > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > would > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > dramatic > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > Hence, we > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > behavior by > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > Recession). > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > rational > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > beyond the > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> David > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From lpscholar2@gmail.com Wed Jan 22 06:38:44 2014 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (Larry Purss) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 06:38:44 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DFCCB5.9010801@mira.net> References: <8v9cxagv9o413do7h3lsko4s.1390396784073@email.android.com> <52DFCCB5.9010801@mira.net> Message-ID: Andy, This way of demarcating our *worlds* is fascinating and opens the possibility of exploring how we open and close our *developing* worlds. If you demarcate understanding WITH change AND interpreting WITH structure it enters into confusing conversations with other traditions which conjoin interpretation WITH understanding as BOTH on the side of humanism. Andy, in your explanation of how you demarcate structuralism [and functionalism on one side AND humanism on the other side is extremely helpful in my being able to *read* your purpose. I have been using the concept interpretation within a different traditional figuration [philosophical hermeneutics] as on the side of humanism. and openings of structural and functional *systems*. Andy, I hope others venture into this opening you have invited us into which is retrieving the concept *humanism* as a response [an *answer*] to structuralism and functionalism AND their post *extensions*. My only quibble is in your demarcating *interpretation* as on the other side of *understanding* when I want to understand *interpretation* as on the other side Larry On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism (together > with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one way of > viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as a humanist > because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) as prisoners > of structures and functions, "interpellated" and "subjectified" by great > social powers, but rather that "Men make their own history, but they do not > make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected > circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and > transmitted from the past". There is absolutely nothing individalist about > that position, but since agency is not an illusion, it does pose the > serious problem of how agency exists. > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on the > side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain how > societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, make > wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell you > how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself and > was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity with > others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to not be > fruitless and in general how people change the world. > Science is always for a purpose. > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. How >> is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? Althusser, for >> me, represents an aspect of our being in the world which highlights our >> unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the nature of our being in >> the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and rauno point to speaks to a >> sort of cartesian rational or self-conscious individual being. The latter >> two want to establish society based on such an individual, I.e., >> subject...whereas, althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such >> individual, but "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." >> So it appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be better >> than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? How will >> you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Rauno Huttunen >> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Hello, >> >> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >> theory of science and social theory are very interesting (generalization >> I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], ideological state >> apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is possible to make kind of >> humanistic interpretation on Althusser's social theory. >> >> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were Althusser's >> students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) Jacques Ranciere >> is also very interesting. He break away from Althusser's school in 1970th >> and started his own kind of humanistic critical social theory. In his book >> "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" >> Ranciere claims that Althusserians really don't care about working class, >> their intentions, their feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. >> Althusserians say that they represents the objective interests of working >> class but actually they are telling to working class how workers should >> think and feel. For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling >> elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >> party ideology. >> >> Rauno Huttunen >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who >> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a >> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >> > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >> > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >> > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >> > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the >> > capitalists.... >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> > >> > >> > -------- Original message -------- >> > From: Andy Blunden >> > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, >> > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of >> > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >> > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality >> > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am >> > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and >> > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the >> > social process. >> > >> > Andy >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > Bill, >> > > >> > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the >> > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >> > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going >> > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >> > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" >> > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >> > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first >> > > century socialists. >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > President >> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> > > >> > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > From: Bill Kerr >> > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: >> > > >> > > 1) General increase in standard of living >> > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> > > >> > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to >> > grasp >> > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >> > about >> > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> > > >> > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230414940457932 >> 4530112590864 >> > > >> > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this >> > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> > > >> > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained >> > then >> > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >> > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >> > Street >> > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of >> > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >> > such as >> > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >> > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we >> > > just >> > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if >> > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >> > > and the >> > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >> > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >> Absurd >> > > simplification on my part. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >> > speak, >> > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >> > always >> > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >> only >> > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >> > > meaningful >> > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >> > > "Do unto >> > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >> > > goes, but >> > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >> > > > >> > > > Andy >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >> > > seems to >> > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >> > > living in a >> > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >> > > required to >> > > >> sustain it. >> > > >> >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >> > rather it >> > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >> > > desired. This, >> > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> > > >> >> > > >> Best, >> > > >> Huw >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >> > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >> > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> > > >> Andy >> > > >> > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/ >> letters/75_05_05.htm >> > > >> >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >> > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I >> > have >> > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >> President >> > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > >> www.mocombeian.com >> > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> -------- Original message -------- >> > > >> From: Andy Blunden >> > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > International >> > > >> >> > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >> > fundamentals of >> > > >> theory is >> > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >> > > >> list this is >> > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" >> is >> > > >> that such >> > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >> > > >> raising the >> > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> > > >> formation of >> > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >> > > invitation by >> > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >> > propsed the >> > > >> writing >> > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >> "the >> > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >> > > >> and the >> > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >> > > >> shift in >> > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >> > by the >> > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >> > which the >> > > >> gains in >> > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >> actual >> > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >> > > hardly news, >> > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >> > > centuries. The >> > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >> > > progress has >> > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >> > a few >> > > >> of that >> > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >> > > >> project >> > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >> > in the >> > > >> argument >> > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >> such >> > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >> > participation, >> > > >> but the >> > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >> > > >> engaged in >> > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >> > > >> struggle. Not >> > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you >> are >> > > >> taking up >> > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> > > >> reflections on >> > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> > > >> >> > > >> Andy >> > > >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >> >> It would appear ... >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >> > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >> > > >> foundational issues, at all. >> > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> > foundations >> > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >> > that a >> > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >> > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >> > forward in >> > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked >> out >> > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to address >> the >> > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> > parameters)? >> > > >> > David >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> ] On Behalf Of Dr. >> > > >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> > > >> >> > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Andy and david, >> > > >> > >> > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have >> to >> > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >> > such a >> > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >> > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >> > upward >> > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >> > > >> lifestyle? > >> > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian >> > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >> > humanity to >> > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >> > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >> > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> fracking, >> > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> > resolve our >> > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit >> of >> > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >> this >> > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >> > President >> > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: >> > > >> David H Kirshner > >> > > >> >> > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity" >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >> Oxfam >> > > >> International
>> > > >> >
Andy, >> > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >> > one's own >> > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >> > provides >> > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >> carried >> > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >> individual >> > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >> > > >> for ordinary citizens. >> > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the >> form >> > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > > >> > Thanks. >> > > >> > David >> > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> >> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >> Blunden >> > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >> > >> > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read >> and >> > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >> > > narrative. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >> doomed >> > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >> > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >> > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >> > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> > everyone had >> > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit >> in >> > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >> > see how >> > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >> > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > > >> > >> > > >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> context, >> > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >> > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of our >> best >> > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >> > project? >> > > >> >> David >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> >> > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >> Blunden >> > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >> measures >> > > >> over teh >> > > >> >> past >> > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >> > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one and >> the >> > > >> same. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Andy >> > > >> >> >> > > >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ---------- >> > > >> >> -- >> > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >> > that can >> > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside >> of >> > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >> > would >> > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >> > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. >> For >> > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >> > effort to >> > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >> > project. >> > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >> > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >> > > >> relation to the theoretical project. >> > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >> desperate >> > > >> times call for. >> > > >> >>> David >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> >> > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >> ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >> Blunden >> > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > >> International >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >> > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, >> > too, >> > > >> you know. >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social psychology >> and >> > > >> well-being: >> > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which >> is >> > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it >> > is for >> > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >> goes >> > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >> > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >> > of the >> > > >> likely results of their behaviour. >> > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >> "have >> > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >> individual >> > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts >> of >> > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the >> reason >> > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >> > itself >> > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to the >> > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and >> > that >> > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >> > Understanding >> > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >> > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >> > political >> > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. >> > That >> > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >> > > >> collaborate with one another. >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> That's what I think. >> > > >> >>> Andy >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> --------- >> > > >> >>> - >> > > >> >>> -- >> > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my >> > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >> > > >> tentatively titled: >> > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> > > >> Despoiling the >> > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture >> In >> > > >> the Quest >> > > >> >>>> for More >> > > >> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >> > sense >> > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >> > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >> > wealth >> > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >> > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >> > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >> would >> > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >> > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >> > > >> that maximizes disparity. >> > > >> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >> > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >> dramatic >> > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, >> we >> > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior >> by >> > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >> > Recession). >> > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >> > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more >> rational >> > > >> policies for the economy. >> > > >> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond >> the >> > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >> > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >> > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> > > >> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> David >> > > >> >>>> >>>> >> > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Wed Jan 22 06:47:24 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:47:24 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <2033j9yksi133ecvxndainpa.1390400638137@email.android.com> Within the logic of? "Men make their? own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it? under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing? already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to change the world? ?Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights movement changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. Science is always for a purpose. Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? >? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Rauno Huttunen > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Hello, > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > social theory. > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > party ideology. > > Rauno Huttunen > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the > > capitalists.... > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Andy Blunden > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the > > social process. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > Bill, > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > > grasp > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > about > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > > then > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > Street > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > such as > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we > > > just > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > and the > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > Absurd > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > speak, > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > always > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > only > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > meaningful > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > "Do unto > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > goes, but > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > seems to > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > > living in a > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > required to > > > >> sustain it. > > > >> > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > rather it > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > desired.? This, > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > > >> > > > >> Best, > > > >> Huw > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a > > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > >>???? Andy > > > >>?? > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > >> > > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > >> > > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > > have > > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > >>???????? President > > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >>???????? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > > >> > > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > fundamentals of > > > >>???????? theory is > > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca > > > >>???????? list this is > > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > "collaboration" is > > > >>???????? that such > > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > > >>???????? raising the > > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > >>???????? formation of > > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > invitation by > > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > propsed the > > > >>???????? writing > > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > "the > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity > > > >>???????? and the > > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > > >>???????? shift in > > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > by the > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > which the > > > >>???????? gains in > > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > actual > > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > hardly news, > > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > centuries. The > > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > progress has > > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > a few > > > >>???????? of that > > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual > > > >>???????? project > > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > in the > > > >>???????? argument > > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > such > > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > participation, > > > >>???????? but the > > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > > >>???????? engaged in > > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > you are > > > >>???????? taking up > > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > >>???????? reflections on > > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > >> > > > >>???????? Andy > > > >>???????? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > > >>???????? >>??? > > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, > > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > foundations > > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > that a > > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough > > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > forward in > > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > worked out > > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to > address the > > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > parameters)? > > > >>???????? > David > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. > > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > have to > > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > > such a > > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > upward > > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian > > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > humanity to > > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's > > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > fracking, > > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > resolve our > > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > spirit of > > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > this > > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > >>???????? > President > > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >>???????? > > > >> > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner > > > > >> > > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > Activity" > > > >>???????? > > > > >> > > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam > > > >>???????? International
> > > >>???????? >
Andy, > > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > one's own > > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > provides > > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > carried > > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > individual > > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage > > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > the form > > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > > >>???????? > David > > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > >> > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > read and > > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > narrative. > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > doomed > > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological > > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at > > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > everyone had > > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > implicit in > > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > see how > > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines > > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ------------ > > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > >> > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > context, > > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of > our best > > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > project? > > > >>???????? >> David > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > measures > > > >>???????? over teh > > > >>???????? >> past > > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one > and the > > > >>???????? same. > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> Andy > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> ---------- > > > >>???????? >> -- > > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> > > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > that can > > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step > outside of > > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > would > > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly > endeavor. For > > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > effort to > > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > project. > > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > desperate > > > >>???????? times call for. > > > >>???????? >>> David > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? > > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Andy > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > >>???????? International > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > > too, > > > >>???????? you know. > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social > psychology and > > > >>???????? well-being: > > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > which is > > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > is for > > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > goes > > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course > > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > of the > > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > "have > > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > individual > > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the > contexts of > > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the > reason > > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > itself > > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the > > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and > > that > > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > Understanding > > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > political > > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > > That > > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >> --------- > > > >>???????? >>> - > > > >>???????? >>> -- > > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> > > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > Culture In > > > >>???????? the Quest > > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > sense > > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our > > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > wealth > > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > would > > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are > > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy > > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > dramatic > > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > Hence, we > > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > behavior by > > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that > > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > Recession). > > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back > > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more > rational > > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > beyond the > > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I > > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that > > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > >>???????? >>>> David > > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Wed Jan 22 06:52:18 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 14:52:18 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <2033j9yksi133ecvxndainpa.1390400638137@email.android.com> References: <2033j9yksi133ecvxndainpa.1390400638137@email.android.com> Message-ID: Dear Paul At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Within the logic of > "Men make their > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights movement > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >
>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > Science is always for a purpose. > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Hello, > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > social theory. > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > party ideology. > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective > of > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > personality > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > the > > > social process. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > sentiments" > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > > > grasp > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > > about > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > > > then > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > > Street > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > > such as > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > we > > > > just > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > > and the > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > Absurd > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > > speak, > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > > always > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > > only > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > meaningful > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > > "Do unto > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > > goes, but > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > > seems to > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > > > living in a > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > required to > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > >> > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > rather it > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > desired. This, > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > > > >> > > > > >> Best, > > > > >> Huw > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than > a > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > >> > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > > > have > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >> President > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > > >> > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > fundamentals of > > > > >> theory is > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > xmca > > > > >> list this is > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > "collaboration" is > > > > >> that such > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > > > >> raising the > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > > >> formation of > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > invitation by > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > propsed the > > > > >> writing > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > > "the > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > prosperity > > > > >> and the > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > > > >> shift in > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > > by the > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > which the > > > > >> gains in > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > actual > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > hardly news, > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > centuries. The > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > progress has > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > > a few > > > > >> of that > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > actual > > > > >> project > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > > in the > > > > >> argument > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > > such > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > participation, > > > > >> but the > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > > > >> engaged in > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > > > >> struggle. Not > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > you are > > > > >> taking up > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > > >> reflections on > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > >> > > > > >> Andy > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > Paul, > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > foundations > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > > that a > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > enough > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > forward in > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > worked out > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > address the > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > parameters)? > > > > >> > David > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > Dr. > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > > > >> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > have to > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > > > such a > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > > upward > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > marxian > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > humanity to > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > it's > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > fracking, > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > resolve our > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > spirit of > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > > this > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >> > President > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > > > >> David H Kirshner > > > > > >> > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > Activity" > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > Oxfam > > > > >> International
> > > > >> >
Andy, > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > one's own > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > provides > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > carried > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > effective > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > individual > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > leverage > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > the form > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > >> > Thanks. > > > > >> > David > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >> Blunden > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > read and > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > narrative. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > doomed > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > ideological > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > at > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > everyone had > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > implicit in > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > see how > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > story-lines > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > context, > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > our best > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > project? > > > > >> >> David > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >> Blunden > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > measures > > > > >> over teh > > > > >> >> past > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one > > and the > > > > >> same. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> Andy > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ---------- > > > > >> >> -- > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > that can > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > outside of > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > > would > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > endeavor. For > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > effort to > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > project. > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > desperate > > > > >> times call for. > > > > >> >>> David > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >> Blunden > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > >> International > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > > > too, > > > > >> you know. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > > psychology and > > > > >> well-being: > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > which is > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > > is for > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > > goes > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > course > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > > of the > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > "have > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > individual > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > contexts of > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > reason > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > > itself > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to > the > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, and > > > that > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > Understanding > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > political > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > > > That > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> --------- > > > > >> >>> - > > > > >> >>> -- > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > > >> Despoiling the > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > Culture In > > > > >> the Quest > > > > >> >>>> for More > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > > sense > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > our > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > > wealth > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > > would > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > are > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > strategy > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > dramatic > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > Hence, we > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > behavior by > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > that > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > Recession). > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > back > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > > rational > > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > beyond the > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, > I > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > that > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>> David > > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Wed Jan 22 06:56:06 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 09:56:06 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Larry...i think that the demarcation that Andy makes is problematic...it implies that structures operate devoid of humans...is humanism not itself another structuring structure that wants to stand against the structuring structure of capitalism? ? Andy, I believe wants to position his humanist subject against the agential moments of the subjects of capitalism as in how Lenin envisioned the dictatorship of the proletariat?? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Larry Purss
Date:01/22/2014 9:38 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Andy, This way of demarcating our *worlds* is fascinating and opens the possibility of exploring how we open and close our *developing* worlds. If you demarcate understanding WITH change AND interpreting WITH structure it enters into confusing conversations with other traditions which conjoin interpretation WITH understanding as BOTH on the side of humanism. Andy, in your explanation of how you demarcate structuralism [and functionalism on one side AND humanism on the other side is extremely helpful in my being able to *read* your purpose. I have been using the concept interpretation within a different traditional figuration [philosophical hermeneutics] as on the side of humanism. and openings of structural and functional *systems*. Andy, I hope others venture into this opening you have invited us into which is retrieving the concept *humanism* as a response [an *answer*] to structuralism and functionalism AND their post *extensions*. My only quibble is in your demarcating *interpretation* as on the other side of *understanding* when I want to understand *interpretation* as on the other side Larry On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism (together > with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one way of > viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as a humanist > because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) as prisoners > of structures and functions, "interpellated" and "subjectified" by great > social powers, but rather that "Men make their own history, but they do not > make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected > circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and > transmitted from the past". There is absolutely nothing individalist about > that position, but since agency is not an illusion, it does pose the > serious problem of how agency exists. > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on the > side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain how > societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, make > wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell you > how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself and > was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity with > others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to not be > fruitless and in general how people change the world. > Science is always for a purpose. > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around.? How >> is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"?? Althusser, for >> me, represents an aspect of our being in the world which highlights our >> unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the nature of our being in >> the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and rauno point to speaks to a >> sort of cartesian rational or self-conscious individual being.? The latter >> two want to establish society based on such an individual, I.e., >> subject...whereas, althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such >> individual, but "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." >> So it appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be better >> than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense?? How will >> you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Rauno Huttunen >> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Hello, >> >> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >> theory of science and social theory are very interesting (generalization >> I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], ideological state >> apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is possible to make kind of >> humanistic interpretation on Althusser's social theory. >> >> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were Althusser's >> students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) Jacques Ranciere >> is also very interesting. He break away from Althusser's school in 1970th >> and started his own kind of humanistic critical social theory. In his book >> "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" >> Ranciere claims that Althusserians really don't care about working class, >> their intentions, their feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. >> Althusserians say that they represents the objective interests of working >> class but actually they are telling to working class how workers should >> think and feel. For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling >> elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >> party ideology. >> >> Rauno Huttunen >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who >> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a >> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> >> Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >> > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are >> > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been >> > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they >> > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the >> > capitalists.... >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> > >> > >> > -------- Original message -------- >> > From: Andy Blunden >> > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > >> > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, >> > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective of >> > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >> > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a personality >> > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am >> > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and >> > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of the >> > social process. >> > >> > Andy >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > Bill, >> > > >> > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the >> > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >> > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going >> > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist >> > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral sentiments" >> > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >> > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first >> > > century socialists. >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > President >> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> > > >> > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > From: Bill Kerr >> > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: >> > > >> > > 1) General increase in standard of living >> > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> > > >> > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to >> > grasp >> > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >> > about >> > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> > > >> > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230414940457932 >> 4530112590864 >> > > >> > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this >> > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> > > >> > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained >> > then >> > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >> > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >> > Street >> > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of >> > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >> > such as >> > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >> > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that we >> > > just >> > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if >> > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >> > > and the >> > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >> > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >> Absurd >> > > simplification on my part. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >> > speak, >> > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >> > always >> > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >> only >> > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >> > > meaningful >> > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >> > > "Do unto >> > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >> > > goes, but >> > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >> > > > >> > > > Andy >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >> > > seems to >> > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure >> > > living in a >> > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >> > > required to >> > > >> sustain it. >> > > >> >> > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >> > rather it >> > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >> > > desired.? This, >> > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. >> > > >> >> > > >> Best, >> > > >> Huw >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through >> > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than a >> > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> > > >>???? Andy >> > > >>?? > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/ >> letters/75_05_05.htm >> > > >> >> > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* >> > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I >> > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I >> > have >> > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >>???????? President >> > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com >> > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >>???????? >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- >> > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden >> > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > International >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on >> > fundamentals of >> > > >>???????? theory is >> > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca >> > > >>???????? list this is >> > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" >> is >> > > >>???????? that such >> > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in >> > > >>???????? raising the >> > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> > > >>???????? formation of >> > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >> > > invitation by >> > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >> > propsed the >> > > >>???????? writing >> > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >> "the >> > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and prosperity >> > > >>???????? and the >> > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual >> > > >>???????? shift in >> > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years >> > by the >> > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >> > which the >> > > >>???????? gains in >> > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >> actual >> > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >> > > hardly news, >> > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >> > > centuries. The >> > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >> > > progress has >> > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >> > a few >> > > >>???????? of that >> > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual >> > > >>???????? project >> > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >> > in the >> > > >>???????? argument >> > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >> such >> > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >> > participation, >> > > >>???????? but the >> > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually >> > > >>???????? engaged in >> > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that >> > > >>???????? struggle. Not >> > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that you >> are >> > > >>???????? taking up >> > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> > > >>???????? reflections on >> > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? Andy >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* >> > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... >> > > >>???????? >>??? > >> > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, >> > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with >> > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. >> > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> > foundations >> > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >> > that a >> > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable enough >> > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >> > forward in >> > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked >> out >> > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to address >> the >> > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> > parameters)? >> > > >>???????? > David >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- >> > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of Dr. >> > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > Andy and david, >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would have >> to >> > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can >> > such a >> > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >> > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >> > upward >> > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >> > > >>???????? lifestyle? > >> > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in marxian >> > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >> > humanity to >> > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce it's >> > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >> > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> fracking, >> > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> > resolve our >> > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit >> of >> > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >> this >> > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > >>???????? > President >> > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com >> > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >>???????? >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: >> > > >>???????? David H Kirshner > >> > > >> >> > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >> > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net >> > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> Activity" >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >> >> > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >> Oxfam >> > > >>???????? International
>> > > >>???????? >
Andy, >> > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to >> > one's own >> > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >> > provides >> > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >> carried >> > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >> individual >> > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political leverage >> > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. >> > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in the >> form >> > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > > >>???????? > Thanks. >> > > >>???????? > David >> > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- >> > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >>???????? Blunden >> > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read >> and >> > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >> > > narrative. >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >> doomed >> > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear >> > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and ideological >> > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project at >> > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> > everyone had >> > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit >> in >> > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >> > see how >> > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines >> > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ------------ >> > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* >> > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> context, >> > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >> > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of our >> best >> > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >> > project? >> > > >>???????? >> David >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- >> > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >>???????? Blunden >> > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > International >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >> measures >> > > >>???????? over teh >> > > >>???????? >> past >> > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the >> > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one and >> the >> > > >>???????? same. >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> Andy >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> ---------- >> > > >>???????? >> -- >> > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> >> > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, >> > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >> > that can >> > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step outside >> of >> > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >> > would >> > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >> > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly endeavor. >> For >> > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >> > effort to >> > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger >> > project. >> > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >> > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual >> > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. >> > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >> desperate >> > > >>???????? times call for. >> > > >>???????? >>> David >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- >> > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? >> > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of >> Andy >> > > >>???????? Blunden >> > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > >>???????? International >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in >> > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, >> > too, >> > > >>???????? you know. >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social psychology >> and >> > > >>???????? well-being: >> > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which >> is >> > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it >> > is for >> > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >> goes >> > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of course >> > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >> > of the >> > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. >> > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >> "have >> > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >> individual >> > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the contexts >> of >> > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the >> reason >> > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >> > itself >> > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to the >> > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and >> > that >> > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >> > Understanding >> > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with >> > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing >> > political >> > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. >> > That >> > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to >> > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. >> > > >>???????? >>> Andy >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> > > >> --------- >> > > >>???????? >>> - >> > > >>???????? >>> -- >> > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* >> > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > > >> >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> >> > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my >> > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper >> > > >>???????? tentatively titled: >> > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> > > >>???????? Despoiling the >> > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our Culture >> In >> > > >>???????? the Quest >> > > >>???????? >>>> for More >> > > >>???????? >>>> >> > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >> > sense >> > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to our >> > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >> > wealth >> > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >> > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which >> > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >> would >> > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they are >> > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a strategy >> > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. >> > > >>???????? >>>> >> > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the >> > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >> dramatic >> > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. Hence, >> we >> > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive behavior >> by >> > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >> > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >> > Recession). >> > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back >> > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more >> rational >> > > >>???????? policies for the economy. >> > > >>???????? >>>> >> > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond >> the >> > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I >> > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one that >> > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. >> > > >>???????? >>>> >> > > >>???????? >>>> David >> > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> >> > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> >> > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >>???????? > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Wed Jan 22 07:14:16 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:14:16 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> Tom,? I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were structural/humanist. ?That is, as adorno points out in identitarian logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. ?They were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Tom Richardson Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Dear Paul At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). Tom Richardson Middlesbrough UK On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Within the logic of > "Men make their > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights movement > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >
>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are two > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > Science is always for a purpose. > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > >? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > >? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? > >? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Hello, > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > social theory. > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > party ideology. > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. "Who > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not a > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > > > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but no, > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective > of > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > personality > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I am > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations and > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > the > > > social process. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., the > > > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and going > > > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > sentiments" > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty first > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic characteristics: > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard to > > > grasp > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > > about > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of this > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is maintained > > > then > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > > Street > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study of > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > > such as > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > we > > > > just > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. if > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > > and the > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > Absurd > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > > speak, > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > > always > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > > only > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > meaningful > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > > "Do unto > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > > goes, but > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > > seems to > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > > > living in a > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > required to > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > >> > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > rather it > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > desired.? This, > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding exercise. > > > > >> > > > > >> Best, > > > > >> Huw > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality through > > > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important than > a > > > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > >>???? Andy > > > > >> > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > >> > > > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, I > > > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what I > > > have > > > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >>???????? President > > > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >>???????? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > fundamentals of > > > > >>???????? theory is > > > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > xmca > > > > >>???????? list this is > > > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > "collaboration" is > > > > >>???????? that such > > > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in > > > > >>???????? raising the > > > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > > >>???????? formation of > > > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > invitation by > > > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > propsed the > > > > >>???????? writing > > > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > > "the > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > prosperity > > > > >>???????? and the > > > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the gradual > > > > >>???????? shift in > > > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > > by the > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > which the > > > > >>???????? gains in > > > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > actual > > > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > hardly news, > > > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > centuries. The > > > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > progress has > > > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > > a few > > > > >>???????? of that > > > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > actual > > > > >>???????? project > > > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > > in the > > > > >>???????? argument > > > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > > such > > > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > participation, > > > > >>???????? but the > > > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those actually > > > > >>???????? engaged in > > > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further that > > > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > you are > > > > >>???????? taking up > > > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > > >>???????? reflections on > > > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? Andy > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > > > >>???????? >>??? > > > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > Paul, > > > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms with > > > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > foundations > > > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > > that a > > > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > enough > > > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > forward in > > > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > worked out > > > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > address the > > > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > parameters)? > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > Dr. > > > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > have to > > > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > > > such a > > > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > > upward > > > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor > > > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in > marxian > > > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > humanity to > > > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > it's > > > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > fracking, > > > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > resolve our > > > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > spirit of > > > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > > this > > > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > >>???????? > President > > > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >>???????? > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message --------
From: > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner > > > > > >> > > > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > Activity" > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >> > > > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > Oxfam > > > > >>???????? International
> > > > >>???????? >
Andy, > > > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > one's own > > > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > provides > > > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > carried > > > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > effective > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > individual > > > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > leverage > > > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > the form > > > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > read and > > > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > narrative. > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > doomed > > > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a linear > > > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and > ideological > > > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > at > > > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > everyone had > > > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > implicit in > > > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > see how > > > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > story-lines > > > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ------------ > > > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > context, > > > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > our best > > > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > project? > > > > >>???????? >> David > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > measures > > > > >>???????? over teh > > > > >>???????? >> past > > > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that the > > > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one > > and the > > > > >>???????? same. > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> Andy > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> ---------- > > > > >>???????? >> -- > > > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > that can > > > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > outside of > > > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > > would > > > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > endeavor. For > > > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > effort to > > > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > project. > > > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little actual > > > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > desperate > > > > >>???????? times call for. > > > > >>???????? >>> David > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? > > > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > Andy > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > >>???????? International > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in > > > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its challenges, > > > too, > > > > >>???????? you know. > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social > > psychology and > > > > >>???????? well-being: > > > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > which is > > > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > > is for > > > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > > goes > > > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > course > > > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > > of the > > > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > "have > > > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > individual > > > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > contexts of > > > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > reason > > > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > > itself > > > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to > the > > > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, and > > > that > > > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > Understanding > > > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task with > > > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > political > > > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. > > > That > > > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to > > > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > >> --------- > > > > >>???????? >>> - > > > > >>???????? >>> -- > > > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in my > > > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a paper > > > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > Culture In > > > > >>???????? the Quest > > > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > > sense > > > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > our > > > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > > wealth > > > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for > > > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which > > > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > > would > > > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > are > > > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > strategy > > > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over the > > > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > dramatic > > > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > Hence, we > > > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > behavior by > > > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > that > > > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > Recession). > > > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > back > > > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more > > rational > > > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > beyond the > > > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project appeals, > I > > > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > that > > > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as co-authors. > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > >>???????? >>>> David > > > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >> > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Wed Jan 22 14:19:54 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:19:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> References: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> Message-ID: Thanks for your (accepting) reply Paul My only response - since I am not at all familiar with the conceptual fields you refer to, (nor even particularly receptive to them,mea culpa), is to adduce the idea of the difference between a 'formal' status of a right and its function reality, i.e. my formal right to a fair trial and my ability to pull together all the resources actually needed to achieve one. Formally while such leaders as King remained part of and submerged within the constraints of the reality which they challenged; functionally their demands could be met only by an alteration in that reality. I hope that this category of answer has some value and coherence within your terms of reference. Yours Tom On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Tom Richardson > Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Dear Paul > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough UK > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Within the logic of > > "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > movement > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >
> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are > two > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > Science is always for a purpose. > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > social theory. > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > party ideology. > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > "Who > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not > a > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > no, > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective > > of > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > personality > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I > am > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > and > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > > the > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > the > > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > going > > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > sentiments" > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > first > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > to > > > > grasp > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > > > about > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > this > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > maintained > > > > then > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > > > Street > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study > of > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > > > such as > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > > we > > > > > just > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. > if > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > > > and the > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > > Absurd > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > > > speak, > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > > > always > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > > > only > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > > > seems to > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > > > > living in a > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > required to > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > > rather it > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > desired. This, > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > exercise. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > through > > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > than > > a > > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > >> > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > >> > > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, > I > > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what > I > > > > have > > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> President > > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > >> theory is > > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > > xmca > > > > > >> list this is > > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > >> that such > > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, > in > > > > > >> raising the > > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > > > >> formation of > > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > invitation by > > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > propsed the > > > > > >> writing > > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > > > "the > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > prosperity > > > > > >> and the > > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > gradual > > > > > >> shift in > > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > > > by the > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > which the > > > > > >> gains in > > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > > actual > > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > > progress has > > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > > > a few > > > > > >> of that > > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > actual > > > > > >> project > > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > > > in the > > > > > >> argument > > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > > > such > > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > participation, > > > > > >> but the > > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > actually > > > > > >> engaged in > > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further > that > > > > > >> struggle. Not > > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > > you are > > > > > >> taking up > > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > > > >> reflections on > > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > > Paul, > > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > with > > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > foundations > > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > > > that a > > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > enough > > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > forward in > > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > worked out > > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > address the > > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > parameters)? > > > > > >> > David > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Dr. > > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > have to > > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > > > > such a > > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > > > upward > > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > poor > > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > > marxian > > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > humanity to > > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > > it's > > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > fracking, > > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > resolve our > > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > spirit of > > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > ontology. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > > > this > > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> > President > > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >
-------- Original message > --------
From: > > > > > >> David H Kirshner >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > Activity" > > > > > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > > Oxfam > > > > > >> International
> > > > > >> >
Andy, > > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > one's own > > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > > provides > > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > > carried > > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > effective > > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > individual > > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > leverage > > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > the form > > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > >> > Thanks. > > > > > >> > David > > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > read and > > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > > narrative. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > > doomed > > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > linear > > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > ideological > > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > > at > > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > everyone had > > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > implicit in > > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > > see how > > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > story-lines > > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > context, > > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > our best > > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > > project? > > > > > >> >> David > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > measures > > > > > >> over teh > > > > > >> >> past > > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > the > > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one > > > and the > > > > > >> same. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> Andy > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > >> >> -- > > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > > that can > > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > outside of > > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > > > would > > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > endeavor. For > > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > effort to > > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > > project. > > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > actual > > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > desperate > > > > > >> times call for. > > > > > >> >>> David > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > >> International > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > in > > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > challenges, > > > > too, > > > > > >> you know. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > > > psychology and > > > > > >> well-being: > > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > which is > > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > > > is for > > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > > > goes > > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > course > > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > > > of the > > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > > "have > > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > individual > > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > contexts of > > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > > reason > > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > > > itself > > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to > > the > > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, > and > > > > that > > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > Understanding > > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task > with > > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > political > > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable > arrangements. > > > > That > > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > to > > > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > >> >>> - > > > > > >> >>> -- > > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in > my > > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > paper > > > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > > > >> Despoiling the > > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > Culture In > > > > > >> the Quest > > > > > >> >>>> for More > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > > > sense > > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > > our > > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > > > wealth > > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > for > > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > which > > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > > > would > > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > > are > > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > strategy > > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over > the > > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > dramatic > > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > Hence, we > > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > behavior by > > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > > that > > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > Recession). > > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > > back > > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > > > rational > > > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > beyond the > > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > appeals, > > I > > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > > that > > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > co-authors. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> David > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Wed Jan 22 14:36:55 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:36:55 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> References: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> Message-ID: Hello again Paul Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only come about either by the efforts of those within any given society attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination Enough already - I've gone on long enough Tom On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Tom Richardson > Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Dear Paul > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough UK > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Within the logic of > > "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > movement > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >
> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are > two > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > Science is always for a purpose. > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > social theory. > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > party ideology. > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > "Who > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not > a > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > no, > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective > > of > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > personality > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I > am > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > and > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > > the > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > the > > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > going > > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > sentiments" > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > first > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > to > > > > grasp > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > > > about > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > this > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > maintained > > > > then > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > > > Street > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study > of > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > > > such as > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > > we > > > > > just > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. > if > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > > > and the > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > > Absurd > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > > > speak, > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > > > always > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > > > only > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > > > seems to > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > > > > living in a > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > required to > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > > rather it > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > desired. This, > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > exercise. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > through > > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > than > > a > > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > >> > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > >> > > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, > I > > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what > I > > > > have > > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> President > > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > >> theory is > > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > > xmca > > > > > >> list this is > > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > >> that such > > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, > in > > > > > >> raising the > > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > > > >> formation of > > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > invitation by > > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > propsed the > > > > > >> writing > > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > > > "the > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > prosperity > > > > > >> and the > > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > gradual > > > > > >> shift in > > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > > > by the > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > which the > > > > > >> gains in > > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > > actual > > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > > progress has > > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > > > a few > > > > > >> of that > > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > actual > > > > > >> project > > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > > > in the > > > > > >> argument > > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > > > such > > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > participation, > > > > > >> but the > > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > actually > > > > > >> engaged in > > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further > that > > > > > >> struggle. Not > > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > > you are > > > > > >> taking up > > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > > > >> reflections on > > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > > Paul, > > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > with > > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > foundations > > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > > > that a > > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > enough > > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > forward in > > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > worked out > > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > address the > > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > parameters)? > > > > > >> > David > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Dr. > > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > have to > > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > > > > such a > > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > > > upward > > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > poor > > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > > marxian > > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > humanity to > > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > > it's > > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > fracking, > > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > resolve our > > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > spirit of > > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > ontology. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > > > this > > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >> > President > > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >
-------- Original message > --------
From: > > > > > >> David H Kirshner >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > Activity" > > > > > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > > Oxfam > > > > > >> International
> > > > > >> >
Andy, > > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > one's own > > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > > provides > > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > > carried > > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > effective > > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > individual > > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > leverage > > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > the form > > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > >> > Thanks. > > > > > >> > David > > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > read and > > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > > narrative. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > > doomed > > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > linear > > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > ideological > > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > > at > > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > everyone had > > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > implicit in > > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > > see how > > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > story-lines > > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > context, > > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > our best > > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > > project? > > > > > >> >> David > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > measures > > > > > >> over teh > > > > > >> >> past > > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > the > > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one > > > and the > > > > > >> same. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> Andy > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > >> >> -- > > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > > that can > > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > outside of > > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > > > would > > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > endeavor. For > > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > effort to > > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > > project. > > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > actual > > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > desperate > > > > > >> times call for. > > > > > >> >>> David > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > >> International > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > in > > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > challenges, > > > > too, > > > > > >> you know. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > > > psychology and > > > > > >> well-being: > > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > which is > > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > > > is for > > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > > > goes > > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > course > > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > > > of the > > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > > "have > > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > individual > > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > contexts of > > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > > reason > > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > > > itself > > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according to > > the > > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, > and > > > > that > > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > Understanding > > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task > with > > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > political > > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable > arrangements. > > > > That > > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > to > > > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > >> >>> - > > > > > >> >>> -- > > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in > my > > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > paper > > > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > > > >> Despoiling the > > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > Culture In > > > > > >> the Quest > > > > > >> >>>> for More > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > > > sense > > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > > our > > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > > > wealth > > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > for > > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > which > > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > > > would > > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > > are > > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > strategy > > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over > the > > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > dramatic > > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > Hence, we > > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > behavior by > > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > > that > > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > Recession). > > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > > back > > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > > > rational > > > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > beyond the > > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > appeals, > > I > > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > > that > > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > co-authors. > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> David > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From rbeach@umn.edu Wed Jan 22 13:06:20 2014 From: rbeach@umn.edu (Richard Beach) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:06:20 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Related to the issue of analysis of institutional systems constituting the perpetuation of capitalism, the following ending of an article in The New Yorker is an interesting discussion of how tools mediate societal transformation?that tool use with the potential for mediating societal change can be co-opted by capitalism/technology to mitigate change. Evgeny Morozo, Making It, The New Yorker, January 13, 2014 http://www.newyorker.com/search?qt=dismax&sort=score+desc&query=Maker&submit = One of the leaders of the Homebrew Computer Club was Lee Felsenstein. A veteran of the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley, he wanted to build communication infrastructure that would allow citizens to swap information in a decentralized manner, bypassing the mistrusted traditional media. In the early nineteen-seventies, he helped launch Community Memory?a handful of computer terminals installed in public spaces in Berkeley and San Francisco which allowed local residents to communicate anonymously. It was the first true ?social media.? Felsenstein got his inspiration from reading Ivan Illich?s ?Tools for Conviviality,? which called for devices and machines that would be easy to understand, learn, and repair, thus making experts and institutions unnecessary. ?Convivial tools rule out certain levels of power, compulsion, and programming, which are precisely those features that now tend to make all governments look more or less alike,? Illich wrote. He had little faith in traditional politics. Whereas Stewart Brand wanted citizens to replace politics with savvy shopping, Illich wanted to ?retool? society so that traditional politics, with its penchant for endless talk, becomes unnecessary. Felsenstein took Illich?s advice to heart, not least because it resembled his own experience with ham radios, which were easy to understand and fiddle with. If the computer were to assist ordinary folks in their political struggles, the computer needed a ham-radio-like community of hobbyists. Such a club would help counter the power of I.B.M., then the dominant manufacturer of large and expensive computers, and make computers smaller, cheaper, and more useful in political struggles. Then Steve Jobs showed up. Felsenstein?s political project, of building computers that would undermine institutions and allow citizens to share information and organize, was recast as an aesthetic project of self-reliance and personal empowerment. For Jobs, who saw computers as ?a bicycle for our minds,? it was of only secondary importance whether one could peek inside or program them. Jobs had his share of sins, but the na?vet? of Illich and his followers shouldn?t be underestimated. Seeking salvation through tools alone is no more viable as a political strategy than addressing the ills of capitalism by cultivating a public appreciation of arts and crafts. Society is always in flux, and the designer can?t predict how various political, social, and economic systems will come to blunt, augment, or redirect the power of the tool that is being designed. Instead of deinstitutionalizing society, the radicals would have done better to advocate reinstitutionalizing it: pushing for political and legal reforms to secure the transparency and decentralization of power they associated with their favorite technology. One thinker who saw through the na?vet? of Illich, the Homebrewers, and the Whole Earthers was the libertarian socialist Murray Bookchin. Back in the late sixties, he published a fiery essay called ?Towards a Liberatory Technology,? arguing that technology is not an enemy of craftsmanship and personal freedom. Unlike Brand, though, Bookchin never thought that such liberation could occur just by getting more technology into everyone?s hands; the nature of the political community mattered. In his book ?The Ecology of Freedom? (1982), he couldn?t hide his frustration with the ?access-to-tools? mentality. Bookchin?s critique of the counterculture?s turn to tools parallels Dennett?s critique of the aesthetes? turn to education eighty years earlier. It didn?t make sense to speak of ?convivial tools,? he argued, without taking a close look at the political and social structures in which they were embedded. A reluctance to talk about institutions and political change doomed the Arts and Crafts movement, channelling the spirit of labor reform into consumerism and D.I.Y. tinkering. The same thing is happening to the movement?s successors. Our tech imagination, to judge from catalogues like ?Cool Tools,? is at its zenith. (Never before have so many had access to thermostatically warmed toilet seats.) But our institutional imagination has stalled, and with it the democratizing potential of radical technologies. We carry personal computers in our pockets?nothing could be more decentralized than this!?but have surrendered control of our data, which is stored on centralized servers, far away from our pockets. The hackers won their fight against I.B.M.?only to lose it to Facebook and Google. And the spooks at the National Security Agency must be surprised to learn that gadgets were supposed to usher in the ?de-institutionalization of society.? The lure of the technological sublime has ruined more than one social movement, and, in this respect, even Mary Dennett fared no better than Felsenstein. For all her sensitivity to questions of inequality, she also believed that, once ?cheap electric power? is ?at every village door,? the ?emancipation of the craftsman and the unchaining of art? would naturally follow. What electric company would disagree? Richard Beach Professor Emeritus of Literacy Education University of Minnesota rbeach@umn.edu Past-President, Literacy Research Association Digital writing Use of apps for literacy learning Teaching literature ELA Common Core Teaching media literacy On 1/22/14, 4:36 PM, "Tom Richardson" wrote: > Hello again Paul > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> Tom, >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Tom Richardson >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Dear Paul >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >wrote: >> >>> > Within the logic of >>> > "Men make their >>> > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to >>> > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, >>> > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >> movement >>> > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? >>> > >>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> > President >>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> > www.mocombeian.com >>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> > >>> >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >>> > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>> >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>> >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >>> >
>>> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are >> two >>> > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >>> > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >>> > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one >>> > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as >>> > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) >>> > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >>> > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >>> > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >>> > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >>> > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >>> > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >>> > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain >>> > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >>> > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show >>> > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >>> > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself >>> > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >>> > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to >>> > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >>> > Science is always for a purpose. >>> > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is >>> > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >>> > >>> > Andy >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> > *Andy Blunden* >>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> > >>> > >>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>> > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >>>> > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >>>> > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >>>> > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the >>>> > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and >>>> > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >>>> > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >>>> > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >>>> > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but >>>> > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >>>> > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >>>> > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >>>> > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? >>>> > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>> > > President >>>> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>> > > www.mocombeian.com >>>> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > -------- Original message -------- >>>> > > From: Rauno Huttunen >>>> > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>> > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> > > >>>> > > Hello, >>>> > > >>>> > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >>>> > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting >>>> > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], >>>> > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >>>> > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >>>> > > social theory. >>>> > > >>>> > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >>>> > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >>>> > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >>>> > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >>>> > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' >>>> > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians >>>> > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >>>> > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >>>> > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >>>> > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >>>> > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >>>> > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >>>> > > party ideology. >>>> > > >>>> > > Rauno Huttunen >>>> > > >>>> > > -----Original Message----- >>>> > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >>>> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> > > >>>> > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >>>> > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >>>> > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >> "Who >>>> > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >>>> > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >>>> > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >>>> > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not >> a >>>> > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >>>> > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >>>> > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >>>> > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >>>> > > >>>> > > Andy >>>> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> > > *Andy Blunden* >>>> > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>> > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >>>>> > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >>>>> > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >>>>> > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >>>>> > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >>>>> > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >>>>> > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >>>>> > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the >>>>> > > > capitalists.... >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> > > > President >>>>> > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> > > > www.mocombeian.com >>>>> > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > -------- Original message -------- >>>>> > > > From: Andy Blunden >>>>> > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>> > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >> no, >>>>> > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >>>>> irrespective >>> > of >>>>> > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which >>>>> protect >>>>> > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >>> > personality >>>>> > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I >> am >>>>> > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations >> and >>>>> > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >>>>> > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >>> > the >>>>> > > > social process. >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Andy >>>>> > > > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> > > > *Andy Blunden* >>>>> > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>> > > > > Bill, >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >> the >>>>>> > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >>>>>> > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >> going >>>>>> > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >>>>>> > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >>> > sentiments" >>>>>> > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >>>>>> Bernstein >>>>>> > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >> first >>>>>> > > > > century socialists. >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>> > > > > President >>>>>> > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>> > > > > www.mocombeian.com >>>>>> > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> > > > > From: Bill Kerr >>>>>> > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>> > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>> > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic >> characteristics: >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living >>>>>> > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>>>>> > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >> to >>>>> > > > grasp >>>>>> > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >>>>> > > > about >>>>>> > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > >>> > >> >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB100014240527023041494045793245301125908 >> 64 >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >> this >>>>>> > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>>>>> > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >> maintained >>>>> > > > then >>>>>> > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >>>>>> > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >>>>> > > > Street >>>>>> > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study >> of >>>>>> > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >>>>> > > > such as >>>>>> > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >>>>>> > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >>> > we >>>>>> > > > > just >>>>>> > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >> if >>>>>> > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >>>>>> > > > > and the >>>>>> > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >>>>>> > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >>>> > > Absurd >>>>>> > > > > simplification on my part. >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>> >>>>> > > > wrote: >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >>>>> > > > speak, >>>>>>> > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >>>>> > > > always >>>>>>> > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >>>> > > only >>>>>>> > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >>>>>> > > > > meaningful >>>>>>> > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >>>>>> > > > > "Do unto >>>>>>> > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >>>>>> > > > > goes, but >>>>>>> > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Andy >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> > > > > > *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>> > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social >>>>>>>> psychology, it >>>>>> > > > > seems to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >>>>>> > > > > living in a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >>>>>> > > > > required to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> sustain it. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >>>>> > > > rather it >>>>>>>> > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>>> > > > > desired. This, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >> exercise. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Best, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Huw >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >>>>>>> > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >> through >>>>>>>> > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important >> than >>> > a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Andy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > > > >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this >>>>>>>> one...albeit, >> I >>>>>>>> > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what >> I >>>>> > > > have >>>>>>>> > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really >>>>>>>> disappointed me. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>> > > > > >> President >>>>>>>> > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>> > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>> > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>> > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>> > > > International >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>> > > > fundamentals of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> theory is >>>>>>>> > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >>> > xmca >>>>>>>> > > > > >> list this is >>>>>>>> > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >>>> > > "collaboration" is >>>>>>>> > > > > >> that such >>>>>>>> > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. >>>>>>>> Nonetheless, >> in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> raising the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting >>>>>>>> collaboration on >>>>>>>> > > > > >> formation of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >>>>>> > > > > invitation by >>>>>>>> > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>> > > > propsed the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> writing >>>>>>>> > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >>>> > > "the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>> > prosperity >>>>>>>> > > > > >> and the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >> gradual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> shift in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >>>>> > > > by the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >>>>> > > > which the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> gains in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >>>> > > actual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >>>>>> > > > > hardly news, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>>> > > > > centuries. The >>>>>>>> > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >>>>>> > > > > progress has >>>>>>>> > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >>>>> > > > a few >>>>>>>> > > > > >> of that >>>>>>>> > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >>> > actual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> project >>>>>>>> > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >>>>> > > > in the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> argument >>>>>>>> > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >>>> > > such >>>>>>>> > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>> > > > participation, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> but the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >> actually >>>>>>>> > > > > >> engaged in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further >> that >>>>>>>> > > > > >> struggle. Not >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >>>> > > you are >>>>>>>> > > > > >> taking up >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>>>>>>> > > > > >> reflections on >>>>>>>> > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Andy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >>> > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> It would appear ... >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >>> > Paul, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms >> with >>>>>>>> > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>> > > > foundations >>>>>>>> > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >>>>> > > > that a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable >>> > enough >>>>>>>> > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>>>>> > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>> > > > forward in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >>>> > > worked out >>>>>>>> > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >>>> > > address the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>> > > > parameters)? >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > David >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of >>> > Dr. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>> > > > > International >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Andy and david, >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >>>> > > have to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>>>>> > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >>>>> > > > such a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>>>>>>> > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >>>>> > > > upward >>>>>>>> > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of >> poor >>>>>>>> > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>>>>>>> > > > > >> lifestyle? > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in >>> > marxian >>>>>>>> > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>> > > > humanity to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce >>> > it's >>>>>>>> > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >>>>>>>> consistently >>>>>>>> > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >>>> > > fracking, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>> > > > resolve our >>>>>>>> > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >>>> > > spirit of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >> ontology. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >>>> > > this >>>>>>>> > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > President >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >
-------- Original message >> --------
From: >>>>>>>> > > > > >> David H Kirshner >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>> > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >>>> > > Activity" >>>>>>>> > > > > >> > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >>>> > > Oxfam >>>>>>>> > > > > >> International
>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >
Andy, >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material >>>>>>>> well-being as >>>>>>>> > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >>>>> > > > one's own >>>>>>>> > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >>>>> > > > provides >>>>>>>> > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >>>> > > carried >>>>>>>> > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >>> > effective >>>>>>>> > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >>>> > > individual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >>> > leverage >>>>>>>> > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >>>> > > the form >>>>>>>> > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Thanks. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > David >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of >>> > Andy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Blunden >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>> > > > > International >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >>>> > > read and >>>>>>>> > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >>>>>> > > > > narrative. >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >>>> > > doomed >>>>>>>> > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >> linear >>>>>>>> > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >>> > ideological >>>>>>>> > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project >>> > at >>>>>>>> > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>> > > > everyone had >>>>>>>> > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >>>> > > implicit in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >>>>> > > > see how >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >>> > story-lines >>>>>>>> > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ------------ >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >>>> > > context, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of >>>> > > our best >>>>>>>> > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>>>>>>> > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >>>>> > > > project? >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> David >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of >>> > Andy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Blunden >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>> > > > > International >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >>>> > > measures >>>>>>>> > > > > >> over teh >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> past >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>>>>>>> > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >> the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one >>>> > > and the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> same. >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> Andy >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ---------- >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> -- >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >>>>> > > > that can >>>>>>>> > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >>>> > > outside of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >>>>> > > > would >>>>>>>> > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>> > > endeavor. For >>>>>>>> > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >>>>> > > > effort to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >>>>> > > > project. >>>>>>>> > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>>>>>>> > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >> actual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >>>> > > desperate >>>>>>>> > > > > >> times call for. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> David >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> > > > > >> ] On Behalf Of >>> > Andy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Blunden >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> > > > > >> International >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >> in >>>>>>>> > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >> challenges, >>>>> > > > too, >>>>>>>> > > > > >> you know. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social >>>> > > psychology and >>>>>>>> > > > > >> well-being: >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >>>> > > which is >>>>>>>> > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as it >>>>> > > > is for >>>>>>>> > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >>>> > > goes >>>>>>>> > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of >>> > course >>>>>>>> > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based >>>>>>>> investigations >>>>> > > > of the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >>>> > > "have >>>>>>>> > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >>>> > > individual >>>>>>>> > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>> > > contexts of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the >>>> > > reason >>>>>>>> > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >>>>> > > > itself >>>>>>>> > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments >>>>>>>> according to >>> > the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are >>>>>>>> participating, >> and >>>>> > > > that >>>>>>>> > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>> > > > Understanding >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task >> with >>>>>>>> > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>>> > > > political >>>>>>>> > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable >> arrangements. >>>>> > > > That >>>>>>>> > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able >> to >>>>>>>> > > > > >> collaborate with one another. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> > > > > >> --------- >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> - >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in >> my >>>>>>>> > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >> paper >>>>>>>> > > > > >> tentatively titled: >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>>>>>>> > > > > >> Despoiling the >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >>>> > > Culture In >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the Quest >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> for More >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >>>>> > > > sense >>>>>>>> > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to >>> > our >>>>>>>> > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >>>>> > > > wealth >>>>>>>> > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>>>>> > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >> for >>>>>>>> > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >> which >>>>>>>> > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >>>> > > would >>>>>>>> > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they >>> > are >>>>>>>> > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >>> > strategy >>>>>>>> > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over >> the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>>>>>>> > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >>>> > > dramatic >>>>>>>> > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >>>> > > Hence, we >>>>>>>> > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>> > > behavior by >>>>>>>> > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble >>> > that >>>>>>>> > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>> > > > Recession). >>>>>>>> > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take >>> > back >>>>>>>> > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more >>>> > > rational >>>>>>>> > > > > >> policies for the economy. >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >>>> > > beyond the >>>>>>>> > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >> appeals, >>> > I >>>>>>>> > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one >>> > that >>>>>>>> > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >> co-authors. >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >> >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> >> > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Wed Jan 22 15:29:07 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:29:07 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Tom, I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint louverture During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation colony with wage-labor. ?To him that was a change from slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system. ?In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a different name. Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social structure. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Hello again Paul Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in a concept whose behavioural demands are not? actually met / practised is, effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only come about either by the efforts of those within any given society attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination Enough already - I've gone on long enough Tom On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > structural/humanist.? That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against.? They > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Tom Richardson > Date:01/22/2014? 9:52 AM? (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Dear Paul > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > Tom Richardson > Middlesbrough UK > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Within the logic of > > "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > > change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > movement > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >
> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are > two > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > Science is always for a purpose. > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > >? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > >? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? > > >? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > social theory. > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > party ideology. > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > "Who > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not > a > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > > > > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > no, > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective > > of > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > personality > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I > am > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > and > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > > the > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > the > > > > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > going > > > > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > sentiments" > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > first > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > to > > > > grasp > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > > > > about > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > this > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > maintained > > > > then > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > > > > Street > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study > of > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > > > > such as > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > > we > > > > > just > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. > if > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > > > > > and the > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > > Absurd > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > > > > speak, > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > > > > always > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > > > only > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > > > > > seems to > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > > > > living in a > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > required to > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > > rather it > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > desired.? This, > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > exercise. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > through > > > > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > than > > a > > > > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > >>???? Andy > > > > > >> > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???? ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, > I > > > > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what > I > > > > have > > > > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >>???????? President > > > > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > > > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > > > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > International > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > >>???????? theory is > > > > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > > xmca > > > > > >>???????? list this is > > > > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > >>???????? that such > > > > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, > in > > > > > >>???????? raising the > > > > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > > > > > >>???????? formation of > > > > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > invitation by > > > > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > propsed the > > > > > >>???????? writing > > > > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > > > "the > > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > prosperity > > > > > >>???????? and the > > > > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > gradual > > > > > >>???????? shift in > > > > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > > > > by the > > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > which the > > > > > >>???????? gains in > > > > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > > actual > > > > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > > progress has > > > > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > > > > a few > > > > > >>???????? of that > > > > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > actual > > > > > >>???????? project > > > > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > > > > in the > > > > > >>???????? argument > > > > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > > > such > > > > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > participation, > > > > > >>???????? but the > > > > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > actually > > > > > >>???????? engaged in > > > > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further > that > > > > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > > > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > > you are > > > > > >>???????? taking up > > > > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > > > > > >>???????? reflections on > > > > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? Andy > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > > > > >>???????? >>??? > > > > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > > Paul, > > > > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > with > > > > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > > > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > foundations > > > > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > > > > that a > > > > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > enough > > > > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > forward in > > > > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > worked out > > > > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > address the > > > > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > parameters)? > > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > > Dr. > > > > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > have to > > > > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > > > > such a > > > > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > > > > upward > > > > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > poor > > > > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in > > marxian > > > > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > humanity to > > > > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > > it's > > > > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > > > > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > fracking, > > > > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > resolve our > > > > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > spirit of > > > > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > ontology. > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > > > this > > > > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > >>???????? > President > > > > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message > --------
From: > > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > > > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > Activity" > > > > > >>???????? xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > > Oxfam > > > > > >>???????? International
> > > > > >>???????? >
Andy, > > > > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > > > > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > > > > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > one's own > > > > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > > provides > > > > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > > carried > > > > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > effective > > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > individual > > > > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > leverage > > > > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > > > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > the form > > > > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > read and > > > > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > > narrative. > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > > doomed > > > > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > linear > > > > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > ideological > > > > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > > at > > > > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > everyone had > > > > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > implicit in > > > > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > > see how > > > > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > story-lines > > > > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > context, > > > > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > > > > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > > > > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > our best > > > > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > > > > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > > project? > > > > > >>???????? >> David > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > measures > > > > > >>???????? over teh > > > > > >>???????? >> past > > > > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > the > > > > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one > > > and the > > > > > >>???????? same. > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> Andy > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > >>???????? >> -- > > > > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > > > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > > that can > > > > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > outside of > > > > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > > > > would > > > > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > endeavor. For > > > > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > effort to > > > > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > > project. > > > > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > actual > > > > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > desperate > > > > > >>???????? times call for. > > > > > >>???????? >>> David > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf Of > > Andy > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > >>???????? International > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > in > > > > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > challenges, > > > > too, > > > > > >>???????? you know. > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social > > > psychology and > > > > > >>???????? well-being: > > > > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > which is > > > > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > > > > is for > > > > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > > > goes > > > > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > course > > > > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > > > > of the > > > > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > > "have > > > > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > individual > > > > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > contexts of > > > > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > > reason > > > > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > > > > itself > > > > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according to > > the > > > > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, > and > > > > that > > > > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > Understanding > > > > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task > with > > > > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > political > > > > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable > arrangements. > > > > That > > > > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > to > > > > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > > > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > >>???????? >>> - > > > > > >>???????? >>> -- > > > > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in > my > > > > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > paper > > > > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > > > > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > > > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > Culture In > > > > > >>???????? the Quest > > > > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > > > > sense > > > > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > > our > > > > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > > > > wealth > > > > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > for > > > > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > which > > > > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > > > would > > > > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > > are > > > > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > strategy > > > > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > > > > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over > the > > > > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > > > > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > dramatic > > > > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > Hence, we > > > > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > behavior by > > > > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > > that > > > > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > Recession). > > > > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > > back > > > > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more > > > rational > > > > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > beyond the > > > > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > appeals, > > I > > > > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > > that > > > > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > co-authors. > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > >>???????? >>>> David > > > > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > > > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>> > >> > > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 22 16:16:19 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:16:19 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52E05F53.3080800@mira.net> Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, that is just as things should be. There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any effort to make the world a better place. Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a waste of time. Yes? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint louverture > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a different name. > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social structure. > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>
Hello again Paul > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > >> Tom, >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Tom Richardson >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Dear Paul >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>> wrote: >>> >>> Within the logic of >>> "Men make their >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to >>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >>> >> movement >> >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> President >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> www.mocombeian.com >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>> >> International >> >>>
>>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are >>> >> two >> >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >>> Science is always for a purpose. >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>> >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? >>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>> President >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >>>> social theory. >>>> >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >>>> party ideology. >>>> >>>> Rauno Huttunen >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >>>> >> "Who >> >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not >>>> >> a >> >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>> >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the >>>>> capitalists.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> President >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>> >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >>>>> >> no, >> >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective >>>>> >>> of >>> >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >>>>> >>> personality >>> >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I >>>>> >> am >> >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations >>>>> >> and >> >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>> social process. >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> >>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Bill, >>>>>> >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >>>>>> >> the >> >>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >>>>>> >> going >> >>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >>>>>> >>> sentiments" >>> >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >>>>>> >> first >> >>>>>> century socialists. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>> President >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>> >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >>>>>> >> characteristics: >> >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>>>>> >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >>>>>> >> to >> >>>>> grasp >>>>> >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >>>>>> >>>>> about >>>>> >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>>>>> >>>>>> >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >> >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >>>>>> >> this >> >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>>>>> >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >>>>>> >> maintained >> >>>>> then >>>>> >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >>>>>> >>>>> Street >>>>> >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study >>>>>> >> of >> >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >>>>>> >>>>> such as >>>>> >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >>>>>> >>> we >>> >>>>>> just >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >>>>>> >> if >> >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >>>>>> and the >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >>>>>> >>>> Absurd >>>> >>>>>> simplification on my part. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >>>>>>> >>>>> speak, >>>>> >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >>>>>>> >>>>> always >>>>> >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >>>>>>> >>>> only >>>> >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >>>>>>> >>>>>> meaningful >>>>>> >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >>>>>>> >>>>>> "Do unto >>>>>> >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >>>>>>> >>>>>> goes, but >>>>>> >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >>>>>>>> >>>>>> seems to >>>>>> >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >>>>>>>> >>>>>> living in a >>>>>> >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >>>>>>>> >>>>>> required to >>>>>> >>>>>>>> sustain it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >>>>>>>> >>>>> rather it >>>>> >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>>>>> >>>>>> desired. This, >>>>>> >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >>>>>>>> >> exercise. >> >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> Huw >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >>>>>>>> >> through >> >>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important >>>>>>>> >> than >> >>> a >>> >>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, >>>>>>>> >> I >> >>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what >>>>>>>> >> I >> >>>>> have >>>>> >>>>>>>> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> >>>>> International >>>>> >>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>>>>> >>>>> fundamentals of >>>>> >>>>>>>> theory is >>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >>>>>>>> >>> xmca >>> >>>>>>>> list this is >>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >>>>>>>> >>>> "collaboration" is >>>> >>>>>>>> that such >>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, >>>>>>>> >> in >> >>>>>>>> raising the >>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >>>>>>>> formation of >>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >>>>>>>> >>>>>> invitation by >>>>>> >>>>>>>> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>>>>> >>>>> propsed the >>>>> >>>>>>>> writing >>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >>>>>>>> >>>> "the >>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>>>>>>> >>> prosperity >>> >>>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >>>>>>>> >> gradual >> >>>>>>>> shift in >>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >>>>>>>> >>>>> by the >>>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >>>>>>>> >>>>> which the >>>>> >>>>>>>> gains in >>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >>>>>>>> >>>> actual >>>> >>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >>>>>>>> >>>>>> hardly news, >>>>>> >>>>>>>> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>>>>> >>>>>> centuries. The >>>>>> >>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >>>>>>>> >>>>>> progress has >>>>>> >>>>>>>> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >>>>>>>> >>>>> a few >>>>> >>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >>>>>>>> >>> actual >>> >>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >>>>>>>> >>>>> in the >>>>> >>>>>>>> argument >>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >>>>>>>> >>>> such >>>> >>>>>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>>>>> >>>>> participation, >>>>> >>>>>>>> but the >>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >>>>>>>> >> actually >> >>>>>>>> engaged in >>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to further >>>>>>>> >> that >> >>>>>>>> struggle. Not >>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >>>>>>>> >>>> you are >>>> >>>>>>>> taking up >>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>>>>>>> reflections on >>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>> >> It would appear ... >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >>>>>>>> >>> Paul, >>> >>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms >>>>>>>> >> with >> >>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. >>>>>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>>>>> >>>>> foundations >>>>> >>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >>>>>>>> >>>>> that a >>>>> >>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable >>>>>>>> >>> enough >>> >>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>>>>> >>>>> forward in >>>>> >>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >>>>>>>> >>>> worked out >>>> >>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >>>>>>>> >>>> address the >>>> >>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>>>>> >>>>> parameters)? >>>>> >>>>>>>> > David >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>> >>> Dr. >>> >>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >>>>>>>> >> ablunden@mira.net >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Andy and david, >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >>>>>>>> >>>> have to >>>> >>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >>>>>>>> >>>>> such a >>>>> >>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >>>>>>>> >>>>> upward >>>>> >>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of >>>>>>>> >> poor >> >>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>>>>>>> lifestyle? > >>>>>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in >>>>>>>> >>> marxian >>> >>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>>>>> >>>>> humanity to >>>>> >>>>>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce >>>>>>>> >>> it's >>> >>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >>>>>>>> >>>> fracking, >>>> >>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>>>>> >>>>> resolve our >>>>> >>>>>>>> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >>>>>>>> >>>> spirit of >>>> >>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >>>>>>>> >> ontology. >> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >>>>>>>> >>>> this >>>> >>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>> > President >>>>>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>> > www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >
-------- Original message >>>>>>>> >> --------
From: >> >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >>>>>>>> >>>> Activity" >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >>>>>>>> >>>> Oxfam >>>> >>>>>>>> International
>>>>>>>> >
Andy, >>>>>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >>>>>>>> >>>>> one's own >>>>> >>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >>>>>>>> >>>>> provides >>>>> >>>>>>>> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >>>>>>>> >>>> carried >>>> >>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >>>>>>>> >>> effective >>> >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >>>>>>>> >>>> individual >>>> >>>>>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >>>>>>>> >>> leverage >>> >>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. >>>>>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >>>>>>>> >>>> the form >>>> >>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>>>>> > Thanks. >>>>>>>> > David >>>>>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >>>>>>>> >>>> read and >>>> >>>>>>>> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >>>>>>>> >>>>>> narrative. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >>>>>>>> >>>> doomed >>>> >>>>>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >>>>>>>> >> linear >> >>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >>>>>>>> >>> ideological >>> >>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project >>>>>>>> >>> at >>> >>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>>>>> >>>>> everyone had >>>>> >>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >>>>>>>> >>>> implicit in >>>> >>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >>>>>>>> >>>>> see how >>>>> >>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >>>>>>>> >>> story-lines >>> >>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>> > *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >>>>>>>> >>>> context, >>>> >>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all of >>>>>>>> >>>> our best >>>> >>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >>>>>>>> >>>>> project? >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> David >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >>>>>>>> >>>> measures >>>> >>>>>>>> over teh >>>>>>>> >> past >>>>>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >>>>>>>> >> the >> >>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are one >>>>>>>> >>>> and the >>>> >>>>>>>> same. >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> Andy >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>>>> ---------- >>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, >>>>>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >>>>>>>> >>>>> that can >>>>> >>>>>>>> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >>>>>>>> >>>> outside of >>>> >>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >>>>>>>> >>>>> would >>>>> >>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>>>>>> >>>> endeavor. For >>>> >>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >>>>>>>> >>>>> effort to >>>>> >>>>>>>> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >>>>>>>> >>>>> project. >>>>> >>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >>>>>>>> >> actual >> >>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. >>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >>>>>>>> >>>> desperate >>>> >>>>>>>> times call for. >>>>>>>> >>> David >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >>>>>>>> >> in >> >>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >>>>>>>> >> challenges, >> >>>>> too, >>>>> >>>>>>>> you know. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social >>>>>>>> >>>> psychology and >>>> >>>>>>>> well-being: >>>>>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >>>>>>>> >>>> which is >>>> >>>>>>>> as valid for making observations about psychology as it >>>>>>>> >>>>> is for >>>>> >>>>>>>> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >>>>>>>> >>>> goes >>>> >>>>>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of >>>>>>>> >>> course >>> >>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >>>>>>>> >>>>> of the >>>>> >>>>>>>> likely results of their behaviour. >>>>>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >>>>>>>> >>>> "have >>>> >>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >>>>>>>> >>>> individual >>>> >>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>>>>>> >>>> contexts of >>>> >>>>>>>> the projects to which they are committed. That is the >>>>>>>> >>>> reason >>>> >>>>>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >>>>>>>> >>>>> itself >>>>> >>>>>>>> of course relative). People make judgments according to >>>>>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they are participating, >>>>>>>> >> and >> >>>>> that >>>>> >>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>>>>> >>>>> Understanding >>>>> >>>>>>>> the psychology of political economy is as of one task >>>>>>>> >> with >> >>>>>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>>>>>> >>>>> political >>>>> >>>>>>>> economic arrangements and build sustainable >>>>>>>> >> arrangements. >> >>>>> That >>>>> >>>>>>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able >>>>>>>> >> to >> >>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> That's what I think. >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>> >>> - >>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in >>>>>>>> >> my >> >>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >>>>>>>> >> paper >> >>>>>>>> tentatively titled: >>>>>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>>>>>>> Despoiling the >>>>>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >>>>>>>> >>>> Culture In >>>> >>>>>>>> the Quest >>>>>>>> >>>> for More >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >>>>>>>> >>>>> sense >>>>> >>>>>>>> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to >>>>>>>> >>> our >>> >>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >>>>>>>> >>>>> wealth >>>>> >>>>>>>> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >>>>>>>> >> for >> >>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >>>>>>>> >> which >> >>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >>>>>>>> >>>> would >>>> >>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they >>>>>>>> >>> are >>> >>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >>>>>>>> >>> strategy >>> >>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy over >>>>>>>> >> the >> >>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >>>>>>>> >>>> dramatic >>>> >>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >>>>>>>> >>>> Hence, we >>>> >>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>>>>> >>>> behavior by >>>> >>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble >>>>>>>> >>> that >>> >>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>>>>> >>>>> Recession). >>>>> >>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take >>>>>>>> >>> back >>> >>>>>>>> control of our political systems so we can set more >>>>>>>> >>>> rational >>>> >>>>>>>> policies for the economy. >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >>>>>>>> >>>> beyond the >>>> >>>>>>>> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >>>>>>>> >> appeals, >> >>> I >>> >>>>>>>> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one >>>>>>>> >>> that >>> >>>>>>>> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >>>>>>>> >> co-authors. >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> David >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> >> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > From ssamaras@uvic.ca Wed Jan 22 16:25:12 2014 From: ssamaras@uvic.ca (Stephanie Ann Samaras) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 16:25:12 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> Message-ID: <0e31a91bae457fdeab74547089086cd4.squirrel@wm3.uvic.ca> Hello all, I am feeling a bit overwhelmed with all of the responses and topics with this mailing list, however, I find the topics fascinating. Regards, Stephanie Ann Samaras B.Ed., M.A. UVIC https://dspace.library.uvic.ca:8443/handle/1828/4908 School District No. 46 (Sunshine Coast)/ S.P.I.D.E.R. http://fc.sd46.bc.ca/spider/ ssamaras@sd46.bc.ca cell: (778) 874 8678 skype: stephanie.samaras.1974 http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/stephanie-ann-samaras/7a/506/a92 stephaniesamarasonline.com/moodle http://prezi.com/user/stephaniesamarasonline/ http://www.scoop.it/u/stephanie-ann-samaras http://moodlemeets.learnnowbc.ca/login/index.php The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to which it was addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) are confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message. > Thanks for your (accepting) reply Paul > My only response - since I am not at all familiar with the conceptual > fields you refer to, (nor even particularly receptive to them,mea culpa), > is to adduce the idea of the difference between a 'formal' status of a > right and its function reality, i.e. my formal right to a fair trial and > my > ability to pull together all the resources actually needed to achieve one. > Formally while such leaders as King remained part of and submerged within > the constraints of the reality which they challenged; functionally their > demands could be met only by an alteration in that reality. > I hope that this category of answer has some value and coherence within > your terms of reference. > Yours > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > wrote: > >> Tom, >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing >> its >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural >> concepts... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Tom Richardson >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Dear Paul >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >wrote: >> >> > Within the logic of >> > "Men make their >> > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come >> to >> > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, >> andy, >> > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >> movement >> > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural >> one? >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >> > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >
>> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) >> are >> two >> > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >> > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >> > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is >> one >> > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify >> as >> > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or >> collectively) >> > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >> > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >> > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >> > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >> > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >> > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >> > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even >> explain >> > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >> > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general >> show >> > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >> > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce >> itself >> > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >> > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes >> to >> > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >> > Science is always for a purpose. >> > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism >> is >> > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >> > >> > Andy >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >> > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >> > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >> > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as >> the >> > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy >> and >> > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >> > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >> > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >> > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, >> but >> > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >> > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what >> capitalists >> > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >> > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what >> sense? >> > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > President >> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> > > >> > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > From: Rauno Huttunen >> > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > Hello, >> > > >> > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >> > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting >> > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative >> causality?], >> > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >> > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >> > > social theory. >> > > >> > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >> > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, >> Debray...) >> > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >> > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >> > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The >> Workers' >> > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that >> Althusserians >> > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >> > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >> > > they represents the objective interests of working class but >> actually >> > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >> > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >> > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >> > > party ideology. >> > > >> > > Rauno Huttunen >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I >> am >> > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is >> itself >> > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >> "Who >> > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >> > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product >> of >> > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a >> role >> > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is >> not >> a >> > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The >> majority" >> > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. >> So >> > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according >> to >> > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> > > >> > > Andy >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >> > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >> > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >> > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think >> they >> > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than >> the >> > > > capitalists.... >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > President >> > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > > From: Andy Blunden >> > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > > >> > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, >> but >> no, >> > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >> irrespective >> > of >> > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which >> protect >> > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >> > personality >> > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What >> I >> am >> > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social >> relations >> and >> > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out >> of >> > the >> > > > social process. >> > > > >> > > > Andy >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > > Bill, >> > > > > >> > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, >> I.e., >> the >> > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in >> "the >> > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >> going >> > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >> > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >> > sentiments" >> > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >> Bernstein >> > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >> first >> > > > > century socialists. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > President >> > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > > > From: Bill Kerr >> > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > > > >> > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic >> characteristics: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living >> > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> > > > > >> > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is >> hard >> to >> > > > grasp >> > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just >> talk >> > > > about >> > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >> > > > > >> > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >> this >> > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >> > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> > > > > >> > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >> maintained >> > > > then >> > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism >> can >> > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy >> Wall >> > > > Street >> > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious >> study >> of >> > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic >> theories >> > > > such as >> > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise >> the >> > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is >> that >> > we >> > > > > just >> > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. >> eg. >> if >> > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more >> money >> > > > > and the >> > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years >> (Great >> > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival >> (?) >> > > Absurd >> > > > > simplification on my part. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so >> to >> > > > speak, >> > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim >> is >> > > > always >> > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I >> believe >> > > only >> > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >> > > > > meaningful >> > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe >> that >> > > > > "Do unto >> > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as >> it >> > > > > goes, but >> > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Andy >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, >> it >> > > > > seems to >> > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >> > > > > living in a >> > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >> > > > > required to >> > > > > >> sustain it. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >> > > > rather it >> > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >> > > > > desired. This, >> > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >> exercise. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Best, >> > > > > >> Huw >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >> through >> > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important >> than >> > a >> > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> > > > > >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this >> one...albeit, >> I >> > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but >> what >> I >> > > > have >> > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed >> me. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> President >> > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- >> > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden >> > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > International >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >> > > > fundamentals of >> > > > > >> theory is >> > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on >> the >> > xmca >> > > > > >> list this is >> > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >> > > "collaboration" is >> > > > > >> that such >> > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. >> Nonetheless, >> in >> > > > > >> raising the >> > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration >> on >> > > > > >> formation of >> > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >> > > > > invitation by >> > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >> > > > propsed the >> > > > > >> writing >> > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand >> that >> > > "the >> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >> > prosperity >> > > > > >> and the >> > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >> gradual >> > > > > >> shift in >> > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 >> years >> > > > by the >> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >> > > > which the >> > > > > >> gains in >> > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense >> of >> > > actual >> > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >> > > > > hardly news, >> > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >> > > > > centuries. The >> > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >> > > > > progress has >> > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all >> but >> > > > a few >> > > > > >> of that >> > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >> > actual >> > > > > >> project >> > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and >> participate >> > > > in the >> > > > > >> argument >> > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years >> of >> > > such >> > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >> > > > participation, >> > > > > >> but the >> > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >> actually >> > > > > >> engaged in >> > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further >> that >> > > > > >> struggle. Not >> > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >> > > you are >> > > > > >> taking up >> > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer >> my >> > > > > >> reflections on >> > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >> It would appear ... >> > > > > >> >> > >> > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >> > Paul, >> > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms >> with >> > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. >> > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> > > > foundations >> > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, >> or >> > > > that a >> > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable >> > enough >> > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >> > > > forward in >> > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >> > > worked out >> > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >> > > address the >> > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> > > > parameters)? >> > > > > >> > David >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On Behalf >> Of >> > Dr. >> > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> ablunden@mira.net >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Andy and david, >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >> > > have to >> > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... >> Can >> > > > such a >> > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including >> us >> > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual >> wealth, >> > > > upward >> > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of >> poor >> > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our >> bourgeois >> > > > > >> lifestyle? > >> > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in >> > marxian >> > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >> > > > humanity to >> > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and >> reproduce >> > it's >> > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >> consistently >> > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> > > fracking, >> > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> > > > resolve our >> > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >> > > spirit of >> > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >> ontology. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that >> in >> > > this >> > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> > President >> > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
-------- Original message >> --------
From: >> > > > > >> David H Kirshner > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> > > Activity" >> > > > > >> > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few >> | >> > > Oxfam >> > > > > >> International
>> > > > > >> >
Andy, >> > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and >> a-historical >> > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being >> as >> > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >> > > > one's own >> > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >> > > > provides >> > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >> > > carried >> > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >> > effective >> > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >> > > individual >> > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >> > leverage >> > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. >> > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >> > > the form >> > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > > > > >> > Thanks. >> > > > > >> > David >> > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >> > > read and >> > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >> > > > > narrative. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a >> project >> > > doomed >> > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >> linear >> > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >> > ideological >> > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a >> project >> > at >> > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> > > > everyone had >> > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >> > > implicit in >> > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy >> to >> > > > see how >> > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >> > story-lines >> > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> > > context, >> > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are >> the >> > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors >> of >> > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of >> > > our best >> > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can >> be >> > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a >> theoretical >> > > > project? >> > > > > >> >> David >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >> > > measures >> > > > > >> over teh >> > > > > >> >> past >> > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the >> broader >> > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >> the >> > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one >> > > and the >> > > > > >> same. >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ---------- >> > > > > >> >> -- >> > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >> > > > that can >> > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >> > > outside of >> > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, >> this >> > > > would >> > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps >> a >> > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >> > > endeavor. For >> > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >> > > > effort to >> > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >> > > > project. >> > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political >> activity >> > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >> actual >> > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. >> > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >> > > desperate >> > > > > >> times call for. >> > > > > >> >>> David >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > >> International >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been >> collaborating >> in >> > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >> challenges, >> > > > too, >> > > > > >> you know. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social >> > > psychology and >> > > > > >> well-being: >> > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >> > > which is >> > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as >> it >> > > > is for >> > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for >> what >> > > goes >> > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of >> > course >> > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based >> investigations >> > > > of the >> > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. >> > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" >> or >> > > "have >> > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >> > > individual >> > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >> > > contexts of >> > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the >> > > reason >> > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which >> is >> > > > itself >> > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according >> to >> > the >> > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, >> and >> > > > that >> > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >> > > > Understanding >> > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task >> with >> > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >> > > > political >> > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable >> arrangements. >> > > > That >> > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and >> able >> to >> > > > > >> collaborate with one another. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. >> > > > > >> >>> Andy >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> --------- >> > > > > >> >>> - >> > > > > >> >>> -- >> > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out >> in >> my >> > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >> paper >> > > > > >> tentatively titled: >> > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy >> are >> > > > > >> Despoiling the >> > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >> > > Culture In >> > > > > >> the Quest >> > > > > >> >>>> for More >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of >> our >> > > > sense >> > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative >> to >> > our >> > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our >> own >> > > > wealth >> > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >> for >> > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >> which >> > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is >> what >> > > would >> > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), >> they >> > are >> > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >> > strategy >> > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that >> the >> > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy >> over >> the >> > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind >> of >> > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >> > > dramatic >> > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >> > > Hence, we >> > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >> > > behavior by >> > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing >> bubble >> > that >> > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >> > > > Recession). >> > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to >> take >> > back >> > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more >> > > rational >> > > > > >> policies for the economy. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >> > > beyond the >> > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >> appeals, >> > I >> > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even >> one >> > that >> > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >> co-authors. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> David >> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > From peterfh46@gmail.com Wed Jan 22 17:05:10 2014 From: peterfh46@gmail.com (Peter Hourdequin) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 10:05:10 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50E0264F-03E2-4A4F-8F81-2CE2FBC7EA28@gmail.com> Interesting post, Richard, thanks very much. Reading it, I couldn't help thinking of Wendell Berry's great essay "Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer." There, he lays out his own "standards for technological innovation" which he lists as: 1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces. 2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces. 3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces. 4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces. 5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body. 6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools. 7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible. 8. It should come from a small, privately owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair. 9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships. The Amish are a model for Berry I believe, and though his principles are admirable, it is difficult to imagine how one could adopt many of them amidst the forces shaping our global market economy. It does seem reasonable to believe, however, that things such as agricultural and trade policy made at the federal level have a ripple effect that contributes to making such a lifestyle nearly impossible. One's ability to use any tool is a function of its availability, and this in turn is a function of what local economies produce and how they function in relation to other communities. The prospect of distributed electricity production in the form of rooftop solar and other technologies, is one promising development that would seem to allow communities to move towards sustainability, but even this depends on a global supply chain engineered to drive productive/consumptive economies of their own in distant locales. ---------------------------------------- Peter Hourdequin Faculty of Foreign Studies Tokoha University 1-22-1 Sena, Aoi Ward Shizuoka City, Shizuoka JAPAN 420-0911 Tel: +81 54 261-3608 Fax: +81 54 263-2750 Post-Graduate Researcher Educational Research Lancaster University, U.K. ---------------------------------------- On Jan 23, 2014, at 6:06 AM, Richard Beach wrote: > Related to the issue of analysis of institutional systems constituting the > perpetuation of capitalism, the following ending of an article in The New > Yorker is an interesting discussion of how tools mediate societal > transformation?that tool use with the potential for mediating societal > change can be co-opted by capitalism/technology to mitigate change. > > Evgeny Morozo, Making It, The New Yorker, January 13, 2014 > http://www.newyorker.com/search?qt=dismax&sort=score+desc&query=Maker&submit > = > > One of the leaders of the Homebrew Computer Club was Lee Felsenstein. A > veteran of the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley, he wanted to build > communication infrastructure that would allow citizens to swap information > in a decentralized manner, bypassing the mistrusted traditional media. In > the early nineteen-seventies, he helped launch Community Memory?a handful of > computer terminals installed in public spaces in Berkeley and San Francisco > which allowed local residents to communicate anonymously. It was the first > true ?social media.? > > > Felsenstein got his inspiration from reading Ivan Illich?s ?Tools for > Conviviality,? which called for devices and machines that would be easy to > understand, learn, and repair, thus making experts and institutions > unnecessary. ?Convivial tools rule out certain levels of power, compulsion, > and programming, which are precisely those features that now tend to make > all governments look more or less alike,? Illich wrote. He had little faith > in traditional politics. Whereas Stewart Brand wanted citizens to replace > politics with savvy shopping, Illich wanted to ?retool? society so that > traditional politics, with its penchant for endless talk, becomes > unnecessary. > > > Felsenstein took Illich?s advice to heart, not least because it resembled > his own experience with ham radios, which were easy to understand and fiddle > with. If the computer were to assist ordinary folks in their political > struggles, the computer needed a ham-radio-like community of hobbyists. Such > a club would help counter the power of I.B.M., then the dominant > manufacturer of large and expensive computers, and make computers smaller, > cheaper, and more useful in political struggles. > > > Then Steve Jobs showed up. Felsenstein?s political project, of building > computers that would undermine institutions and allow citizens to share > information and organize, was recast as an aesthetic project of > self-reliance and personal empowerment. For Jobs, who saw computers as ?a > bicycle for our minds,? it was of only secondary importance whether one > could peek inside or program them. > > > Jobs had his share of sins, but the na?vet? of Illich and his followers > shouldn?t be underestimated. Seeking salvation through tools alone is no > more viable as a political strategy than addressing the ills of capitalism > by cultivating a public appreciation of arts and crafts. Society is always > in flux, and the designer can?t predict how various political, social, and > economic systems will come to blunt, augment, or redirect the power of the > tool that is being designed. Instead of deinstitutionalizing society, the > radicals would have done better to advocate reinstitutionalizing it: pushing > for political and legal reforms to secure the transparency and > decentralization of power they associated with their favorite technology. > > > One thinker who saw through the na?vet? of Illich, the Homebrewers, and the > Whole Earthers was the libertarian socialist Murray Bookchin. Back in the > late sixties, he published a fiery essay called ?Towards a Liberatory > Technology,? arguing that technology is not an enemy of craftsmanship and > personal freedom. Unlike Brand, though, Bookchin never thought that such > liberation could occur just by getting more technology into everyone?s > hands; the nature of the political community mattered. In his book ?The > Ecology of Freedom? (1982), he couldn?t hide his frustration with the > ?access-to-tools? mentality. Bookchin?s critique of the counterculture?s > turn to tools parallels Dennett?s critique of the aesthetes? turn to > education eighty years earlier. It didn?t make sense to speak of ?convivial > tools,? he argued, without taking a close look at the political and social > structures in which they were embedded. > > > A reluctance to talk about institutions and political change doomed the Arts > and Crafts movement, channelling the spirit of labor reform into consumerism > and D.I.Y. tinkering. The same thing is happening to the movement?s > successors. Our tech imagination, to judge from catalogues like ?Cool > Tools,? is at its zenith. (Never before have so many had access to > thermostatically warmed toilet seats.) But our institutional imagination has > stalled, and with it the democratizing potential of radical technologies. We > carry personal computers in our pockets?nothing could be more decentralized > than this!?but have surrendered control of our data, which is stored on > centralized servers, far away from our pockets. The hackers won their fight > against I.B.M.?only to lose it to Facebook and Google. And the spooks at the > National Security Agency must be surprised to learn that gadgets were > supposed to usher in the ?de-institutionalization of society.? > > > The lure of the technological sublime has ruined more than one social > movement, and, in this respect, even Mary Dennett fared no better than > Felsenstein. For all her sensitivity to questions of inequality, she also > believed that, once ?cheap electric power? is ?at every village door,? the > ?emancipation of the craftsman and the unchaining of art? would naturally > follow. What electric company would disagree? > > > Richard Beach > Professor Emeritus of Literacy Education > University of Minnesota > rbeach@umn.edu > Past-President, Literacy Research Association > Digital writing > Use of apps for literacy learning > Teaching literature > ELA Common Core > Teaching media literacy > > > > > On 1/22/14, 4:36 PM, "Tom Richardson" > wrote: > >> Hello again Paul >> Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered >> your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that >> the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in >> a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, >> effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too >> sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - >> I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only >> come about either by the efforts of those within any given society >> attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their >> society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting >> that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that >> that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by >> changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest >> groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not >> themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the >> necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to >> where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves >> able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That >> state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to >> me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination >> Enough already - I've gone on long enough >> Tom >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>> Tom, >>> >>> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >>> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >>> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >>> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >>> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They >>> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its >>> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... >>> >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> President >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> www.mocombeian.com >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Tom Richardson >>> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> Dear Paul >>> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >>> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >>> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >>> Tom Richardson >>> Middlesbrough UK >>> >>> >>> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>> wrote: >>> >>>>> Within the logic of >>>>> "Men make their >>>>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>>>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>>>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to >>>>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, >>>>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >>> movement >>>>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> President >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >>>>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>> International >>>>>
>>>>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are >>> two >>>>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >>>>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >>>>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one >>>>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as >>>>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) >>>>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >>>>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >>>>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>>>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>>>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >>>>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >>>>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >>>>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >>>>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain >>>>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >>>>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show >>>>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >>>>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself >>>>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >>>>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to >>>>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >>>>> Science is always for a purpose. >>>>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is >>>>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >>>>>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >>>>>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >>>>>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the >>>>>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and >>>>>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >>>>>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >>>>>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >>>>>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but >>>>>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >>>>>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >>>>>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >>>>>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? >>>>>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>> President >>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >>>>>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >>>>>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >>>>>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], >>>>>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >>>>>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >>>>>>> social theory. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >>>>>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >>>>>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >>>>>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >>>>>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' >>>>>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians >>>>>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >>>>>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >>>>>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >>>>>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >>>>>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >>>>>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >>>>>>> party ideology. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rauno Huttunen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>>>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >>>>>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >>>>>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >>> "Who >>>>>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >>>>>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >>>>>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a > role >>>>>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not >>> a >>>>>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >>>>>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >>>>>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >>>>>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >>>>>>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >>>>>>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >>>>>>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >>>>>>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >>>>>>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >>>>>>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >>>>>>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than > the >>>>>>>>> capitalists.... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >>> no, >>>>>>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >>>>>> irrespective >>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which >>>>> > protect >>>>>>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >>>>> personality >>>>>>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What > I >>> am >>>>>>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations >>> and >>>>>>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >>>>>>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out > of >>>>> the >>>>>>>>> social process. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Bill, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, > I.e., >>> the >>>>>>>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in > "the >>>>>>>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >>> going >>>>>>>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >>>>>>>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >>>>> sentiments" >>>>>>>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >>>>>> > Bernstein >>>>>>>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >>> first >>>>>>>>>>> century socialists. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >>>>>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >>> characteristics: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>>>>>>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is > hard >>> to >>>>>>>>> grasp >>>>>>>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just > talk >>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB100014240527023041494045793245301125908 >>> 64 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >>> this >>>>>>>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >>> maintained >>>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism > can >>>>>>>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy > Wall >>>>>>>>> Street >>>>>>>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious > study >>> of >>>>>>>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic > theories >>>>>>>>> such as >>>>>>>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise > the >>>>>>>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is > that >>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. > eg. >>> if >>>>>>>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more > money >>>>>>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years > (Great >>>>>>>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival > (?) >>>>>>> Absurd >>>>>>>>>>> simplification on my part. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so > to >>>>>>>>> speak, >>>>>>>>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the > maxim is >>>>>>>>> always >>>>>>>>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I > believe >>>>>>> only >>>>>>>>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you > is >>>>>>>>>>> meaningful >>>>>>>>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe > that >>>>>>>>>>> "Do unto >>>>>>>>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as > it >>>>>>>>>>> goes, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social >>>>>>>>> psychology, it >>>>>>>>>>> seems to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not > sure >>>>>>>>>>> living in a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the > immaturity >>>>>>>>>>> required to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sustain it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be > combatted, >>>>>>>>> rather it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>>>>>>>> desired. This, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >>> exercise. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Huw >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >>> through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more > important >>> than >>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this >>>>>>>> > one...albeit, >>> I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but > what >>> I >>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seen happen to black america has really >>>>>>>>> disappointed me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>>>>>> fundamentals of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theory is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on > the >>>>> xmca >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list this is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >>>>>>> "collaboration" is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that such >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. >>>>>>>> > Nonetheless, >>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raising the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting >>>>>>>>> collaboration on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formation of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted > the >>>>>>>>>>> invitation by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>>>>>> propsed the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> writing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand > that >>>>>>> "the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>>>> prosperity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >>> gradual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shift in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 > years >>>>>>>>> by the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point > in >>>>>>>>> which the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense > of >>>>>>> actual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This > is >>>>>>>>>>> hardly news, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>>>>>>>> centuries. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; > social >>>>>>>>>>> progress has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been only in the teeth of opposition from > all but >>>>>>>>> a few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter > some >>>>> actual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > participate >>>>>>>>> in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 > years of >>>>>>> such >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>>>>>> participation, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >>> actually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engaged in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to > further >>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> struggle. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased > that >>>>>>> you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is > offer my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reflections on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >>>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would appear ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy > and >>>>> Paul, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to > terms >>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>>>>>> foundations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to > offer, or >>>>>>>>> that a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a > stable >>>>> enough >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>>>>>> forward in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >>>>>>> worked out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >>>>>>> address the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's option > of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>>>>>> parameters)? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf > Of >>>>> Dr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >>> ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam >>>>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy and david, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would appear that any counter - narrative > would >>>>>>> have to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... > Can >>>>>>>>> such a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including > us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > wealth, >>>>>>>>> upward >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses > of >>> poor >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our > bourgeois >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lifestyle? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I ask because, it would appear that the > earth,in >>>>> marxian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>>>>>> humanity to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize and > reproduce >>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >>>>>>>>> consistently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >>>>>>> fracking, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>>>>>> resolve our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >>>>>>> spirit of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >>> ontology. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears > that in >>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
-------- Original message >>> --------
From: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >>>>>>> Activity" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | >>>>>>> Oxfam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> International
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Andy, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose social psychology's unitary and > a-historical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material >>>>>>>> > well-being as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative > to >>>>>>>>> one's own >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think > it >>>>>>>>> provides >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a way to understand the individual pursuit of > wealth, >>>>>>> carried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >>>>> effective >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >>>>>>> individual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >>>>> leverage >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If anyone would like to help pull that together > in >>>>>>> the form >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf > Of >>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam >>>>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope > to >>>>>>> read and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> participate in acting out the opening chapter of > that >>>>>>>>>>> narrative. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a > project >>>>>>> doomed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >>> linear >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >>>>> ideological >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a > project >>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>>>>>> everyone had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >>>>>>> implicit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy > to >>>>>>>>> see how >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >>>>> story-lines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The operative narrative, at least in the > U.S. >>>>>>> context, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are > the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the > saviors of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all > of >>>>>>> our best >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy, is this practical project something that > can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a > theoretical >>>>>>>>> project? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf > Of >>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam >>>>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David I have plenty of experience with > desparate >>>>>>> measures >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over teh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the > broader >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential > that >>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are > one >>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sometimes, in order to create a > counter-narrative >>>>>>>>> that can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >>>>>>> outside of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, > this >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from the real work, > perhaps a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>>>>> endeavor. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if > imperfect) >>>>>>>>> effort to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apply what one has come to understand from the > larger >>>>>>>>> project. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a political > activity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >>> actual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that > these >>>>>>> desperate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> times call for. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf > Of >>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, that's the project I have been > collaborating >>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >>> challenges, >>>>>>>>> too, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you know. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First off, these observations about social >>>>>>> psychology and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well-being: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and > one >>>>>>> which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as valid for making observations about psychology > as it >>>>>>>>> is for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for > what >>>>>>> goes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People do not > of >>>>> course >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based >>>>>>>>> investigations >>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely results of their behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger > economy" or >>>>>>> "have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >>>>>>> individual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>>>>> contexts of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the projects to which they are committed. That is > the >>>>>>> reason >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth > (which is >>>>>>>>> itself >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of course relative). People make judgments >>>>>>>> > according to >>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they are >>>>>>>>> participating, >>> and >>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>>>>>> Understanding >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the psychology of political economy is as of one > task >>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the > existing >>>>>>>>> political >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economic arrangements and build sustainable >>> arrangements. >>>>>>>>> That >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and > able >>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's what I think. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've been > sketching out in >>> my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >>> paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tentatively titled: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the > Ultra-wealthy are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despoiling the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting > our >>>>>>> Culture In >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for More >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The premise is that the psychological > metric of our >>>>>>>>> sense >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of material well-being is not accumulation, > relative to >>>>> our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our > own >>>>>>>>> wealth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) > So, >>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is > what >>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), > they >>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >>>>> strategy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is > that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy > over >>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a > kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are > so >>>>>>> dramatic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >>>>>>> Hence, we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>>>> behavior by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing > bubble >>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>>>>>> Recession). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to > take >>>>> back >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> control of our political systems so we can set more >>>>>>> rational >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies for the economy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so > easily >>>>>>> beyond the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >>> appeals, >>>>> I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even > one >>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >>> co-authors. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> > > ---------------------------------------- Peter Hourdequin Faculty of Foreign Studies Tokoha University 1-22-1 Sena, Aoi Ward Shizuoka City, Shizuoka JAPAN 420-0911 Tel: +81 54 261-3608 Fax: +81 54 263-2750 Post-Graduate Researcher Educational Research Lancaster University, U.K. ---------------------------------------- From vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp Wed Jan 22 17:54:05 2014 From: vwilk@inf.shizuoka.ac.jp (valerie A. Wilkinson) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 10:54:05 +0900 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <0e31a91bae457fdeab74547089086cd4.squirrel@wm3.uvic.ca> References: <4kni37xmh1ojsxp3gysamm88.1390403341616@email.android.com> <0e31a91bae457fdeab74547089086cd4.squirrel@wm3.uvic.ca> Message-ID: <003f01cf17de$004e3e20$00eaba60$@shizuoka.ac.jp> When I flew through Dallas on the way to Fayetteville Arkansas, I grabbed a "healthy" personal pizza at Pizza Hut. I asked if there was a tip jar. He said no. "Cannery Row" has been outlawed. We went from personal tips - to tip jars that the shift shared - to no tips. I was afraid to slip the guy a tip or frankly tip him! I don't know the rules or who is watching. When I was young, I was a waitress working $1.80/hr when I was at college. I had to tip the bus boy. I never got big tips because, well, there are lots of reasons why some people know how to attract big tips and some don't. Then we had to declare them on our taxes (or be criminal). I was a college student still living at home... In the Allegory of Cannery Row, leading to Sweet Thursday, Suzy, who was not "cut out" to do business at The Bear Flag Restaurant, moved to The Golden Poppy Restaurant and waited customers for tips only. Living in a boiler in a vacant lot ... Then I was a waitress. I waited tables in Honolulu, Seattle, and Arkansas! Wow! Truth to tell, we are all in the same boat. The competent kitchen manager and line cooks were the bosses of the prep cooks. I couldn't get a waitress job at a good place. I worked three jobs: "waitress" at Holiday Inn buffet, and two prep cook jobs. That way of life is gone and I live in Japan. But it was working with African Americans in restaurants that took me big steps into the new world where it was "we" and my superiors in character, know-how, and talent were African American. We all have a hard time, and we have our habits, education, and background to help us or hinder us and we move along until "something" comes and shakes the carpet and you have to set up the game again, some pieces are missing, substitute new pieces. Act like it's "same as it ever was." Which it isn't. It all changes and I like Kurt Vonnegut saying : We are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is. Thank you for this discussion. -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Stephanie Ann Samaras Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 9:25 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Hello all, I am feeling a bit overwhelmed with all of the responses and topics with this mailing list, however, I find the topics fascinating. Regards, Stephanie Ann Samaras B.Ed., M.A. UVIC https://dspace.library.uvic.ca:8443/handle/1828/4908 School District No. 46 (Sunshine Coast)/ S.P.I.D.E.R. http://fc.sd46.bc.ca/spider/ ssamaras@sd46.bc.ca cell: (778) 874 8678 skype: stephanie.samaras.1974 http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/stephanie-ann-samaras/7a/506/a92 stephaniesamarasonline.com/moodle http://prezi.com/user/stephaniesamarasonline/ http://www.scoop.it/u/stephanie-ann-samaras http://moodlemeets.learnnowbc.ca/login/index.php The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity to which it was addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) are confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient you must not use, disclose, disseminate, copy or print its contents. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message. > Thanks for your (accepting) reply Paul My only response - since I am > not at all familiar with the conceptual fields you refer to, (nor even > particularly receptive to them,mea culpa), is to adduce the idea of > the difference between a 'formal' status of a right and its function > reality, i.e. my formal right to a fair trial and my ability to pull > together all the resources actually needed to achieve one. > Formally while such leaders as King remained part of and submerged > within the constraints of the reality which they challenged; > functionally their demands could be met only by an alteration in that reality. > I hope that this category of answer has some value and coherence > within your terms of reference. > Yours > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > wrote: > >> Tom, >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying >> with itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the >> black american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were >> against. They were americans simply convicting the society of not >> fully implementing its structural concepts...they were not asking for >> new structural concepts... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Tom Richardson >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Dear Paul >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer >> to all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm >> looking forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > >wrote: >> >> > Within the logic of >> > "Men make their >> > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not >> > make >> it >> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people >> > come >> to >> > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, >> andy, >> > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >> movement >> > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a >> > structural >> one? >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy >> > Blunden < ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM >> > (GMT-05:00) >> >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> International >> >
>> >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) >> are >> two >> > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, >> > and I think that very broadly humanism on one side, and >> > structuralism (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) >> > on the other is >> one >> > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I >> > identify >> as >> > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or >> collectively) >> > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >> > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make >> > their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do >> > not make >> it >> > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >> > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not >> > an illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >> > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand >> > on the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even >> explain >> > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each >> > other, make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in >> > general >> show >> > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never >> > tell you how a social formation at a certain point failed to >> > reproduce >> itself >> > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in >> > solidarity with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn >> > out sometimes >> to >> > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >> > Science is always for a purpose. >> > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; >> > humanism >> is >> > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >> > >> > Andy >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > ----- >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >> > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >> > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the >> > > world which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and >> > > ideas as >> the >> > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim >> > > Andy >> and >> > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >> > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to >> > > establish society based on such an individual, I.e., >> > > subject...whereas, althusser is suggesting that not only is there >> > > no such individual, >> but >> > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >> > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what >> capitalists >> > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >> > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what >> sense? >> > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > President >> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > >> > > >> > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > From: Rauno Huttunen >> > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > Hello, >> > > >> > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. >> > > Althusser's theory of science and social theory are very >> > > interesting (generalization I-III, intransitive causality >> > > [generative >> causality?], >> > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >> > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >> > > social theory. >> > > >> > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >> > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, >> Debray...) >> > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >> > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of >> > > humanistic critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of >> > > Labor: The >> Workers' >> > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that >> Althusserians >> > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >> > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say >> > > that they represents the objective interests of working class but >> actually >> > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >> > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling >> > > elite's ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with >> > > Althusserian party ideology. >> > > >> > > Rauno Huttunen >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy >> > > Blunden >> > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > >> > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, >> > > I >> am >> > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is >> itself >> > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >> "Who >> > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer >> > > is that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the >> > > product >> of >> > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have >> > > a >> role >> > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" >> > > is >> not >> a >> > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The >> majority" >> > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. >> So >> > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity >> > > according >> to >> > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> > > >> > > Andy >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> --- >> > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> > > >> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >> > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where >> > > > are they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in >> > > > latin america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority >> > > > have been interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses >> > > > that present capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The >> > > > masses think >> they >> > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more >> > > > than >> the >> > > > capitalists.... >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > President >> > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > > From: Andy Blunden >> > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> > > > >> > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, >> but >> no, >> > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >> irrespective >> > of >> > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which >> protect >> > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >> > personality >> > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." >> > > > What >> I >> am >> > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social >> relations >> and >> > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly >> > > > out >> of >> > the >> > > > social process. >> > > > >> > > > Andy >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > ----- >> > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > > Bill, >> > > > > >> > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, >> I.e., >> the >> > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in >> "the >> > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive >> > > > > and >> going >> > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a >> > > > > humanist capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of >> > > > > moral >> > sentiments" >> > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >> Bernstein >> > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague >> > > > > twenty >> first >> > > > > century socialists. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > President >> > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -------- Original message -------- >> > > > > From: Bill Kerr >> > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic >> characteristics: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living >> > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> > > > > >> > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is >> hard >> to >> > > > grasp >> > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates >> > > > > just >> talk >> > > > about >> > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230414940457932453 >> 0112590864 >> > > > > >> > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version >> > > > > of >> this >> > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >> > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> > > > > >> > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >> maintained >> > > > then >> > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether >> > > > > capitalism >> can >> > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the >> > > > > Occupy >> Wall >> > > > Street >> > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious >> study >> of >> > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic >> theories >> > > > such as >> > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which >> > > > > recognise >> the >> > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion >> > > > > is >> that >> > we >> > > > > just >> > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. >> eg. >> if >> > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more >> money >> > > > > and the >> > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years >> (Great >> > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival >> (?) >> > > Absurd >> > > > > simplification on my part. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, >> > > > > > so >> to >> > > > speak, >> > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the >> > > > > > maxim >> is >> > > > always >> > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I >> believe >> > > only >> > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you >> > > > > > is >> > > > > meaningful >> > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I >> > > > > > believe >> that >> > > > > "Do unto >> > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far >> > > > > > as >> it >> > > > > goes, but >> > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Andy >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > ----- >> > > > > > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social >> > > > > >> psychology, >> it >> > > > > seems to >> > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not >> > > > > >> sure >> > > > > living in a >> > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the >> > > > > >> immaturity >> > > > > required to >> > > > > >> sustain it. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be >> > > > > >> combatted, >> > > > rather it >> > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired >> > > > > >> or >> > > > > desired. This, >> > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >> exercise. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Best, >> > > > > >> Huw >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >> through >> > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more >> > > > > >> important >> than >> > a >> > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >> > > > > >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > >> -- >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this >> one...albeit, >> I >> > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but >> what >> I >> > > > have >> > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really >> > > > > >> disappointed >> me. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> President >> > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- >> > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden >> > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > International >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >> > > > fundamentals of >> > > > > >> theory is >> > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on >> the >> > xmca >> > > > > >> list this is >> > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >> > > "collaboration" is >> > > > > >> that such >> > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. >> Nonetheless, >> in >> > > > > >> raising the >> > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting >> > > > > >> collaboration >> on >> > > > > >> formation of >> > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted >> > > > > >> the >> > > > > invitation by >> > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >> > > > propsed the >> > > > > >> writing >> > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand >> that >> > > "the >> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >> > prosperity >> > > > > >> and the >> > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >> gradual >> > > > > >> shift in >> > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 >> years >> > > > by the >> > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point >> > > > > >> in >> > > > which the >> > > > > >> gains in >> > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any >> > > > > >> sense >> of >> > > actual >> > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This >> > > > > >> is >> > > > > hardly news, >> > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for >> > > > > >> several >> > > > > centuries. The >> > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; >> > > > > >> social >> > > > > progress has >> > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from >> > > > > >> all >> but >> > > > a few >> > > > > >> of that >> > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter >> > > > > >> some >> > actual >> > > > > >> project >> > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and >> participate >> > > > in the >> > > > > >> argument >> > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 >> > > > > >> years >> of >> > > such >> > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >> > > > participation, >> > > > > >> but the >> > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >> actually >> > > > > >> engaged in >> > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to >> > > > > >> further >> that >> > > > > >> struggle. Not >> > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased >> > > > > >> that >> > > you are >> > > > > >> taking up >> > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is >> > > > > >> offer >> my >> > > > > >> reflections on >> > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >> It would appear ... >> > > > > >> >> > >> > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy >> > > > > >> and >> > Paul, >> > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to >> > > > > >> terms >> with >> > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. >> > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> > > > foundations >> > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to >> > > > > >> offer, >> or >> > > > that a >> > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a >> > > > > >> stable >> > enough >> > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >> > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary >> > > > > >> way >> > > > forward in >> > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >> > > worked out >> > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >> > > address the >> > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >> > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> > > > parameters)? >> > > > > >> > David >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On >> > > > > >> Behalf >> Of >> > Dr. >> > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> ablunden@mira.net >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >> > > > > >> Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Andy and david, >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative >> > > > > >> would >> > > have to >> > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >> > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... >> Can >> > > > such a >> > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, >> > > > > >> including >> us >> > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual >> wealth, >> > > > upward >> > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses >> > > > > >> of >> poor >> > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our >> bourgeois >> > > > > >> lifestyle? > >> > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the >> > > > > >> earth,in >> > marxian >> > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >> > > > humanity to >> > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and >> reproduce >> > it's >> > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >> consistently >> > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> > > fracking, >> > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> > > > resolve our >> > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >> > > spirit of >> > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >> ontology. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears >> > > > > >> that >> in >> > > this >> > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > > > > >> > President >> > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >
-------- Original message >> --------
From: >> > > > > >> David H Kirshner > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, >> > > > > >> Culture, >> > > Activity" >> > > > > >> > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the >> > > > > >> Few >> | >> > > Oxfam >> > > > > >> International
>> > > > > >> >
Andy, >> > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and >> a-historical >> > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material >> > > > > >> well-being >> as >> > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative >> > > > > >> to >> > > > one's own >> > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think >> > > > > >> it >> > > > provides >> > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of >> > > > > >> wealth, >> > > carried >> > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >> > effective >> > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >> > > individual >> > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >> > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >> > leverage >> > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. >> > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together >> > > > > >> in >> > > the form >> > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> > > > > >> > Thanks. >> > > > > >> > David >> > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On >> > > > > >> Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >> > > > > >> Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope >> > > > > >> to >> > > read and >> > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of >> > > > > >> that >> > > > > narrative. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a >> project >> > > doomed >> > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >> linear >> > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >> > ideological >> > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a >> project >> > at >> > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> > > > everyone had >> > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >> > > implicit in >> > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from >> > > > > >> easy >> to >> > > > see how >> > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >> > story-lines >> > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ------------ >> > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> > > context, >> > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy >> > > > > >> are >> the >> > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the >> > > > > >> saviors >> of >> > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all >> > > > > >> of >> > > our best >> > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >> > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that >> > > > > >> can >> be >> > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a >> theoretical >> > > > project? >> > > > > >> >> David >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On >> > > > > >> Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >> > > > > >> Oxfam >> > > > > International >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with >> > > > > >> desparate >> > > measures >> > > > > >> over teh >> > > > > >> >> past >> > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the >> broader >> > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential >> > > > > >> that >> the >> > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are >> > > > > >> one >> > > and the >> > > > > >> same. >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> Andy >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> ---------- >> > > > > >> >> -- >> > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, >> > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a >> > > > > >> counter-narrative >> > > > that can >> > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >> > > outside of >> > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for >> > > > > >> some, >> this >> > > > would >> > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, >> > > > > >> perhaps >> a >> > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >> > > endeavor. For >> > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if >> > > > > >> imperfect) >> > > > effort to >> > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the >> > > > > >> larger >> > > > project. >> > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political >> activity >> > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >> actual >> > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. >> > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that >> > > > > >> these >> > > desperate >> > > > > >> times call for. >> > > > > >> >>> David >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> > > > > >> ] On >> > > > > >> Behalf >> Of >> > Andy >> > > > > >> Blunden >> > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> > > > > >> International >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been >> collaborating >> in >> > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >> challenges, >> > > > too, >> > > > > >> you know. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social >> > > psychology and >> > > > > >> well-being: >> > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and >> > > > > >> one >> > > which is >> > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology >> > > > > >> as >> it >> > > > is for >> > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for >> what >> > > goes >> > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not >> > > > > >> of >> > course >> > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based >> investigations >> > > > of the >> > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. >> > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" >> or >> > > "have >> > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >> > > individual >> > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >> > > contexts of >> > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is >> > > > > >> the >> > > reason >> > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth >> > > > > >> (which >> is >> > > > itself >> > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments >> > > > > >> according >> to >> > the >> > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are >> > > > > >> participating, >> and >> > > > that >> > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >> > > > Understanding >> > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one >> > > > > >> task >> with >> > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the >> > > > > >> existing >> > > > political >> > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable >> arrangements. >> > > > That >> > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and >> able >> to >> > > > > >> collaborate with one another. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. >> > > > > >> >>> Andy >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > >> --------- >> > > > > >> >>> - >> > > > > >> >>> -- >> > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out >> in >> my >> > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, >> > > > > >> a >> paper >> > > > > >> tentatively titled: >> > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the >> > > > > >> Ultra-wealthy >> are >> > > > > >> Despoiling the >> > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >> > > Culture In >> > > > > >> the Quest >> > > > > >> >>>> for More >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric >> > > > > >> of >> our >> > > > sense >> > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, >> > > > > >> relative >> to >> > our >> > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of >> > > > > >> our >> own >> > > > wealth >> > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >> > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) >> > > > > >> So, >> for >> > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger >> > > > > >> economy >> which >> > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is >> what >> > > would >> > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), >> they >> > are >> > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >> > strategy >> > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is >> > > > > >> that >> the >> > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy >> over >> the >> > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a >> > > > > >> kind >> of >> > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are >> > > > > >> so >> > > dramatic >> > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >> > > Hence, we >> > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >> > > behavior by >> > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing >> bubble >> > that >> > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >> > > > Recession). >> > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to >> take >> > back >> > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set >> > > > > >> more >> > > rational >> > > > > >> policies for the economy. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >> > > beyond the >> > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >> appeals, >> > I >> > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even >> one >> > that >> > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >> co-authors. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> David >> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Wed Jan 22 18:13:21 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 23:13:21 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52E05F53.3080800@mira.net> References: <52E05F53.3080800@mira.net> Message-ID: <44ACFB16-C9BD-4275-8CE6-4D8CE3DFF3E5@gmail.com> Wow! This is a fantastic description not only of politics but also of citizenship, Andy. I endorse every word in it. Enviado desde mi iPhone El 22-01-2014, a las 21:16, Andy Blunden escribi?: > Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. > I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, that is just as things should be. > There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any effort to make the world a better place. > Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a waste of time. Yes? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> Tom, >> >> I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint louverture >> During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a different name. >> >> Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social structure. >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>>
Hello again Paul >> Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered >> your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that >> the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in >> a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, >> effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too >> sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - >> I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only >> come about either by the efforts of those within any given society >> attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their >> society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting >> that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that >> that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by >> changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest >> groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not >> themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the >> necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to >> where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves >> able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That >> state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to >> me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination >> Enough already - I've gone on long enough >> Tom >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >> >>> Tom, >>> >>> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >>> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >>> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >>> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >>> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They >>> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its >>> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... >>> >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> President >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> www.mocombeian.com >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Tom Richardson >>> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> Dear Paul >>> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >>> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >>> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >>> Tom Richardson >>> Middlesbrough UK >>> >>> >>> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>> wrote: >>>> Within the logic of >>>> "Men make their >>>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to >>>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, >>>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >>> movement >>> >>>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>> President >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>> >>>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >>>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >>> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>> >>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>> International >>> >>>>
>>>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are >>> two >>> >>>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >>>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >>>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one >>>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as >>>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) >>>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >>>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >>>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >>>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >>>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >>>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >>>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain >>>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >>>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show >>>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >>>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself >>>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >>>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to >>>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >>>> Science is always for a purpose. >>>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is >>>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >>>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >>>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >>>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the >>>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and >>>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >>>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >>>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >>>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but >>>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >>>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >>>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >>>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? >>>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> President >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >>>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >>>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >>>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], >>>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >>>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >>>>> social theory. >>>>> >>>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >>>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >>>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >>>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >>>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' >>>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians >>>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >>>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >>>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >>>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >>>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >>>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >>>>> party ideology. >>>>> >>>>> Rauno Huttunen >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >>>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>> >>>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >>>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >>>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >>> "Who >>> >>>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >>>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >>>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >>>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not >>> a >>> >>>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >>>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >>>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >>>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >>>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >>>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >>>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >>>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >>>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >>>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >>>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than the >>>>>> capitalists.... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>> President >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>> >>>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >>> no, >>> >>>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective >>>> of >>>> >>>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >>>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >>>> personality >>>> >>>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I >>> am >>> >>>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations >>> and >>> >>>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >>>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >>>> the >>>> >>>>>> social process. >>>>>> >>>>>> Andy >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Bill, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >>> the >>> >>>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >>>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >>> going >>> >>>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist >>>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >>>> sentiments" >>>> >>>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >>>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >>> first >>> >>>>>>> century socialists. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>> President >>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >>> characteristics: >>> >>>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >>>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >>> to >>> >>>>>> grasp >>>>>> >>>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >>>>>> about >>>>>> >>>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >>> >>>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >>> this >>> >>>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >>> maintained >>> >>>>>> then >>>>>> >>>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >>>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >>>>>> Street >>>>>> >>>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study >>> of >>> >>>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >>>>>> such as >>>>>> >>>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >>>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >>>> we >>>> >>>>>>> just >>>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >>> if >>> >>>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >>>>>>> and the >>>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >>>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >>>>> Absurd >>>>> >>>>>>> simplification on my part. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >>>>>> speak, >>>>>> >>>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >>>>>> always >>>>>> >>>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >>>>> only >>>>> >>>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >>>>>>> meaningful >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >>>>>>> "Do unto >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >>>>>>> goes, but >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >>>>>>> seems to >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure >>>>>>> living in a >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >>>>>>> required to >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> sustain it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >>>>>> rather it >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>>>> desired. This, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >>> exercise. >>> >>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>> Huw >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >> >> >>>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >>> through >>> >>>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important >>> than >>> >>>> a >>>> >>>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>>>>>> Andy >>> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >>> >>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, >>> I >>> >>>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what >>> I >>> >>>>>> have >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> President >>>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>> International >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>>> fundamentals of >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> theory is >>>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >>>> xmca >>>> >>>>>>>>> list this is >>>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >>>>> "collaboration" is >>>>> >>>>>>>>> that such >>>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, >>> in >>> >>>>>>>>> raising the >>>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >>>>>>>>> formation of >>>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >>>>>>> invitation by >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>>> propsed the >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> writing >>>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >>>>> "the >>>>> >>>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>>> prosperity >>>> >>>>>>>>> and the >>>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >>> gradual >>> >>>>>>>>> shift in >>>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >>>>>> by the >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >>>>>> which the >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> gains in >>>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >>>>> actual >>>>> >>>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >>>>>>> hardly news, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>>>> centuries. The >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >>>>>>> progress has >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >>>>>> a few >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> of that >>>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >>>> actual >>>> >>>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >>>>>> in the >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> argument >>>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >>>>> such >>>>> >>>>>>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>>> participation, >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> but the >>>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >>> actually >>> >>>>>>>>> engaged in >>>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to further >>> that >>> >>>>>>>>> struggle. Not >>>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >>>>> you are >>>>> >>>>>>>>> taking up >>>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>>>>>>>> reflections on >>>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andy >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >>>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>> >> It would appear ... >>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>>>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >>>> Paul, >>>> >>>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms >>> with >>> >>>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. >>>>>>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>>> foundations >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >>>>>> that a >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable >>>> enough >>>> >>>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>>> forward in >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >>>>> worked out >>>>> >>>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the need to >>>>> address the >>>>> >>>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>>> parameters)? >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > David >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>> Dr. >>>> >>>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >>> ablunden@mira.net >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>> International >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Andy and david, >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >>>>> have to >>>>> >>>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >>>>>> such a >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >>>>>> upward >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of >>> poor >>> >>>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>>>>>>>> lifestyle? > >>>>>>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in >>>> marxian >>>> >>>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>>> humanity to >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce >>>> it's >>>> >>>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >>>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >>>>> fracking, >>>>> >>>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>>> resolve our >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >>>>> spirit of >>>>> >>>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >>> ontology. >>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >>>>> this >>>>> >>>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>> > President >>>>>>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>> > www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >
-------- Original message >>> --------
From: >>> >>>>>>>>> David H Kirshner >>>>>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >>>>> Activity" >>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>> >>>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >>>>> Oxfam >>>>> >>>>>>>>> International
>>>>>>>>> >
Andy, >>>>>>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >>>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >>>>>> one's own >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >>>>>> provides >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >>>>> carried >>>>> >>>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >>>> effective >>>> >>>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >>>>> individual >>>>> >>>>>>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >>>> leverage >>>> >>>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. >>>>>>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >>>>> the form >>>>> >>>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>>>>>> > Thanks. >>>>>>>>> > David >>>>>>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>> Andy >>>> >>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>> International >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >>>>> read and >>>>> >>>>>>>>> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >>>>>>> narrative. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >>>>> doomed >>>>> >>>>>>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >>> linear >>> >>>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >>>> ideological >>>> >>>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project >>>> at >>>> >>>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>>> everyone had >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >>>>> implicit in >>>>> >>>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >>>>>> see how >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >>>> story-lines >>>> >>>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>>>>>> > >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>> > *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >>>>> context, >>>>> >>>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all of >>>>> our best >>>>> >>>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>>>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >>>>>> project? >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> David >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>> Andy >>>> >>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>>>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>> International >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >>>>> measures >>>>> >>>>>>>>> over teh >>>>>>>>> >> past >>>>>>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >>> the >>> >>>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are one >>>>> and the >>>>> >>>>>>>>> same. >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> Andy >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>>>>> ---------- >>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, >>>>>>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> that can >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> be effective in the here and now, one has to step >>>>>>>>> >>>>> outside of >>>>> >>>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> would >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>>>>>>> >>>>> endeavor. For >>>>> >>>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> effort to >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> apply what one has come to understand from the larger >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> project. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >>>>>>>>> >>> actual >>> >>>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. >>>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >>>>>>>>> >>>>> desperate >>>>> >>>>>>>>> times call for. >>>>>>>>> >>> David >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>>>>>>> Blunden >>>>>>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>>>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>> International >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >>>>>>>>> >>> in >>> >>>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >>>>>>>>> >>> challenges, >>> >>>>>> too, >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> you know. >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social >>>>>>>>> >>>>> psychology and >>>>> >>>>>>>>> well-being: >>>>>>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >>>>>>>>> >>>>> which is >>>>> >>>>>>>>> as valid for making observations about psychology as it >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> is for >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >>>>>>>>> >>>>> goes >>>>> >>>>>>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of >>>>>>>>> >>>> course >>>> >>>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> of the >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> likely results of their behaviour. >>>>>>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >>>>>>>>> >>>>> "have >>>>> >>>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >>>>>>>>> >>>>> individual >>>>> >>>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> contexts of >>>>> >>>>>>>>> the projects to which they are committed. That is the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> reason >>>>> >>>>>>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> itself >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> of course relative). People make judgments according to >>>>>>>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they are participating, >>>>>>>>> >>> and >>> >>>>>> that >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Understanding >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the psychology of political economy is as of one task >>>>>>>>> >>> with >>> >>>>>>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> political >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> economic arrangements and build sustainable >>>>>>>>> >>> arrangements. >>> >>>>>> That >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able >>>>>>>>> >>> to >>> >>>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> That's what I think. >>>>>>>>> >>> Andy >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>>> >>> - >>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in >>>>>>>>> >>> my >>> >>>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >>>>>>>>> >>> paper >>> >>>>>>>>> tentatively titled: >>>>>>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>>>>>>>> Despoiling the >>>>>>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Culture In >>>>> >>>>>>>>> the Quest >>>>>>>>> >>>> for More >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> sense >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to >>>>>>>>> >>>> our >>>> >>>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> wealth >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>>>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >>>>>>>>> >>> for >>> >>>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >>>>>>>>> >>> which >>> >>>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >>>>>>>>> >>>>> would >>>>> >>>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they >>>>>>>>> >>>> are >>>> >>>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >>>>>>>>> >>>> strategy >>>> >>>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy over >>>>>>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >>>>>>>>> >>>>> dramatic >>>>> >>>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Hence, we >>>>> >>>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>>>>>> >>>>> behavior by >>>>> >>>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble >>>>>>>>> >>>> that >>>> >>>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Recession). >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take >>>>>>>>> >>>> back >>>> >>>>>>>>> control of our political systems so we can set more >>>>>>>>> >>>>> rational >>>>> >>>>>>>>> policies for the economy. >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >>>>>>>>> >>>>> beyond the >>>>> >>>>>>>>> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >>>>>>>>> >>> appeals, >>> >>>> I >>>> >>>>>>>>> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one >>>>>>>>> >>>> that >>>> >>>>>>>>> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >>>>>>>>> >>> co-authors. >>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> David >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Thu Jan 23 03:13:25 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 06:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Andy, I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. ?I was raised in a small province of Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents who served the lwaes of my ancestors and country...i am a product of the haitian/african "vodou ethic and the spirit of communism" of that province. ?It is from that practical consciousness that my teaching and activism stems. ?The women, like blacks in america, of the 70s, 80s, 90s...did not change the world...they sought to participate in it as constituted by rich, white, protestant, heterosexual men...Prior to her death my grandmother, who could not read and write, "could not understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and act like men..." In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with tremendous intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or to benefit yourself because there are countless people who sacrificed their own education so that you can have yours. ?Your life work belongs to their service and the poor you have left behind in haiti. .." ?she went on to say, "I know all the stuff the white people in the university have taught you have made you an atheist, but you are not white, you are haitian/african, you owe your freedom to no man, but to the lwaes of your ancestors who blessed you with your intelligence to serve them and the poor...never abandon them, pray daily, and always remember that the universe is and must be your frame of reference...no matter what the white people say" ? I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the only tradition I came across in the West that is in line with the African communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me. ?It is from my vodou ethic and the spirit of communism that i see the destruction wrought on by Western practical consciousness, ?and it is from that ethic that I seek to change the world. ? We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and reproduce and participate in a practical consciousness that is bent on raping the earth and it's resources, and exploiting and starving the masses of people while a few drive automobiles...that is absurd and insane! Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden
Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, that is just as things should be. There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any effort to make the world a better place. Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a waste of time. Yes? Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint louverture > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation colony with wage-labor.? To him that was a change from slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system.? In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a different name. > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social structure. > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson
Date:01/22/2014? 5:36 PM? (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
>
Hello again Paul > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in > a concept whose behavioural demands are not? actually met / practised is, > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >?? >> Tom, >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> structural/humanist.? That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against.? They >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing its >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Tom Richardson >> Date:01/22/2014? 9:52 AM? (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Dear Paul >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> Tom Richardson >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >???? >>> wrote: >>>?????? >>> Within the logic of >>> "Men make their >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to >>> change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >>>?????? >> movement >>???? >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural one? >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>> President >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>> www.mocombeian.com >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>> >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >>>?????? >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >>???? >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>?????? >> International >>???? >>>
>>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are >>>?????? >> two >>???? >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce itself >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >>> Science is always for a purpose. >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >>> >>> Andy >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>?????? >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. >>>>?? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >>>>?? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as the >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy and >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >>>> self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, but >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? >>>>?? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>> President >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative causality?], >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >>>> social theory. >>>> >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The Workers' >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that Althusserians >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >>>> party ideology. >>>> >>>> Rauno Huttunen >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >>>>???????? >> "Who >>???? >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a role >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is not >>>>???????? >> a >>???? >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The majority" >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >>>> >>>> Andy >>>> >>>>???????? >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>???? >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>???????? >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are >>>>> they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >>>>> america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than the >>>>> capitalists.... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>> President >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Andy Blunden >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>> >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >>>>>?????????? >> no, >>???? >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists irrespective >>>>>?????????? >>> of >>>?????? >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >>>>>?????????? >>> personality >>>?????? >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I >>>>>?????????? >> am >>???? >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations >>>>>?????????? >> and >>???? >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >>>>>?????????? >>> the >>>?????? >>>>> social process. >>>>> >>>>> Andy >>>>> >>>>>?????????? >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>?????? >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> Bill, >>>>>> >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >>>>>>???????????? >> the >>???? >>>>>> free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >>>>>>???????????? >> going >>???? >>>>>> amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >>>>>>???????????? >>> sentiments" >>>?????? >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >>>>>>???????????? >> first >>???? >>>>>> century socialists. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>> President >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>>>> >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >>>>>>???????????? >> characteristics: >>???? >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >>>>>> >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >>>>>>???????????? >> to >>???? >>>>> grasp >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk >>>>>>???????????? >>>>> about >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >>>>>> >>>>>>???????????? >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >>???? >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of >>>>>>???????????? >> this >>???? >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >>>>>> >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >>>>>>???????????? >> maintained >>???? >>>>> then >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >>>>>>???????????? >>>>> Street >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study >>>>>>???????????? >> of >>???? >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories >>>>>>???????????? >>>>> such as >>>>>?????????? >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >>>>>>???????????? >>> we >>>?????? >>>>>> just >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >>>>>>???????????? >> if >>???? >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money >>>>>> and the >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >>>>>>???????????? >>>> Absurd >>>>???????? >>>>>> simplification on my part. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >>>>>>???????????? >>>>> wrote: >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>> speak, >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>> always >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>> only >>>>???????? >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>>> meaningful >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>>> "Do unto >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>>> goes, but >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>> >>>>>>>?????????????? >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>?????? >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>?????????????? >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> seems to >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> living in a >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> required to >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>> sustain it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> rather it >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> desired.? This, >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> exercise. >>???? >>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>> Huw >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >>>>>>>???????????????? >> >???? >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> through >>???? >>>>>>>>????? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> than >>???? >>> a >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. >>>>>>>>????? Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >>???? >>>>>>>>????? ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>????? *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> I >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> I >>???? >>>>> have >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>????????? President >>>>>>>>????????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>????????? www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>????????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>>????????? From: Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>????????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>????????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >>>>>>>>????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> International >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> fundamentals of >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? theory is >>>>>>>>????????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> xmca >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? list this is >>>>>>>>????????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> "collaboration" is >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? that such >>>>>>>>????????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> in >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? raising the >>>>>>>>????????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >>>>>>>>????????? formation of >>>>>>>>????????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> invitation by >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> propsed the >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? writing >>>>>>>>????????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> "the >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> prosperity >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? and the >>>>>>>>????????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> gradual >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? shift in >>>>>>>>????????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> by the >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> which the >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? gains in >>>>>>>>????????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> actual >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> hardly news, >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> centuries. The >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> progress has >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> a few >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of that >>>>>>>>????????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> actual >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? project >>>>>>>>????????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> in the >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? argument >>>>>>>>????????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> such >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> participation, >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? but the >>>>>>>>????????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> actually >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? engaged in >>>>>>>>????????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> that >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? struggle. Not >>>>>>>>????????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> you are >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? taking up >>>>>>>>????????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >>>>>>>>????????? reflections on >>>>>>>>????????? your object-concept, as others have and will. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>???????? >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>????????? *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >>>?????? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>????????? >> It would appear ... >>>>>>>>????????? >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. >>>>>>>>????????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> Paul, >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> with >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? foundational issues, at all. >>>>>>>>????????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> foundations >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> that a >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> enough >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and >>>>>>>>????????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> forward in >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> worked out >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> address the >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of >>>>>>>>????????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> parameters)? >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > David >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> Dr. >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> ablunden@mira.net >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> International >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > Andy and david, >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> have to >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., >>>>>>>>????????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> such a >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us >>>>>>>>????????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> upward >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> poor >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois >>>>>>>>????????? lifestyle? > >>>>>>>>????????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> marxian >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> humanity to >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> it's >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently >>>>>>>>????????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> fracking, >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> resolve our >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> spirit of >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> ontology. >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> this >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>>>>>>>????????? > President >>>>>>>>????????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >>>>>>>>????????? > www.mocombeian.com >>>>>>>>????????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >
-------- Original message >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> --------
From: >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner >>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>>>>?????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >>>>>>>>?????????
To: ablunden@mira.net >>>>>>>>????????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> Activity" >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>???????????????? >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >>???? >>>>>>>>?????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> Oxfam >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? International
>>>>>>>>????????? >
Andy, >>>>>>>>????????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >>>>>>>>????????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >>>>>>>>????????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> one's own >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> provides >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> carried >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> effective >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> individual >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> leverage >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? for ordinary citizens. >>>>>>>>????????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> the form >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >>>>>>>>????????? > Thanks. >>>>>>>>????????? > David >>>>>>>>????????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> Andy >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> International >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> read and >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> narrative. >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> doomed >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> linear >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> ideological >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> at >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> everyone had >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> implicit in >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> see how >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> story-lines >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>???????? >>>>>>>> ------------ >>>>>>>>????????? > *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>????????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>????????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> context, >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the >>>>>>>>????????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >>>>>>>>????????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> our best >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> project? >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> David >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>????????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> Andy >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >>>>>>>>????????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>>>>>>>????????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>????????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>> International >>>>>>???????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> measures >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? over teh >>>>>>>>????????? >> past >>>>>>>>????????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >>>>>>>>????????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> the >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? practical project and the theoretical project are one >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> and the >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? same. >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>???????? >>>>>>>> ---------- >>>>>>>>????????? >> -- >>>>>>>>????????? >> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>????????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>????????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> that can >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> outside of >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> would >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a >>>>>>>>????????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> endeavor. For >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> effort to >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> project. >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> actual >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? relation to the theoretical project. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> desperate >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? times call for. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>????????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> Andy >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>>>>>>????????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >>>>>>>>????????? International >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> in >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> challenges, >>???? >>>>> too, >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? you know. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> First off, these observations about social >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> psychology and >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? well-being: >>>>>>>>????????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> which is >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> is for >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> goes >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> course >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> of the >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? likely results of their behaviour. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> "have >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> individual >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> contexts of >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> reason >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> itself >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of course relative). People make judgments according to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> the >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? norms of the project in which they are participating, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> and >>???? >>>>> that >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> Understanding >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> with >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> political >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? economic arrangements and build sustainable >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> arrangements. >>???? >>>>> That >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> to >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? collaborate with one another. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> That's what I think. >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Andy >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>???????? >>>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>>>????????? >>> - >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -- >>>>>>>>????????? >>> *Andy Blunden* >>>>>>>>????????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>>>>>>????????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> my >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> paper >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? tentatively titled: >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >>>>>>>>????????? Despoiling the >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> Culture In >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? the Quest >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> for More >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> sense >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> our >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> wealth >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a >>>>>>>>????????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> for >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> which >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> would >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> are >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> strategy >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? that maximizes disparity. >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >>>>>>>>????????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> the >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >>>>>>>>????????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> dramatic >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> Hence, we >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> behavior by >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> that >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>> Recession). >>>>>?????????? >>>>>>>>????????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> back >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? control of our political systems so we can set more >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> rational >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? policies for the economy. >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>> beyond the >>>>???????? >>>>>>>>????????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> appeals, >>???? >>> I >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>> that >>>?????? >>>>>>>>????????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as >>>>>>>>???????????????? >> co-authors. >>???? >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> David >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>?? >>>> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >>?? >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>???????????????? >>>>>?????????? >>>> >>>>???????? >>> >>>?????? >>???? > >?? From ablunden@mira.net Thu Jan 23 04:06:57 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:06:57 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52E105E1.7000602@mira.net> Paul, you make a true point, which perhaps I have overlooked. You make a distinction between an ethic and a praxis. By ethic I mean the deontology which specifies for you what is the right thing to do. By praxis I mean a unity of theory and practice which guides you as someone who seeks, in collaboration with others, some end. Now for me the two are identical, but it has taken a lot of work to get to a point where my praxis is equally ethical as scientific. There cannot be a sharp line between the two. But the distinction you make clarifies what you are saying. It is not necessary that someone is able to justify what they are doing by saying "... so that ..." I just do this because it is the right thing to do. That is fine. So you have embaced, not just Western Marxism, but a specific strand of Western Marxism which lays its emphasis on structure. This is not the only brand of Western Marxism. As David Preiss remarked, my comments were descriptive "not only of politics but also of citizenship." Making projects the key concept of my ethical and theoretical thinking is not only about how the world changes, but how it is. That is, I do not see the world made up of either srtuctures or individuals, but processes, in particular (us being human beings) *projects*. But if you embrace the anti-dialectical view that the world is individuals on one side and structures on the other, then it is blindingly obvious that if you were to ask which is the really determining factor, the really powerful one, it is obviously the social structures (ideologies, etc.). But why make this dichotomy in the first place? The answer is: to do science. The idea of structures gives one a powerful lens in which to describe and explain the world, in particular how is reproduces and maintains itself, how it "works." But the down side is that structures *cannot* explain how those structures (really) change, how they come to be broken. But you are a human being. When you put down your books and go into the world you act like a human being, not a machine. You try, you endeavour, you struggle. Because you are human. One last point. The difference between science (whether Marxist or positivist) and tradition is that while both change over time and both have tendencies within them which resist change, it is in the very essence of science that its theories are always up for testing and of failing the test of practice - nothing is sacred. This is not true of tradition. As you say, Marxism is a science, in the best sense of the word. What proved right last week may be thrown out next week if it fails the test of practice. Structural Marxism has failed. If anything unites the people on this list at all, it is an interest in CHAT - Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Although originating in the USSR it is not "Soviet Marxism." In fact it was brutally suppressed in the Soviet Union. Some people still take an "Activity" to be a system or a structure, but others, myself included, take it as a "project", that which challenges and changes structures. "Ontological" speaking, the world is not structures. That is just a way of seeing the world, as structures. As static and absolutely resistant to change. But you can see it differently, more humanly, as processes. The glass is half full. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Andy, > > I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. I was raised in a > small province of Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents who served the > lwaes of my ancestors and country...i am a product of the > haitian/african "vodou ethic and the spirit of communism" of that > province. It is from that practical consciousness that my teaching > and activism stems. The women, like blacks in america, of the 70s, > 80s, 90s...did not change the world...they sought to participate in it > as constituted by rich, white, protestant, heterosexual men...Prior to > her death my grandmother, who could not read and write, "could not > understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and act like men..." > > In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, > > "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with tremendous > intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or to benefit yourself > because there are countless people who sacrificed their own education > so that you can have yours. Your life work belongs to their service > and the poor you have left behind in haiti. .." she went on to say, > "I know all the stuff the white people in the university have taught > you have made you an atheist, but you are not white, you are > haitian/african, you owe your freedom to no man, but to the lwaes of > your ancestors who blessed you with your intelligence to serve them > and the poor...never abandon them, pray daily, and always remember > that the universe is and must be your frame of reference...no matter > what the white people say" > > I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the only > tradition I came across in the West that is in line with the African > communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me. It is from my vodou > ethic and the spirit of communism that i see the destruction wrought > on by Western practical consciousness, and it is from that ethic that > I seek to change the world. > > We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and reproduce > and participate in a practical consciousness that is bent on raping > the earth and it's resources, and exploiting and starving the masses > of people while a few drive automobiles...that is absurd and insane! > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. > I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that > is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that > difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the > "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every > woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in > the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they > changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, > that is just as things should be. > There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." > These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not > correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your > real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list > you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from > what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually > struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing > in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any > effort to make the world a better place. > Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a > problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and > you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You > develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you > hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum > and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all > become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its > own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is > now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being > changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture > responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project > becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of > the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a > modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things > have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise > and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing > social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is > only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a > social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of > the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little > step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter > when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of > the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a > waste of time. Yes? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Tom, > > > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint > louverture > > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french > plantation colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from > slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived > africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have > their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant > farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system. In fact, > Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought > against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had > become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a > different name. > > > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not > identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave > like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions > of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice > vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into > its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an > alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social > structure. > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom > Richardson >
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: > "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International
> >
Hello again Paul > > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not > answered > > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional > change in > > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / > practised is, > > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, > can only > > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / > moral by > > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions > (hence the > > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not > themselves > > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed > entity That > > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for > analysis, to > > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > > Tom > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > wrote: > > > > > >> Tom, > >> > >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying > with > >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. > They > >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully > implementing its > >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural > concepts... > >> > >> > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> President > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >> www.mocombeian.com > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >> > >> > >> > >> -------- Original message -------- > >> From: Tom Richardson > >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> Dear Paul > >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the > answer to > >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > >> Tom Richardson > >> Middlesbrough UK > >> > >> > >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Within the logic of > >>> "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not > make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people > come to > >>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, > andy, > >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > >>> > >> movement > >> > >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a > structural one? > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>> President > >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>> www.mocombeian.com > >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>> > >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > >>> > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >> > >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>> > >> International > >> > >>>
> >>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or > ethical) are > >>> > >> two > >> > >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other > is one > >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I > identify as > >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or > collectively) > >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not > make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even > explain > >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general > show > >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce > itself > >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out > sometimes to > >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > >>> Science is always for a purpose. > >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; > humanism is > >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>> > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>> > >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > >>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > >>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas > as the > >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim > Andy and > >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > >>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such > individual, but > >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > >>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>> President > >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen > >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting > >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > causality?], > >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > >>>> social theory. > >>>> > >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The > Workers' > >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > Althusserians > >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > >>>> party ideology. > >>>> > >>>> Rauno Huttunen > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>> > >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > >>>> > >> "Who > >> > >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have > a role > >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" > is not > >>>> > >> a > >> > >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The > majority" > >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > >>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > >>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more > than the > >>>>> capitalists.... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>> President > >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>> From: Andy Blunden > >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>>> > >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > >>>>> > >> no, > >> > >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists > irrespective > >>>>> > >>> of > >>> > >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > >>>>> > >>> personality > >>> > >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I > >>>>> > >> am > >> > >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > >>>>> > >> and > >> > >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > >>>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>>> social process. > >>>>> > >>>>> Andy > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Bill, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > >>>>>> > >> the > >> > >>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > >>>>>> > >> going > >> > >>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > >>>>>> > >>> sentiments" > >>> > >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > >>>>>> > >> first > >> > >>>>>> century socialists. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>> President > >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr > >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic > >>>>>> > >> characteristics: > >> > >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living > >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > >>>>>> > >> to > >> > >>>>> grasp > >>>>> > >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > >>>>>> > >>>>> about > >>>>> > >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >> > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > >> > >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > >>>>>> > >> this > >> > >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > >>>>>> > >> maintained > >> > >>>>> then > >>>>> > >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > >>>>>> > >>>>> Street > >>>>> > >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study > >>>>>> > >> of > >> > >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > >>>>>> > >>>>> such as > >>>>> > >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > >>>>>> > >>> we > >>> > >>>>>> just > >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. > >>>>>> > >> if > >> > >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > >>>>>> and the > >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > >>>>>> > >>>> Absurd > >>>> > >>>>>> simplification on my part. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > >>>>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > >>>>>>> > >>>>> speak, > >>>>> > >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > >>>>>>> > >>>>> always > >>>>> > >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > >>>>>>> > >>>> only > >>>> > >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> meaningful > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> "Do unto > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> goes, but > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> seems to > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> living in a > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> required to > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> sustain it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> rather it > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> desired. This, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > >>>>>>>> > >> exercise. > >> > >>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>> Huw > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >>>>>>>> > >> >> > >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > >>>>>>>> > >> through > >> > >>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > >>>>>>>> > >> than > >> > >>> a > >>> > >>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > >>>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > >> > >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, > >>>>>>>> > >> I > >> > >>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what > >>>>>>>> > >> I > >> > >>>>> have > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> President > >>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden > >>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> International > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> fundamentals of > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> theory is > >>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > >>>>>>>> > >>> xmca > >>> > >>>>>>>> list this is > >>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > >>>>>>>> > >>>> "collaboration" is > >>>> > >>>>>>>> that such > >>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, > >>>>>>>> > >> in > >> > >>>>>>>> raising the > >>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > >>>>>>>> formation of > >>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> invitation by > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> propsed the > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> writing > >>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > >>>>>>>> > >>>> "the > >>>> > >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > >>>>>>>> > >>> prosperity > >>> > >>>>>>>> and the > >>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > >>>>>>>> > >> gradual > >> > >>>>>>>> shift in > >>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> by the > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> which the > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> gains in > >>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > >>>>>>>> > >>>> actual > >>>> > >>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> hardly news, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> centuries. The > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> progress has > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> a few > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> of that > >>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > >>>>>>>> > >>> actual > >>> > >>>>>>>> project > >>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> in the > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> argument > >>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > >>>>>>>> > >>>> such > >>>> > >>>>>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> participation, > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> but the > >>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > >>>>>>>> > >> actually > >> > >>>>>>>> engaged in > >>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to further > >>>>>>>> > >> that > >> > >>>>>>>> struggle. Not > >>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > >>>>>>>> > >>>> you are > >>>> > >>>>>>>> taking up > >>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > >>>>>>>> reflections on > >>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > >>>>>>>> > >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >> It would appear ... > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > >>>>>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > >>>>>>>> > >>> Paul, > >>> > >>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > >>>>>>>> > >> with > >> > >>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. > >>>>>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> foundations > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> that a > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > >>>>>>>> > >>> enough > >>> > >>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > >>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> forward in > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > >>>>>>>> > >>>> worked out > >>>> > >>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > >>>>>>>> > >>>> address the > >>>> > >>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > >>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> parameters)? > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > David > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> > >>> Dr. > >>> > >>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > >>>>>>>> > >> ablunden@mira.net > >> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> International > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > Andy and david, > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > >>>>>>>> > >>>> have to > >>>> > >>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > >>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> such a > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > >>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> upward > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > >>>>>>>> > >> poor > >> > >>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > >>>>>>>> lifestyle? > > >>>>>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > >>>>>>>> > >>> marxian > >>> > >>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> humanity to > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > >>>>>>>> > >>> it's > >>> > >>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > >>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > >>>>>>>> > >>>> fracking, > >>>> > >>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> resolve our > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > >>>>>>>> > >>>> spirit of > >>>> > >>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > >>>>>>>> > >> ontology. > >> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > >>>>>>>> > >>>> this > >>>> > >>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> > President > >>>>>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>> > www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >
-------- Original message > >>>>>>>> > >> --------
From: > >> > >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net > >>>>>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > >>>>>>>> > >>>> Activity" > >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >> > >>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > >>>>>>>> > >>>> Oxfam > >>>> > >>>>>>>> International
> >>>>>>>> >
Andy, > >>>>>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > >>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > >>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> one's own > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> provides > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > >>>>>>>> > >>>> carried > >>>> > >>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > >>>>>>>> > >>> effective > >>> > >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > >>>>>>>> > >>>> individual > >>>> > >>>>>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > >>>>>>>> > >>> leverage > >>> > >>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. > >>>>>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > >>>>>>>> > >>>> the form > >>>> > >>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > >>>>>>>> > Thanks. > >>>>>>>> > David > >>>>>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> International > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > >>>>>>>> > >>>> read and > >>>> > >>>>>>>> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> narrative. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > >>>>>>>> > >>>> doomed > >>>> > >>>>>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > >>>>>>>> > >> linear > >> > >>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > >>>>>>>> > >>> ideological > >>> > >>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > >>>>>>>> > >>> at > >>> > >>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> everyone had > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > >>>>>>>> > >>>> implicit in > >>>> > >>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> see how > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > >>>>>>>> > >>> story-lines > >>> > >>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> > *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > >>>>>>>> > >>>> context, > >>>> > >>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > >>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > >>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > >>>>>>>> > >>>> our best > >>>> > >>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >>>>>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > >>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> project? > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> David > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >>>>>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> International > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > >>>>>>>> > >>>> measures > >>>> > >>>>>>>> over teh > >>>>>>>> >> past > >>>>>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > >>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > >>>>>>>> > >> the > >> > >>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are one > >>>>>>>> > >>>> and the > >>>> > >>>>>>>> same. > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> Andy > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>>>>>> ---------- > >>>>>>>> >> -- > >>>>>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, > >>>>>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> that can > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > >>>>>>>> > >>>> outside of > >>>> > >>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> would > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > >>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > >>>>>>>> > >>>> endeavor. For > >>>> > >>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> effort to > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> project. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > >>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > >>>>>>>> > >> actual > >> > >>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. > >>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > >>>>>>>> > >>>> desperate > >>>> > >>>>>>>> times call for. > >>>>>>>> >>> David > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>>>>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> International > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > >>>>>>>> > >> in > >> > >>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > >>>>>>>> > >> challenges, > >> > >>>>> too, > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> you know. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social > >>>>>>>> > >>>> psychology and > >>>> > >>>>>>>> well-being: > >>>>>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > >>>>>>>> > >>>> which is > >>>> > >>>>>>>> as valid for making observations about psychology as it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> is for > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > >>>>>>>> > >>>> goes > >>>> > >>>>>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > >>>>>>>> > >>> course > >>> > >>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> of the > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> likely results of their behaviour. > >>>>>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > >>>>>>>> > >>>> "have > >>>> > >>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > >>>>>>>> > >>>> individual > >>>> > >>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > >>>>>>>> > >>>> contexts of > >>>> > >>>>>>>> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > >>>>>>>> > >>>> reason > >>>> > >>>>>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> itself > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> of course relative). People make judgments according to > >>>>>>>> > >>> the > >>> > >>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they are participating, > >>>>>>>> > >> and > >> > >>>>> that > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> Understanding > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> the psychology of political economy is as of one task > >>>>>>>> > >> with > >> > >>>>>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> political > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> economic arrangements and build sustainable > >>>>>>>> > >> arrangements. > >> > >>>>> That > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > >>>>>>>> > >> to > >> > >>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> That's what I think. > >>>>>>>> >>> Andy > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> > >>>>>>>> --------- > >>>>>>>> >>> - > >>>>>>>> >>> -- > >>>>>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in > >>>>>>>> > >> my > >> > >>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > >>>>>>>> > >> paper > >> > >>>>>>>> tentatively titled: > >>>>>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > >>>>>>>> Despoiling the > >>>>>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > >>>>>>>> > >>>> Culture In > >>>> > >>>>>>>> the Quest > >>>>>>>> >>>> for More > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> sense > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > >>>>>>>> > >>> our > >>> > >>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> wealth > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > >>>>>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > >>>>>>>> > >> for > >> > >>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > >>>>>>>> > >> which > >> > >>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > >>>>>>>> > >>>> would > >>>> > >>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > >>>>>>>> > >>> are > >>> > >>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > >>>>>>>> > >>> strategy > >>> > >>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > >>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy over > >>>>>>>> > >> the > >> > >>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > >>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > >>>>>>>> > >>>> dramatic > >>>> > >>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > >>>>>>>> > >>>> Hence, we > >>>> > >>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > >>>>>>>> > >>>> behavior by > >>>> > >>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > >>>>>>>> > >>> that > >>> > >>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> Recession). > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > >>>>>>>> > >>> back > >>> > >>>>>>>> control of our political systems so we can set more > >>>>>>>> > >>>> rational > >>>> > >>>>>>>> policies for the economy. > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > >>>>>>>> > >>>> beyond the > >>>> > >>>>>>>> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > >>>>>>>> > >> appeals, > >> > >>> I > >>> > >>>>>>>> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > >>>>>>>> > >>> that > >>> > >>>>>>>> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > >>>>>>>> > >> co-authors. > >> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> David > >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Thu Jan 23 04:34:22 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 07:34:22 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: I get you andy...I have adopted my brand of marxism because, I believe, it higlights what capitalism has done since the 17th century, mainly reified itself, via ideological apparatuses, as the nature of reality as such to prevent any other alternatives to how we "can" ?or "ought" to recursively reorganize and reproduce our being in the world....within this reified space structural marxism must necessarily be science as capitalism is the social space for the unfolding of the human condition, which is no longer allowed to experience the noumenal world (I disagree with Kant...that we can never know the noumenal world), because it is embedded in phenomenon or what I call ideology. ? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? -------- Original message -------- From: Andy Blunden Date:01/23/2014 7:06 AM (GMT-05:00) To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Paul, you make a true point, which perhaps I have overlooked. You make a distinction between an ethic and a praxis. By ethic I mean the deontology which specifies for you what is the right thing to do. By praxis I mean a unity of theory and practice which guides you as someone who seeks, in collaboration with others, some end. Now for me the two are identical, but it has taken a lot of work to get to a point where my praxis is equally ethical as scientific. There cannot be a sharp line between the two. But the distinction you make clarifies what you are saying. It is not necessary that someone is able to justify what they are doing by saying "... so that ..." I just do this because it is the right thing to do. That is fine. So you have embaced, not just Western Marxism, but a specific strand of Western Marxism which lays its emphasis on structure. This is not the only brand of Western Marxism. As David Preiss remarked, my comments were descriptive "not only of politics but also of citizenship." Making projects the key concept of my ethical and theoretical thinking is not only about how the world changes, but how it is. That is, I do not see the world made up of either srtuctures or individuals, but processes, in particular (us being human beings) *projects*. But if you embrace the anti-dialectical view that the world is individuals on one side and structures on the other, then it is blindingly obvious that if you were to ask which is the really determining factor, the really powerful one, it is obviously the social structures (ideologies, etc.). But why make this dichotomy in the first place? The answer is: to do science. The idea of structures gives one a powerful lens in which to describe and explain the world, in particular how is reproduces and maintains itself, how it "works." But the down side is that structures *cannot* explain how those structures (really) change, how they come to be broken. But you are a human being. When you put down your books and go into the world you act like a human being, not a machine. You try, you endeavour, you struggle. Because you are human. One last point. The difference between science (whether Marxist or positivist) and tradition is that while both change over time and both have tendencies within them which resist change, it is in the very essence of science that its theories are always up for testing and of failing the test of practice - nothing is sacred. This is not true of tradition. As you say, Marxism is a science, in the best sense of the word. What proved right last week may be thrown out next week if it fails the test of practice. Structural Marxism has failed. If anything unites the people on this list at all, it is an interest in CHAT - Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Although originating in the USSR it is not "Soviet Marxism." In fact it was brutally suppressed in the Soviet Union. Some people still take an "Activity" to be a system or a structure, but others, myself included, take it as a "project", that which challenges and changes structures. "Ontological" speaking, the world is not structures. That is just a way of seeing the world, as structures. As static and absolutely resistant to change. But you can see it differently, more humanly, as processes. The glass is half full. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Andy, > > I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism.? I was raised in a > small province of Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents who served the > lwaes of my ancestors and country...i am a product of the > haitian/african "vodou ethic and the spirit of communism" of that > province.? It is from that practical consciousness that my teaching > and activism stems.? The women, like blacks in america, of the 70s, > 80s, 90s...did not change the world...they sought to participate in it > as constituted by rich, white, protestant, heterosexual men...Prior to > her death my grandmother, who could not read and write, "could not > understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and act like men..." > > In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, > > "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with tremendous > intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or to benefit yourself > because there are countless people who sacrificed their own education > so that you can have yours.? Your life work belongs to their service > and the poor you have left behind in haiti. .."? she went on to say, > "I know all the stuff the white people in the university have taught > you have made you an atheist, but you are not white, you are > haitian/african, you owe your freedom to no man, but to the lwaes of > your ancestors who blessed you with your intelligence to serve them > and the poor...never abandon them, pray daily, and always remember > that the universe is and must be your frame of reference...no matter > what the white people say"? > > I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the only > tradition I came across in the West that is in line with the African > communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me.? It is from my vodou > ethic and the spirit of communism that i see the destruction wrought > on by Western practical consciousness,? and it is from that ethic that > I seek to change the world.? > > We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and reproduce > and participate in a practical consciousness that is bent on raping > the earth and it's resources, and exploiting and starving the masses > of people while a few drive automobiles...that is absurd and insane! > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. > I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that > is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that > difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the > "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every > woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in > the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they > changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, > that is just as things should be. > There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." > These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not > correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your > real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list > you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from > what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually > struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing > in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any > effort to make the world a better place. > Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a > problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and > you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You > develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you > hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum > and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all > become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its > own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is > now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being > changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture > responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project > becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of > the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a > modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things > have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise > and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing > social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is > only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a > social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of > the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little > step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter > when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of > the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a > waste of time. Yes? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Tom, > > > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint > louverture > > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french > plantation colony with wage-labor.? To him that was a change from > slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived > africans on the island, who wanted to practice their vodou and have > their own plot of land to grow their own crops and practice peasant > farming as they did in Africa, it was the same system.? In fact, > Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on the island fought > against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they felt they had > become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under a > different name. > > > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not > identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave > like liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions > of the state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice > vodou and peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into > its discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an > alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social > structure. > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom > Richardson >
Date:01/22/2014? 5:36 PM? (GMT-05:00)
To: > "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International
> >
Hello again Paul > > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not > answered > > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional > change in > > a concept whose behavioural demands are not? actually met / > practised is, > > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, > can only > > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / > moral by > > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions > (hence the > > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not > themselves > > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed > entity That > > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for > analysis, to > > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > > Tom > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > wrote: > > > >? > >> Tom, > >> > >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > >> structural/humanist.? That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying > with > >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against.? > They > >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully > implementing its > >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural > concepts... > >> > >> > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> President > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >> www.mocombeian.com > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >> > >> > >> > >> -------- Original message -------- > >> From: Tom Richardson > >> Date:01/22/2014? 9:52 AM? (GMT-05:00) > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> Dear Paul > >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the > answer to > >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > >> Tom Richardson > >> Middlesbrough UK > >> > >> > >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >>??? > >>> wrote: > >>>????? > >>> Within the logic of > >>> "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not > make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people > come to > >>> change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, > andy, > >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > >>>????? > >> movement > >>??? > >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a > structural one? > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>> President > >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>> www.mocombeian.com > >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>> > >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > >>>????? > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > >>??? > >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>????? > >> International > >>??? > >>>
> >>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or > ethical) are > >>>????? > >> two > >>??? > >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other > is one > >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I > identify as > >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or > collectively) > >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not > make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even > explain > >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general > show > >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce > itself > >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out > sometimes to > >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > >>> Science is always for a purpose. > >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; > humanism is > >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>> > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>????? > >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > >>>>?? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > >>>>?? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas > as the > >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim > Andy and > >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > >>>> self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish > >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such > individual, but > >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it > >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? > >>>>?? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>> President > >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen > >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting > >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > causality?], > >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > >>>> social theory. > >>>> > >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The > Workers' > >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > Althusserians > >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > >>>> party ideology. > >>>> > >>>> Rauno Huttunen > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>> > >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > >>>>??????? > >> "Who > >>??? > >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have > a role > >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" > is not > >>>>??????? > >> a > >>??? > >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The > majority" > >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>>??????? > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>??? > >>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>??????? > >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > >>>>> they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > >>>>> america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more > than the > >>>>> capitalists.... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>> President > >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>> From: Andy Blunden > >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>>> > >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > >>>>>????????? > >> no, > >>??? > >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists > irrespective > >>>>>????????? > >>> of > >>>????? > >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which protect > >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > >>>>>????????? > >>> personality > >>>????? > >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What I > >>>>>????????? > >> am > >>??? > >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > >>>>>????????? > >> and > >>??? > >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of > >>>>>????????? > >>> the > >>>????? > >>>>> social process. > >>>>> > >>>>> Andy > >>>>> > >>>>>????????? > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>????? > >>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> Bill, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > >>>>>>??????????? > >> the > >>??? > >>>>>> free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > >>>>>>??????????? > >> going > >>??? > >>>>>> amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > >>>>>>??????????? > >>> sentiments" > >>>????? > >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as Bernstein > >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > >>>>>>??????????? > >> first > >>??? > >>>>>> century socialists. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>> President > >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr > >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic > >>>>>>??????????? > >> characteristics: > >>??? > >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living > >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > >>>>>>??????????? > >> to > >>??? > >>>>> grasp > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just talk > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>> about > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > >>>>>> > >>>>>>??????????? > >> > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > >>??? > >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > >>>>>>??????????? > >> this > >>??? > >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > >>>>>>??????????? > >> maintained > >>??? > >>>>> then > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism can > >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>> Street > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious study > >>>>>>??????????? > >> of > >>??? > >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic theories > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>> such as > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise the > >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that > >>>>>>??????????? > >>> we > >>>????? > >>>>>> just > >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. > >>>>>>??????????? > >> if > >>??? > >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more money > >>>>>> and the > >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>> Absurd > >>>>??????? > >>>>>> simplification on my part. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so to > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>> speak, > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim is > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>> always > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I believe > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>> only > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>>> meaningful > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe that > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>>> "Do unto > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as it > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>>> goes, but > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>????? > >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>????????????? > >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, it > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> seems to > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> living in a > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> required to > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>> sustain it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> rather it > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> desired.? This, > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> exercise. > >>??? > >>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>> Huw > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> >>??? > >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> through > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> than > >>??? > >>> a > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > >>>>>>>>????? Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????? ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>>????? *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>>????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> I > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but what > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> I > >>??? > >>>>> have > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed me. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>>????????? President > >>>>>>>>????????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>>????????? www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>>>>????????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>>>>????????? From: Andy Blunden > >>>>>>>>????????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>>????????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>>>>????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> International > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> fundamentals of > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? theory is > >>>>>>>>????????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> xmca > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? list this is > >>>>>>>>????????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> "collaboration" is > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? that such > >>>>>>>>????????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> in > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? raising the > >>>>>>>>????????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on > >>>>>>>>????????? formation of > >>>>>>>>????????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> invitation by > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> propsed the > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? writing > >>>>>>>>????????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> "the > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> prosperity > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? and the > >>>>>>>>????????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> gradual > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? shift in > >>>>>>>>????????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> by the > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> which the > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? gains in > >>>>>>>>????????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> actual > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> hardly news, > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> centuries. The > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> progress has > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> a few > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? of that > >>>>>>>>????????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> actual > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? project > >>>>>>>>????????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> in the > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? argument > >>>>>>>>????????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> such > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> participation, > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? but the > >>>>>>>>????????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> actually > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? engaged in > >>>>>>>>????????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> that > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? struggle. Not > >>>>>>>>????????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> you are > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? taking up > >>>>>>>>????????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my > >>>>>>>>????????? reflections on > >>>>>>>>????????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>>????????? *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>>????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > >>>????? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>>????????? >> It would appear ... > >>>>>>>>????????? >>??? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > >>>>>>>>????????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> Paul, > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> with > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? foundational issues, at all. > >>>>>>>>????????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> foundations > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> that a > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> enough > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > >>>>>>>>????????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> forward in > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> worked out > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> address the > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > >>>>>>>>????????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> parameters)? > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > David > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> Dr. > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> ablunden@mira.net > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> International > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > Andy and david, > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> have to > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > >>>>>>>>????????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> such a > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > >>>>>>>>????????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> upward > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> poor > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > >>>>>>>>????????? lifestyle? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> marxian > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> humanity to > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> it's > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we consistently > >>>>>>>>????????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> fracking, > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> resolve our > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> spirit of > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> ontology. > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> this > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>>????????? > President > >>>>>>>>????????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>>????????? > www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>>>>????????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? >
-------- Original message > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> --------
From: > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>>>>?????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>>?????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > >>>>>>>>????????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> Activity" > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>??? > >>>>>>>>?????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> Oxfam > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? International
> >>>>>>>>????????? >
Andy, > >>>>>>>>????????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical > >>>>>>>>????????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as > >>>>>>>>????????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> one's own > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> provides > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> carried > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> effective > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> individual > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> leverage > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? for ordinary citizens. > >>>>>>>>????????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> the form > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > >>>>>>>>????????? > Thanks. > >>>>>>>>????????? > David > >>>>>>>>????????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> Andy > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden > >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> International > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> read and > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> narrative. > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> doomed > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> linear > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> ideological > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a project > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> at > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> everyone had > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> implicit in > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> see how > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> story-lines > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>>????????? > *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>>????????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>>????????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> context, > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the > >>>>>>>>????????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of > >>>>>>>>????????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> our best > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be > >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> project? > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >> David > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>>????????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> Andy > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden > >>>>>>>>????????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >>>>>>>>????????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>>????????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>> International > >>>>>>??????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> measures > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? over teh > >>>>>>>>????????? >> past > >>>>>>>>????????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > >>>>>>>>????????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> the > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? practical project and the theoretical project are one > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> and the > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? same. > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>> ---------- > >>>>>>>>????????? >> -- > >>>>>>>>????????? >> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>>????????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> > >>>>>>>>????????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>>????????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> that can > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> outside of > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, this > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> would > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > >>>>>>>>????????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> endeavor. For > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> effort to > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> project. > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> actual > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? relation to the theoretical project. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> desperate > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? times call for. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> Andy > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>>????????? International > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> in > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> challenges, > >>??? > >>>>> too, > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? you know. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> First off, these observations about social > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> psychology and > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? well-being: > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> which is > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? as valid for making observations about psychology as it > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> is for > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for what > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> goes > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> course > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based investigations > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> of the > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? likely results of their behaviour. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> "have > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> individual > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> contexts of > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> reason > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> itself > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? of course relative). People make judgments according to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> the > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? norms of the project in which they are participating, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> and > >>??? > >>>>> that > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> Understanding > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> with > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> political > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? economic arrangements and build sustainable > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> arrangements. > >>??? > >>>>> That > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> to > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? collaborate with one another. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> That's what I think. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Andy > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>> --------- > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> - > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -- > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> my > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> paper > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? tentatively titled: > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are > >>>>>>>>????????? Despoiling the > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> Culture In > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the Quest > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> for More > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> sense > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative to > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> our > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our own > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> wealth > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > >>>>>>>>????????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> for > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> which > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is what > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> would > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), they > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> are > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> strategy > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? that maximizes disparity. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the > >>>>>>>>????????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> the > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of > >>>>>>>>????????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> dramatic > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> Hence, we > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> behavior by > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> that > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>> Recession). > >>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> back > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? control of our political systems so we can set more > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> rational > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? policies for the economy. > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>> beyond the > >>>>??????? > >>>>>>>>????????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> appeals, > >>??? > >>> I > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>> that > >>>????? > >>>>>>>>????????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >> co-authors. > >>??? > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> David > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>?? >>>> > >>>>>>>>????????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>>>>????????? >>?? >>??? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>>????????? > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>??????????????? > >>>>>????????? > >>>> > >>>>??????? > >>> > >>>????? > >>??? > > > >? > > From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Thu Jan 23 07:39:13 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:39:13 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Paul A fascinating post. I had never heard of black opposition to the original Haitian Revolution. I shall have to get CLRJames off my shelf. Your example does perfectly illustrate your original question with its sense of insoluble quandary. Off the top of my head, and not meant as a destructive rejoinder, just where I am, I tend to assume/presume that any 'change' is towards a fuller development of the productive forces and a trend towards a fuller assertion of humanist materialism (philosophical sense). So, if Toussaint's vision was of a movement towards property-owning bourgeois formal democracy, as was the French version across the Atlantic, rather than a continuation of a subsistence farming economy, and a shamanic-spirituality sharing people, then I am on his side, whatever the establishment of capitalist forms and their exploitative nature. But that leaves me unable to dissolve your stony question. Unless my next observation / query elicits an illuminating answer , for me at least. Crucially,do you write out of a conviction that the problem with capitalism is that it is essentially a white socio-econo-politico-cultural form which, when it meets them, will (intend to) destroy the more cohesive social forms of any (e.g. Indian sub-continental, African) grouping for whom the moment of human contact and the cultivation of welcoming sustaining society, with non-exploitative (e.g. prohibition of extortionate interest under sharia law is the limit of my knowledge but you will be able to supply many more) social forms is of paramount importance? As indeed my comment on C18th Haiti above betrays. Marx talks about this quandary in his discussion in Capital of the effect of British rapine and regulation in the (former) Indian sub-continent, although that will not get us very far in a polite discussion of social change if I am trying to persuade you that my sense of historical progress is one that you should share. Unfortunately that is where I stand, shocked at the apparent finality of my own statement, at present. Yours Tom On 22 January 2014 23:29, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint > louverture > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation > colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from slave labor, but to > Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who > wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow > their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was > the same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on > the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they > felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under > a different name. > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not > identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like > liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the > state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and > peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its > discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an > alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social > structure. > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | Oxfam International
>
Hello again Paul > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Tom, > > > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > > structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with > > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. They > > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing > its > > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Tom Richardson > > Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Dear Paul > > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to > > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > > Tom Richardson > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >wrote: > > > > > Within the logic of > > > "Men make their > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > it > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > > > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > > movement > > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural > one? > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >
> > >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are > > two > > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > it > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce > itself > > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > > Science is always for a purpose. > > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as > the > > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy > and > > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, > but > > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? > > > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > causality?], > > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > > social theory. > > > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The > Workers' > > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > Althusserians > > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > > party ideology. > > > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > > "Who > > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a > role > > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is > not > > a > > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The > majority" > > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been > > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they > > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than > the > > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > > no, > > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists > irrespective > > > of > > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which > protect > > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > > personality > > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What > I > > am > > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > > and > > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out > of > > > the > > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > > the > > > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > > going > > > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > > sentiments" > > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as > Bernstein > > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > > first > > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > President > > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > > to > > > > > grasp > > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just > talk > > > > > about > > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > > this > > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > > maintained > > > > > then > > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism > can > > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy > Wall > > > > > Street > > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious > study > > of > > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic > theories > > > > > such as > > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise > the > > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is > that > > > we > > > > > > just > > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. > eg. > > if > > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more > money > > > > > > and the > > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > > > Absurd > > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden < > ablunden@mira.net> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so > to > > > > > speak, > > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim > is > > > > > always > > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I > believe > > > > only > > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe > that > > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as > it > > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, > it > > > > > > seems to > > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not sure > > > > > > living in a > > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > > required to > > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > > > rather it > > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > > desired. This, > > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > > exercise. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > > through > > > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > > than > > > a > > > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this > one...albeit, > > I > > > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but > what > > I > > > > > have > > > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed > me. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >> President > > > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > > >> theory is > > > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > > > xmca > > > > > > >> list this is > > > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > > >> that such > > > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. > Nonetheless, > > in > > > > > > >> raising the > > > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration > on > > > > > > >> formation of > > > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > > invitation by > > > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > > propsed the > > > > > > >> writing > > > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand > that > > > > "the > > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > > prosperity > > > > > > >> and the > > > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > > gradual > > > > > > >> shift in > > > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 > years > > > > > by the > > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > > which the > > > > > > >> gains in > > > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > > > actual > > > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > > > progress has > > > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all > but > > > > > a few > > > > > > >> of that > > > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > > actual > > > > > > >> project > > > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > participate > > > > > in the > > > > > > >> argument > > > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years > of > > > > such > > > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > > participation, > > > > > > >> but the > > > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > > actually > > > > > > >> engaged in > > > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further > > that > > > > > > >> struggle. Not > > > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > > > you are > > > > > > >> taking up > > > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer > my > > > > > > >> reflections on > > > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > > > Paul, > > > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > > with > > > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > > foundations > > > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, > or > > > > > that a > > > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > > enough > > > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > > forward in > > > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > > worked out > > > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > > address the > > > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > > parameters)? > > > > > > >> > David > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > Of > > > Dr. > > > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > > have to > > > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... > Can > > > > > such a > > > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > wealth, > > > > > upward > > > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > > poor > > > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > > > marxian > > > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > > humanity to > > > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > > > it's > > > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we > consistently > > > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > > fracking, > > > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > > resolve our > > > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > > spirit of > > > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > > ontology. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that > in > > > > this > > > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >> > President > > > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
-------- Original message > > --------
From: > > > > > > >> David H Kirshner dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > > Activity" > > > > > > >> > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > > > Oxfam > > > > > > >> International
> > > > > > >> >
Andy, > > > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and > a-historical > > > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being > as > > > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > > one's own > > > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > > > provides > > > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > > > carried > > > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > > effective > > > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > > individual > > > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > > leverage > > > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > > the form > > > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > > >> > Thanks. > > > > > > >> > David > > > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > > read and > > > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > > > narrative. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > > > doomed > > > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > > linear > > > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > > ideological > > > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a > project > > > at > > > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > > everyone had > > > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > > implicit in > > > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > > > see how > > > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > > story-lines > > > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > > context, > > > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are > the > > > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors > of > > > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > > our best > > > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can > be > > > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > > > project? > > > > > > >> >> David > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > > measures > > > > > > >> over teh > > > > > > >> >> past > > > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > > the > > > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are one > > > > and the > > > > > > >> same. > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> Andy > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > > >> >> -- > > > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > > > that can > > > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > > outside of > > > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, > this > > > > > would > > > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > > endeavor. For > > > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > > effort to > > > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > > > project. > > > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > > actual > > > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > > desperate > > > > > > >> times call for. > > > > > > >> >>> David > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > >> International > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > > in > > > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > > challenges, > > > > > too, > > > > > > >> you know. > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > > > > psychology and > > > > > > >> well-being: > > > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > > which is > > > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as > it > > > > > is for > > > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for > what > > > > goes > > > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > > course > > > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based > investigations > > > > > of the > > > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > > > "have > > > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > > individual > > > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > > contexts of > > > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > > > reason > > > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which > is > > > > > itself > > > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according > to > > > the > > > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are participating, > > and > > > > > that > > > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > > Understanding > > > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one task > > with > > > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > > political > > > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable > > arrangements. > > > > > That > > > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > > to > > > > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > > >> >>> - > > > > > > >> >>> -- > > > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in > > my > > > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > > paper > > > > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy > are > > > > > > >> Despoiling the > > > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > > Culture In > > > > > > >> the Quest > > > > > > >> >>>> for More > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of > our > > > > > sense > > > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative > to > > > our > > > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our > own > > > > > wealth > > > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > > for > > > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > > which > > > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is > what > > > > would > > > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), > they > > > are > > > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > > strategy > > > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that > the > > > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy over > > the > > > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind > of > > > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > > dramatic > > > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > > Hence, we > > > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > > behavior by > > > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > > > that > > > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > > Recession). > > > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > > > back > > > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > > > > rational > > > > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > > beyond the > > > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > > appeals, > > > I > > > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > > > that > > > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > > co-authors. > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > >> >>>> David > > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Thu Jan 23 08:25:43 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Tom, May i also recommend Laurent Du Bois's "Avengers of the new world" as well...great analysis of toussaint ' s position. ?Toussaint was a despot, who made himself governor for life of French saint-domingue. ?? Essentially, what happened to Haiti after the revolution was what the africans and dessalines wanted. ?Alexander petion, following the deaths of christophe and dessalines, allowed the majority of the africans in the north to maintain their own land where they practiced subsistence farming and sold their goods on own provincial markets, while the mulatto and petit - bourgeois classes in the south established commercial ties outside of haiti. ?There was no or very little intervention by the state in the affairs of the peasants...For example, I can trace ownership of my families' land back to the time of the revolution. ..my grandfather farmed the same land to send my dad and me to university. ?Today, we must decide what to do with the land amidst the emerging bourgeois state and it's decentralization efforts and development of the productive forces. ?Many peasants are being thrown off their land for hotels, industrial parks, commercial farming etc. ?(The case of Ile la lavche, small island off the southern coast of haiti where the government wants to turn it into the countries main tourist destination is a large example of what is going on in haiti today). ?In a country in which 60-70 percent of the people are peasant farmers who have been on their land since the 18th century this is very problematic...similar to the English situation with the end of the feudal era. ? Yes, we, and I include myself in this statement, consider capitalism a white destructive socio-religious ethos, which stands against our african communal vodou ethos. ?I was raised on kreyol proverbs such as, "cooked food has no ownership"; "hands together the load is not heavy"...and many more. ?This view was usually juxtaposed against the individualism of whites and the mulatto elites in the capital city of the island. ?In fact, we continuously juxtapose the two positions by calling ourselves either the children of dessalines or the children of petion...the children of petion want to allow the whites and wage slavery on the island, and the children of dessalines want to remove ourselves from the global economy and live as our ancestors did...subsistence peasant farming...the government today is walking a tightrope on this issue...investing millions of dollars into the agricultural sector by supporting the peasant classes, many are refusing to get off the land. ? Witnessing this entire process unfold, I have begun to question everything, modernity, progress, enlightenment, social change, etc., I learned in grad school... Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson
Date:01/23/2014 10:39 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Hello Paul A fascinating post. I had never heard of black opposition to the original Haitian Revolution. I shall have to get CLRJames off my shelf. Your example does perfectly illustrate your original question with its sense of insoluble quandary. Off the top of my head, and not meant as a destructive rejoinder, just where I am, I tend to assume/presume that any 'change' is towards a fuller development of the productive forces and a trend towards a fuller assertion of humanist materialism (philosophical sense). So, if Toussaint's vision was of a movement towards property-owning bourgeois formal democracy, as was the French version across the Atlantic, rather than a continuation of a subsistence farming economy, and a shamanic-spirituality sharing people, then I am on his side, whatever the establishment of capitalist forms and their exploitative nature. But that leaves me unable to dissolve your stony question. Unless my next observation / query elicits an illuminating answer , for me at least. Crucially,do you write out of a conviction that the problem with capitalism is that it is essentially a white socio-econo-politico-cultural form which, when it meets them,? will (intend to) destroy the more cohesive social forms of? any (e.g. Indian sub-continental, African)? grouping for whom the moment of human contact and the cultivation of welcoming sustaining society, with non-exploitative (e.g. prohibition of extortionate interest under sharia law is the limit of my knowledge but you will be able to supply many more) social forms is of paramount importance? As indeed my comment on C18th Haiti above betrays. Marx talks about this quandary in his discussion in Capital of the effect of British rapine and regulation in the (former) Indian sub-continent, although that will not get us very far in a polite discussion of social change if I am trying to persuade you that my sense of historical progress is one that you should share. Unfortunately that is where I stand, shocked at the apparent finality of my own statement, at present. Yours Tom On 22 January 2014 23:29, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint > louverture > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation > colony with wage-labor.? To him that was a change from slave labor, but to > Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who > wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow > their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was > the same system.? In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on > the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they > felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under > a different name. > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not > identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like > liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the > state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and > peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its > discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an > alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social > structure. > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/22/2014? 5:36 PM >? (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | Oxfam International
>
Hello again Paul > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not answered > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change in > a concept whose behavioural demands are not? actually met / practised is, > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can only > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral by > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence the > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not themselves > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity That > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, to > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > Tom > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Tom, > > > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > > structural/humanist.? That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying with > > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against.? They > > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing > its > > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural concepts... > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: Tom Richardson > > Date:01/22/2014? 9:52 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > Dear Paul > > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer to > > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > > Tom Richardson > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >wrote: > > > > > Within the logic of > > > "Men make their > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > it > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come to > > > change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, andy, > > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > > movement > > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural > one? > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < > > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > International > > >
> > >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) are > > two > > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and I > > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is one > > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify as > > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or collectively) > > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > it > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even explain > > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general show > > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell > > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce > itself > > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes to > > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > > Science is always for a purpose. > > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism is > > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > > > Andy > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > > >? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > > >? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as > the > > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy > and > > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > > self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish > > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, > but > > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it > > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists > > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? > > > >? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's > > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > causality?], > > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > > social theory. > > > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) > > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The > Workers' > > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > Althusserians > > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but actually > > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. > > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > > party ideology. > > > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am > > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself > > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > > "Who > > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer is > > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of > > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a > role > > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is > not > > a > > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The > majority" > > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So > > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to > > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are > > > > > they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > > america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been > > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they > > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > > housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than > the > > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but > > no, > > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists > irrespective > > > of > > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which > protect > > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > > personality > > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." What > I > > am > > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social relations > > and > > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out > of > > > the > > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., > > the > > > > > > free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in "the > > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > > going > > > > > > amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a humanist > > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > > sentiments" > > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as > Bernstein > > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > > first > > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > President > > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard > > to > > > > > grasp > > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just > talk > > > > > about > > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version of > > this > > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > > maintained > > > > > then > > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism > can > > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy > Wall > > > > > Street > > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious > study > > of > > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic > theories > > > > > such as > > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise > the > > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is > that > > > we > > > > > > just > > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. > eg. > > if > > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more > money > > > > > > and the > > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great > > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) > > > > Absurd > > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden < > ablunden@mira.net> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so > to > > > > > speak, > > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the maxim > is > > > > > always > > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I > believe > > > > only > > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you is > > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe > that > > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as > it > > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, > it > > > > > > seems to > > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too.? I am not sure > > > > > > living in a > > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > > required to > > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, > > > > > rather it > > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > > desired.? This, > > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > > exercise. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > > through > > > > > > >>???? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > > than > > > a > > > > > > >>???? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > > >>???? Andy > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >>???? *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >>???? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this > one...albeit, > > I > > > > > > >>???????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but > what > > I > > > > > have > > > > > > >>???????? seen happen to black america has really disappointed > me. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >>???????? President > > > > > > >>???????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > >>???????? www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > >>???????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > >>???????? From: Andy Blunden > > > > > > >>???????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > >>???????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > >>???????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > International > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > > >>???????? theory is > > > > > > >>???????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the > > > xmca > > > > > > >>???????? list this is > > > > > > >>???????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > > >>???????? that such > > > > > > >>???????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. > Nonetheless, > > in > > > > > > >>???????? raising the > > > > > > >>???????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration > on > > > > > > >>???????? formation of > > > > > > >>???????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > > invitation by > > > > > > >>???????? criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > > propsed the > > > > > > >>???????? writing > > > > > > >>???????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand > that > > > > "the > > > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > > prosperity > > > > > > >>???????? and the > > > > > > >>???????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > > gradual > > > > > > >>???????? shift in > > > > > > >>???????? political control of the economy over the past 50 > years > > > > > by the > > > > > > >>???????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > > which the > > > > > > >>???????? gains in > > > > > > >>???????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of > > > > actual > > > > > > >>???????? self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > > >>???????? David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > > >>???????? wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social > > > > > > progress has > > > > > > >>???????? always been only in the teeth of opposition from all > but > > > > > a few > > > > > > >>???????? of that > > > > > > >>???????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > > actual > > > > > > >>???????? project > > > > > > >>???????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > participate > > > > > in the > > > > > > >>???????? argument > > > > > > >>???????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years > of > > > > such > > > > > > >>???????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > > participation, > > > > > > >>???????? but the > > > > > > >>???????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > > actually > > > > > > >>???????? engaged in > > > > > > >>???????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further > > that > > > > > > >>???????? struggle. Not > > > > > > >>???????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that > > > > you are > > > > > > >>???????? taking up > > > > > > >>???????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer > my > > > > > > >>???????? reflections on > > > > > > >>???????? your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? Andy > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >>???????? *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >>???????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >>???????? >> It would appear ... > > > > > > >>???????? >>??? > > > > > > > >>???????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > > >>???????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and > > > Paul, > > > > > > >>???????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come to terms > > with > > > > > > >>???????? foundational issues, at all. > > > > > > >>???????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > > foundations > > > > > > >>???????? right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, > or > > > > > that a > > > > > > >>???????? make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > > enough > > > > > > >>???????? foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > > >>???????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > > forward in > > > > > > >>???????? any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > > worked out > > > > > > >>???????? foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > > address the > > > > > > >>???????? world as we find it, without the theorist's option of > > > > > > >>???????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > > parameters)? > > > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf > Of > > > Dr. > > > > > > >>???????? Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > Andy and david, > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > > have to > > > > > > >>???????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > > >>???????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... > Can > > > > > such a > > > > > > >>???????? counter - narrative come from a humanity, including us > > > > > > >>???????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > wealth, > > > > > upward > > > > > > >>???????? mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > > poor > > > > > > >>???????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois > > > > > > >>???????? lifestyle? > > > > > > > >>???????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in > > > marxian > > > > > > >>???????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > > humanity to > > > > > > >>???????? change the way it recursively reorganize and reproduce > > > it's > > > > > > >>???????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we > consistently > > > > > > >>???????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > > fracking, > > > > > > >>???????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > > resolve our > > > > > > >>???????? problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > > spirit of > > > > > > >>???????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > > ontology. > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that > in > > > > this > > > > > > >>???????? case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > >>???????? > President > > > > > > >>???????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > >>???????? > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > >>???????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? >
-------- Original message > > --------
From: > > > > > > >>???????? David H Kirshner dkirsh@lsu.edu > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>????????
Date:01/21/2014? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > >>????????
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > >>???????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > > Activity" > > > > > > >>???????? > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > > > > Oxfam > > > > > > >>???????? International
> > > > > > >>???????? >
Andy, > > > > > > >>???????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and > a-historical > > > > > > >>???????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being > as > > > > > > >>???????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > > one's own > > > > > > >>???????? past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think it > > > > > provides > > > > > > >>???????? a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, > > > > carried > > > > > > >>???????? to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > > effective > > > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > > individual > > > > > > >>???????? unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > > >>???????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > > leverage > > > > > > >>???????? for ordinary citizens. > > > > > > >>???????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > > the form > > > > > > >>???????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > > >>???????? > Thanks. > > > > > > >>???????? > David > > > > > > >>???????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >>???????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > > >>???????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > > >>???????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >>???????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > > read and > > > > > > >>???????? participate in acting out the opening chapter of that > > > > > > narrative. > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project > > > > doomed > > > > > > >>???????? to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > > linear > > > > > > >>???????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > > ideological > > > > > > >>???????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a > project > > > at > > > > > > >>???????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > > everyone had > > > > > > >>???????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > > implicit in > > > > > > >>???????? the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to > > > > > see how > > > > > > >>???????? the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > > story-lines > > > > > > >>???????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > >>???????? > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >>???????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >>???????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > > context, > > > > > > >>???????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are > the > > > > > > >>???????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors > of > > > > > > >>???????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > > our best > > > > > > >>???????? interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > > >>???????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can > be > > > > > > >>???????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical > > > > > project? > > > > > > >>???????? >> David > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >>???????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > > >>???????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > > >>???????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >>???????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > > measures > > > > > > >>???????? over teh > > > > > > >>???????? >> past > > > > > > >>???????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader > > > > > > >>???????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that > > the > > > > > > >>???????? practical project and the theoretical project are one > > > > and the > > > > > > >>???????? same. > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> Andy > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > > >>???????? >> -- > > > > > > >>???????? >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >>???????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> > > > > > > >>???????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative > > > > > that can > > > > > > >>???????? be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > > outside of > > > > > > >>???????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, > this > > > > > would > > > > > > >>???????? constitute a distraction from the real work, perhaps a > > > > > > >>???????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > > endeavor. For > > > > > > >>???????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > > effort to > > > > > > >>???????? apply what one has come to understand from the larger > > > > > project. > > > > > > >>???????? For others, still, perhaps simply a political activity > > > > > > >>???????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > > actual > > > > > > >>???????? relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > > desperate > > > > > > >>???????? times call for. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> David > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > >>???????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > >>???????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > >>???????? ] On Behalf > Of > > > Andy > > > > > > >>???????? Blunden > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > > >>???????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > >>???????? International > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating > > in > > > > > > >>???????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > > challenges, > > > > > too, > > > > > > >>???????? you know. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> First off, these observations about social > > > > psychology and > > > > > > >>???????? well-being: > > > > > > >>???????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > > which is > > > > > > >>???????? as valid for making observations about psychology as > it > > > > > is for > > > > > > >>???????? social theory. And in general, this is lacking for > what > > > > goes > > > > > > >>???????? by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > > course > > > > > > >>???????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based > investigations > > > > > of the > > > > > > >>???????? likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or > > > > "have > > > > > > >>???????? more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > > individual > > > > > > >>???????? has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > > contexts of > > > > > > >>???????? the projects to which they are committed. That is the > > > > reason > > > > > > >>???????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which > is > > > > > itself > > > > > > >>???????? of course relative). People make judgments according > to > > > the > > > > > > >>???????? norms of the project in which they are participating, > > and > > > > > that > > > > > > >>???????? means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > > Understanding > > > > > > >>???????? the psychology of political economy is as of one task > > with > > > > > > >>???????? that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > > political > > > > > > >>???????? economic arrangements and build sustainable > > arrangements. > > > > > That > > > > > > >>???????? requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able > > to > > > > > > >>???????? collaborate with one another. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> That's what I think. > > > > > > >>???????? >>> Andy > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > > >>???????? >>> - > > > > > > >>???????? >>> -- > > > > > > >>???????? >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > >>???????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > >>???????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in > > my > > > > > > >>???????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > > paper > > > > > > >>???????? tentatively titled: > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy > are > > > > > > >>???????? Despoiling the > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > > Culture In > > > > > > >>???????? the Quest > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> for More > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of > our > > > > > sense > > > > > > >>???????? of material well-being is not accumulation, relative > to > > > our > > > > > > >>???????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our > own > > > > > wealth > > > > > > >>???????? in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > > >>???????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, > > for > > > > > > >>???????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > > which > > > > > > >>???????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is > what > > > > would > > > > > > >>???????? provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), > they > > > are > > > > > > >>???????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > > strategy > > > > > > >>???????? that maximizes disparity. > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that > the > > > > > > >>???????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over > > the > > > > > > >>???????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind > of > > > > > > >>???????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > > dramatic > > > > > > >>???????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > > Hence, we > > > > > > >>???????? see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > > behavior by > > > > > > >>???????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble > > > that > > > > > > >>???????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > > Recession). > > > > > > >>???????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take > > > back > > > > > > >>???????? control of our political systems so we can set more > > > > rational > > > > > > >>???????? policies for the economy. > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > > beyond the > > > > > > >>???????? U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > > appeals, > > > I > > > > > > >>???????? would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even one > > > that > > > > > > >>???????? somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > > co-authors. > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>>> David > > > > > > >>???????? >>>>?? >>>> > > > > > > >>???????? >>>>???? >>>>?????? >>>>??????? >>>?? >>>???? >>> > > >> > > > > > > >>???????? >>?? >>??? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >>???????? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Thu Jan 23 08:41:54 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:41:54 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Watch "HAITI IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS" on YouTube Message-ID: Tom, This is the government's, backed by the US, ?plan for haiti... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLeHSnLPybo&feature=youtube_gdata_player Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com? From tom.richardson3@googlemail.com Thu Jan 23 11:16:54 2014 From: tom.richardson3@googlemail.com (Tom Richardson) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:16:54 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Paul thank you for sharing that painful reality Yours Tom On 23 January 2014 16:25, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > Tom, > > May i also recommend Laurent Du Bois's "Avengers of the new world" as > well...great analysis of toussaint ' s position. Toussaint was a despot, > who made himself governor for life of French saint-domingue. > > Essentially, what happened to Haiti after the revolution was what the > africans and dessalines wanted. Alexander petion, following the deaths of > christophe and dessalines, allowed the majority of the africans in the > north to maintain their own land where they practiced subsistence farming > and sold their goods on own provincial markets, while the mulatto and petit > - bourgeois classes in the south established commercial ties outside of > haiti. There was no or very little intervention by the state in the > affairs of the peasants...For example, I can trace ownership of my > families' land back to the time of the revolution. ..my grandfather farmed > the same land to send my dad and me to university. Today, we must decide > what to do with the land amidst the emerging bourgeois state and it's > decentralization efforts and development of the productive forces. Many > peasants are being thrown off their land for hotels, industrial parks, > commercial farming etc. (The case of Ile la lavche, small island off the > southern coast of haiti where the government wants to turn it into the > countries main tourist destination is a large example of what is going on > in haiti today). In a country in which 60-70 percent of the people are > peasant farmers who have been on their land since the 18th century this is > very problematic...similar to the English situation with the end of the > feudal era. > > Yes, we, and I include myself in this statement, consider capitalism a > white destructive socio-religious ethos, which stands against our african > communal vodou ethos. I was raised on kreyol proverbs such as, "cooked > food has no ownership"; "hands together the load is not heavy"...and many > more. This view was usually juxtaposed against the individualism of whites > and the mulatto elites in the capital city of the island. In fact, we > continuously juxtapose the two positions by calling ourselves either the > children of dessalines or the children of petion...the children of petion > want to allow the whites and wage slavery on the island, and the children > of dessalines want to remove ourselves from the global economy and live as > our ancestors did...subsistence peasant farming...the government today is > walking a tightrope on this issue...investing millions of dollars into the > agricultural sector by supporting the peasant classes, many are refusing to > get off the land. > > Witnessing this entire process unfold, I have begun to question > everything, modernity, progress, enlightenment, social change, etc., I > learned in grad school... > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/23/2014 10:39 AM > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | Oxfam International
>
Hello Paul > A fascinating post. I had never heard of black opposition to the original > Haitian Revolution. I shall have to get CLRJames off my shelf. Your example > does perfectly illustrate your original question with its sense of > insoluble quandary. > > Off the top of my head, and not meant as a destructive rejoinder, just > where I am, I tend to assume/presume that any 'change' is towards a fuller > development of the productive forces and a trend towards a fuller assertion > of humanist materialism (philosophical sense). > > So, if Toussaint's vision was of a movement towards property-owning > bourgeois formal democracy, as was the French version across the Atlantic, > rather than a continuation of a subsistence farming economy, and a > shamanic-spirituality sharing people, then I am on his side, whatever the > establishment of capitalist forms and their exploitative nature. > > But that leaves me unable to dissolve your stony question. Unless my next > observation / query elicits an illuminating answer , for me at least. > > Crucially,do you write out of a conviction that the problem with capitalism > is that it is essentially a white socio-econo-politico-cultural form which, > when it meets them, will (intend to) destroy the more cohesive social > forms of any (e.g. Indian sub-continental, African) grouping for whom the > moment of human contact and the cultivation of welcoming sustaining > society, with non-exploitative (e.g. prohibition of extortionate interest > under sharia law is the limit of my knowledge but you will be able to > supply many more) social forms is of paramount importance? > As indeed my comment on C18th Haiti above betrays. > > Marx talks about this quandary in his discussion in Capital of the effect > of British rapine and regulation in the (former) Indian sub-continent, > although that will not get us very far in a polite discussion of social > change if I am trying to persuade you that my sense of historical progress > is one that you should share. > > Unfortunately that is where I stand, shocked at the apparent finality of my > own statement, at present. > Yours > Tom > > > > On 22 January 2014 23:29, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >wrote: > > > Tom, > > > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint > > louverture > > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation > > colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from slave labor, but > to > > Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who > > wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow > > their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it > was > > the same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons > on > > the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because > they > > felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways > under > > a different name. > > > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not > > identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like > > liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the > > state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and > > peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its > > discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an > > alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the > > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social > > structure. > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < > > tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM > > (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for > the > > Few | Oxfam International
> >
Hello again Paul > > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not > answered > > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that > > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change > in > > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised is, > > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too > > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can > only > > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society > > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their > > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting > > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that > > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral > by > > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest > > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not > > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence > the > > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to > > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not > themselves > > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity > That > > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, > to > > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination > > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > > Tom > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >wrote: > > > > > Tom, > > > > > > I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > > > structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian > > > logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying > with > > > itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black > > > american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. > They > > > were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing > > its > > > structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural > concepts... > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > President > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > From: Tom Richardson > > > Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > Dear Paul > > > At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer > to > > > all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking > > > forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > > > Tom Richardson > > > Middlesbrough UK > > > > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >wrote: > > > > > > > Within the logic of > > > > "Men make their > > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > > it > > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > > already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come > to > > > > change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, > andy, > > > > would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights > > > movement > > > > changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a structural > > one? > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > President > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden > < > > > > ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> > > > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > International > > > >
> > > >
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) > are > > > two > > > > quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad category, and > I > > > > think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism > > > > (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is > one > > > > way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify > as > > > > a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or > collectively) > > > > as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > > > > "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make > their > > > > own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make > > it > > > > under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing > > > > already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely > > > > nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an > > > > illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. > > > > This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on > > > > the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even > explain > > > > how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, > > > > make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general > show > > > > themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never > tell > > > > you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce > > itself > > > > and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity > > > > with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes > to > > > > not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > > > > Science is always for a purpose. > > > > Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism > is > > > > for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown around. > > > > > How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? > > > > > Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world > > > > > which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as > > the > > > > > nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy > > and > > > > > rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > > > > > self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish > > > > > society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > > > > > althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, > > but > > > > > "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it > > > > > appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what > capitalists > > > > > have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be > > > > > better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what > sense? > > > > > How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > President > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > From: Rauno Huttunen > > > > > Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. > Althusser's > > > > > theory of science and social theory are very interesting > > > > > (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > > causality?], > > > > > ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is > > > > > possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's > > > > > social theory. > > > > > > > > > > Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > > > > > Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, > Debray...) > > > > > Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > > > > > Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic > > > > > critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The > > Workers' > > > > > Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > > Althusserians > > > > > really don't care about working class, their intentions, their > > > > > feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that > > > > > they represents the objective interests of working class but > actually > > > > > they are telling to working class how workers should think and > feel. > > > > > For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's > > > > > ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian > > > > > party ideology. > > > > > > > > > > Rauno Huttunen > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > > > > Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > > > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I > am > > > > > deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is > itself > > > > > the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. > > > "Who > > > > > will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the answer > is > > > > > that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product > of > > > > > many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a > > role > > > > > to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is > > not > > > a > > > > > serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The > > majority" > > > > > (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. > So > > > > > what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according > to > > > > > majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > But your position, andy, begs the question who will take that > > > > > > self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are > > > > > > they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin > > > > > > america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have > been > > > > > > interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present > > > > > > capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think > they > > > > > > can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > > > > > > housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than > > the > > > > > > capitalists.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > President > > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > From: Andy Blunden > > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > > > Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, > but > > > no, > > > > > > it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists > > irrespective > > > > of > > > > > > the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots which > > protect > > > > > > those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > > > > personality > > > > > > to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us academics." > What > > I > > > am > > > > > > saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social > relations > > > and > > > > > > thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a > > > > > > collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out > > of > > > > the > > > > > > social process. > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, > I.e., > > > the > > > > > > > free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in > "the > > > > > > > great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and > > > going > > > > > > > amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a > humanist > > > > > > > capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > > > > sentiments" > > > > > > > and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as > > Bernstein > > > > > > > grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty > > > first > > > > > > > century socialists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > > President > > > > > > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > > From: Bill Kerr > > > > > > > Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > > To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My contention is that capitalism has these economic > > > characteristics: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) General increase in standard of living > > > > > > > 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > > > > > > > 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is > hard > > > to > > > > > > grasp > > > > > > > why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda Gates just > > talk > > > > > > about > > > > > > > (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other version > of > > > this > > > > > > > narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is interesting: > > > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > > > maintained > > > > > > then > > > > > > > people will continue to tolerate capitalism. Whether capitalism > > can > > > > > > > maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy > > Wall > > > > > > Street > > > > > > > movement suggested to me that it was time to do some serious > > study > > > of > > > > > > > Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic > > theories > > > > > > such as > > > > > > > Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) which recognise > > the > > > > > > > inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is > > that > > > > we > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. > > eg. > > > if > > > > > > > capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing more > > money > > > > > > > and the > > > > > > > very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years > (Great > > > > > > > Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival > (?) > > > > > Absurd > > > > > > > simplification on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden < > > ablunden@mira.net> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a counter-ethic, so > > to > > > > > > speak, > > > > > > > > since arguments against an ethic are just words, and the > maxim > > is > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is meaningful, I > > believe > > > > > only > > > > > > > > within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship to you > is > > > > > > > meaningful > > > > > > > > only in connection of what we do, as we, together. I believe > > that > > > > > > > "Do unto > > > > > > > > others as you would have them do unto you," is fine as far as > > it > > > > > > > goes, but > > > > > > > > is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Huw Lloyd wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Going back to reference to the bubble and social psychology, > > it > > > > > > > seems to > > > > > > > >> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. I am not > sure > > > > > > > living in a > > > > > > > >> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given the immaturity > > > > > > > required to > > > > > > > >> sustain it. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be > combatted, > > > > > > rather it > > > > > > > >> is the inane notion that this is something to be admired or > > > > > > > desired. This, > > > > > > > >> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more rewarding > > > exercise. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > > > >> Huw > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > > > > > > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality > > > through > > > > > > > >> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more important > > > than > > > > a > > > > > > > >> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist said. > > > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this > > one...albeit, > > > I > > > > > > > >> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, but > > what > > > I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > >> seen happen to black america has really disappointed > > me. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > > >> President > > > > > > > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > > >> www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > > > > > > >> From: Andy Blunden > > > > > > > >> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > > > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > International > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> David, you are quite correct that agreement on > > > > > > fundamentals of > > > > > > > >> theory is > > > > > > > >> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on > the > > > > xmca > > > > > > > >> list this is > > > > > > > >> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > > > > > "collaboration" is > > > > > > > >> that such > > > > > > > >> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. > > Nonetheless, > > > in > > > > > > > >> raising the > > > > > > > >> proposal on this list your are inviting > collaboration > > on > > > > > > > >> formation of > > > > > > > >> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the > > > > > > > invitation by > > > > > > > >> criticising your concept of the proposal. You have > > > > > > propsed the > > > > > > > >> writing > > > > > > > >> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand > > that > > > > > "the > > > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and > > > > prosperity > > > > > > > >> and the > > > > > > > >> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the > > > gradual > > > > > > > >> shift in > > > > > > > >> political control of the economy over the past 50 > > years > > > > > > by the > > > > > > > >> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in > > > > > > which the > > > > > > > >> gains in > > > > > > > >> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense > of > > > > > actual > > > > > > > >> self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This > is > > > > > > > hardly news, > > > > > > > >> David. This has been argued (correctly) for several > > > > > > > centuries. The > > > > > > > >> wealthy have always been a class of parasites; > social > > > > > > > progress has > > > > > > > >> always been only in the teeth of opposition from all > > but > > > > > > a few > > > > > > > >> of that > > > > > > > >> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some > > > > actual > > > > > > > >> project > > > > > > > >> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > > participate > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > >> argument > > > > > > > >> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years > > of > > > > > such > > > > > > > >> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's length > > > > > > participation, > > > > > > > >> but the > > > > > > > >> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > > > actually > > > > > > > >> engaged in > > > > > > > >> that struggle in any formm about how best to further > > > that > > > > > > > >> struggle. Not > > > > > > > >> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased > that > > > > > you are > > > > > > > >> taking up > > > > > > > >> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is > offer > > my > > > > > > > >> reflections on > > > > > > > >> your object-concept, as others have and will. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Andy > > > > > > > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > > >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < > > > > http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > > >> >> It would appear ... > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > > > > > > > >> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy > and > > > > Paul, > > > > > > > >> that in a practical endeavor one has to come to > terms > > > with > > > > > > > >> foundational issues, at all. > > > > > > > >> > The fact that social psychology may not have the > > > > > > foundations > > > > > > > >> right doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, > > or > > > > > > that a > > > > > > > >> make-shift frame of reference can't provide a stable > > > > enough > > > > > > > >> foundation to move people forward (collectively and > > > > > > > >> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way > > > > > > forward in > > > > > > > >> any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully > > > > > worked out > > > > > > > >> foundational perspectives (and given the need to > > > > > address the > > > > > > > >> world as we find it, without the theorist's option > of > > > > > > > >> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable > > > > > > parameters)? > > > > > > > >> > David > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > > Of > > > > Dr. > > > > > > > >> Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > > > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > > > ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > > International > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Andy and david, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would > > > > > have to > > > > > > > >> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., > > > > > > > >> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... > > Can > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > >> counter - narrative come from a humanity, including > us > > > > > > > >> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual > > wealth, > > > > > > upward > > > > > > > >> mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of > > > poor > > > > > > > >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our > bourgeois > > > > > > > >> lifestyle? > > > > > > > > >> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in > > > > marxian > > > > > > > >> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging for > > > > > > humanity to > > > > > > > >> change the way it recursively reorganize and > reproduce > > > > it's > > > > > > > >> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we > > consistently > > > > > > > >> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, > > > > > fracking, > > > > > > > >> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to > > > > > > resolve our > > > > > > > >> problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the > > > > > spirit of > > > > > > > >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) > > > ontology. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that > > in > > > > > this > > > > > > > >> case we are all dead we just do not know it yet. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > > > > > > >> > President > > > > > > > >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > > > > > > >> > www.mocombeian.com > > > > > > > >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> >
-------- Original message > > > --------
From: > > > > > > > >> David H Kirshner > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > > > > > > > >>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > > > > > > >> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > > > > > Activity" > > > > > > > >> > > xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | > > > > > Oxfam > > > > > > > >> International
> > > > > > > >> >
Andy, > > > > > > > >> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and > > a-historical > > > > > > > >> ascription of the human sense of material well-being > > as > > > > > > > >> relative to other people (rather than as relative to > > > > > > one's own > > > > > > > >> past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think > it > > > > > > provides > > > > > > > >> a way to understand the individual pursuit of > wealth, > > > > > carried > > > > > > > >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an > > > > effective > > > > > > > >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the > > > > > individual > > > > > > > >> unfettered by societal constraints. We badly need a > > > > > > > >> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political > > > > leverage > > > > > > > >> for ordinary citizens. > > > > > > > >> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in > > > > > the form > > > > > > > >> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. > > > > > > > >> > Thanks. > > > > > > > >> > David > > > > > > > >> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > >> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > > Of > > > > Andy > > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > > > > > > > >> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > >> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > > International > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to > > > > > read and > > > > > > > >> participate in acting out the opening chapter of > that > > > > > > > narrative. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a > project > > > > > doomed > > > > > > > >> to failure however, as it conceived of itself as a > > > linear > > > > > > > >> expansion which would somehow bypass social and > > > > ideological > > > > > > > >> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as a > > project > > > > at > > > > > > > >> all. Just a mesage about the one true world which > > > > > > everyone had > > > > > > > >> to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies > > > > > implicit in > > > > > > > >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy > to > > > > > > see how > > > > > > > >> the plot will unfold itself though the multiple > > > > story-lines > > > > > > > >> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >> ------------ > > > > > > > >> > *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > >> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. > > > > > context, > > > > > > > >> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are > > the > > > > > > > >> engines of advancement and prosperity and the > saviors > > of > > > > > > > >> society. What is in their best interest is in all of > > > > > our best > > > > > > > >> interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. > > > > > > > >> >> Andy, is this practical project something that > can > > be > > > > > > > >> undertaken and completed in real-time as a > theoretical > > > > > > project? > > > > > > > >> >> David > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > >> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > > Of > > > > Andy > > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > > >> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > > > > > > > >> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > > > > > > > International > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate > > > > > measures > > > > > > > >> over teh > > > > > > > >> >> past > > > > > > > >> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the > broader > > > > > > > >> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential > that > > > the > > > > > > > >> practical project and the theoretical project are > one > > > > > and the > > > > > > > >> same. > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> Andy > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >> ---------- > > > > > > > >> >> -- > > > > > > > >> >> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > >> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > > >> >> >> >>> Andy, > > > > > > > >> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a > counter-narrative > > > > > > that can > > > > > > > >> be effective in the here and now, one has to step > > > > > outside of > > > > > > > >> the broader theoretical project. I guess, for some, > > this > > > > > > would > > > > > > > >> constitute a distraction from the real work, > perhaps a > > > > > > > >> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > > > > > endeavor. For > > > > > > > >> others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) > > > > > > effort to > > > > > > > >> apply what one has come to understand from the > larger > > > > > > project. > > > > > > > >> For others, still, perhaps simply a political > activity > > > > > > > >> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little > > > actual > > > > > > > >> relation to the theoretical project. > > > > > > > >> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these > > > > > desperate > > > > > > > >> times call for. > > > > > > > >> >>> David > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > >> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > > > > > >> ] On Behalf > > Of > > > > Andy > > > > > > > >> Blunden > > > > > > > >> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > > > > > > > >> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > > > > > > >> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam > > > > > > > >> International > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> Well, that's the project I have been > collaborating > > > in > > > > > > > >> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its > > > challenges, > > > > > > too, > > > > > > > >> you know. > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> First off, these observations about social > > > > > psychology and > > > > > > > >> well-being: > > > > > > > >> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one > > > > > which is > > > > > > > >> as valid for making observations about psychology as > > it > > > > > > is for > > > > > > > >> social theory. And in general, this is lacking for > > what > > > > > goes > > > > > > > >> by the name of "social psychology." People do not of > > > > course > > > > > > > >> govern their behaviour by evidence-based > > investigations > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > >> likely results of their behaviour. > > > > > > > >> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" > or > > > > > "have > > > > > > > >> more wealth than someone else". The thinking of an > > > > > individual > > > > > > > >> has to be understood (I would contend) within the > > > > > contexts of > > > > > > > >> the projects to which they are committed. That is > the > > > > > reason > > > > > > > >> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which > > is > > > > > > itself > > > > > > > >> of course relative). People make judgments according > > to > > > > the > > > > > > > >> norms of the project in which they are > participating, > > > and > > > > > > that > > > > > > > >> means semantic, theoretical and practical norms. > > > > > > Understanding > > > > > > > >> the psychology of political economy is as of one > task > > > with > > > > > > > >> that of building a project to overthrow the existing > > > > > > political > > > > > > > >> economic arrangements and build sustainable > > > arrangements. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > >> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and > able > > > to > > > > > > > >> collaborate with one another. > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> That's what I think. > > > > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >> --------- > > > > > > > >> >>> - > > > > > > > >> >>> -- > > > > > > > >> >>> *Andy Blunden* > > > > > > > >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > > > > > > > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out > in > > > my > > > > > > > >> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, a > > > paper > > > > > > > >> tentatively titled: > > > > > > > >> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy > > are > > > > > > > >> Despoiling the > > > > > > > >> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our > > > > > Culture In > > > > > > > >> the Quest > > > > > > > >> >>>> for More > > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of > > our > > > > > > sense > > > > > > > >> of material well-being is not accumulation, relative > > to > > > > our > > > > > > > >> own past wealth, but the comparative measure of our > > own > > > > > > wealth > > > > > > > >> in relation to that of others. (I believe this is a > > > > > > > >> well-established principle of social psychology.) > So, > > > for > > > > > > > >> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy > > > which > > > > > > > >> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this is > > what > > > > > would > > > > > > > >> provide more actual wealth for the ultra-wealthy), > > they > > > > are > > > > > > > >> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they can--a > > > > strategy > > > > > > > >> that maximizes disparity. > > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that > > the > > > > > > > >> gradual shift in political control of the economy > over > > > the > > > > > > > >> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a > kind > > of > > > > > > > >> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so > > > > > dramatic > > > > > > > >> as to overwhelm any sense of actual self-interest. > > > > > Hence, we > > > > > > > >> see increasingly irrational and self-destructive > > > > > behavior by > > > > > > > >> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing > bubble > > > > that > > > > > > > >> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great > > > > > > Recession). > > > > > > > >> The conclusion, of course, is a call to action to > take > > > > back > > > > > > > >> control of our political systems so we can set more > > > > > rational > > > > > > > >> policies for the economy. > > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily > > > > > beyond the > > > > > > > >> U.S. situation to the world, but if this project > > > appeals, > > > > I > > > > > > > >> would welcome a collaborative effort--perhaps even > one > > > > that > > > > > > > >> somehow encompasses the whole XMCA listserv as > > > co-authors. > > > > > > > >> >>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>> David > > > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Thu Jan 23 11:19:49 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:19:49 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52E105E1.7000602@mira.net> References: <52E105E1.7000602@mira.net> Message-ID: Sorry to jump in sideways here, but Andy, isn't your notion of "tradition" a bit too reified? That is, a bit too much like structure (which you aptly criticize)? Aren't traditions just the projects of a community of people? Changes in tradition don't change nearly as quickly as science (seldom will you see such changes that are shorter than a lifetime). But to say that traditions are not always up for the testing and failing in practice seems to ignore tens of thousands of years of human history in which precisely this process has been happening. Over and over and over again... The sacred may be "sacred" in theory/ideology, but that doesn't mean that it is unchangeable in practice. And to Paul, following Andy, I wonder if your approach leaves room for the transformation of tradition into the future, that is, allowing for it to change into something completely different altogether? Or is there some essence to tradition (e.g., of Haitian vodou) that must remain? (and I suspect that might get to Andy's question of process and processualism - processualists don't like essences...). And one last note, the communalism that you describe Paul, is a common feature of traditional cultures around the globe. Sharing resources for the common good might indeed be the hallmark of humanity (were it not for late industrial capitalism!). It is an admirable one. Yet, going forward, I have my doubts about it as a global politics b.c. it is almost always a bounded notion - i.e. the "community" is bounded. One shares in community with kin and ancestors or clan members, but one has no debt to outsiders. This seems like it would present some difficulties in terms of global politics. I think this is where Marx is sharpest - he proposed that in the future, we will come to recognize a community of humankind that has no such boundaries, such that you (we!) recognize a kinship to the Hmong woman suffering in southern China under local as well as global forms of oppression as well as the Inuit man doing the same in northern Alaska and as the child in Paraguay. I think Marx offers a way of imagining such a kinship of humanity - and he says that it turns out that it is capitalism that accomplishes this! Capitalism provides a means by which we Americans come into a kind intercourse with others around the globe. Granted most of us are blind to the hands the touched the clothes that lay against our skin right now as we speak. Quick object lesson, take a look at your shirt label and imagine the hands of the person who was sewing this garment. Suddenly the collapse of a garment factory in Bangladesh becomes a great deal more intimate than it ever could have been a hundred or so years ago. The person who made the very sweater that warms you could have died in that collapse. And this point of Marx's makes me quite a bit more agnostic about Wendell Barry's point about avoiding complicated technologies. I agree the we need to avoid dependence upon them. But why not hack it for your/our ends? But I ramble... -greg On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Paul, you make a true point, which perhaps I have overlooked. You make a > distinction between an ethic and a praxis. By ethic I mean the deontology > which specifies for you what is the right thing to do. By praxis I mean a > unity of theory and practice which guides you as someone who seeks, in > collaboration with others, some end. Now for me the two are identical, but > it has taken a lot of work to get to a point where my praxis is equally > ethical as scientific. There cannot be a sharp line between the two. But > the distinction you make clarifies what you are saying. It is not necessary > that someone is able to justify what they are doing by saying "... so that > ..." I just do this because it is the right thing to do. That is fine. > > So you have embaced, not just Western Marxism, but a specific strand of > Western Marxism which lays its emphasis on structure. This is not the only > brand of Western Marxism. > As David Preiss remarked, my comments were descriptive "not only of > politics but also of citizenship." Making projects the key concept of my > ethical and theoretical thinking is not only about how the world changes, > but how it is. That is, I do not see the world made up of either srtuctures > or individuals, but processes, in particular (us being human beings) > *projects*. But if you embrace the anti-dialectical view that the world is > individuals on one side and structures on the other, then it is blindingly > obvious that if you were to ask which is the really determining factor, the > really powerful one, it is obviously the social structures (ideologies, > etc.). But why make this dichotomy in the first place? The answer is: to do > science. The idea of structures gives one a powerful lens in which to > describe and explain the world, in particular how is reproduces and > maintains itself, how it "works." But the down side is that structures > *cannot* explain how those structures (really) change, how they come to be > broken. But you are a human being. When you put down your books and go into > the world you act like a human being, not a machine. You try, you > endeavour, you struggle. Because you are human. > > One last point. The difference between science (whether Marxist or > positivist) and tradition is that while both change over time and both have > tendencies within them which resist change, it is in the very essence of > science that its theories are always up for testing and of failing the test > of practice - nothing is sacred. This is not true of tradition. As you say, > Marxism is a science, in the best sense of the word. What proved right last > week may be thrown out next week if it fails the test of practice. > Structural Marxism has failed. > If anything unites the people on this list at all, it is an interest in > CHAT - Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Although originating in the > USSR it is not "Soviet Marxism." In fact it was brutally suppressed in the > Soviet Union. Some people still take an "Activity" to be a system or a > structure, but others, myself included, take it as a "project", that which > challenges and changes structures. "Ontological" speaking, the world is not > structures. That is just a way of seeing the world, as structures. As > static and absolutely resistant to change. But you can see it differently, > more humanly, as processes. The glass is half full. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the protestant >> ethic and the spirit of capitalism. I was raised in a small province of >> Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents who served the lwaes of my ancestors >> and country...i am a product of the haitian/african "vodou ethic and the >> spirit of communism" of that province. It is from that practical >> consciousness that my teaching and activism stems. The women, like blacks >> in america, of the 70s, 80s, 90s...did not change the world...they sought >> to participate in it as constituted by rich, white, protestant, >> heterosexual men...Prior to her death my grandmother, who could not read >> and write, "could not understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and >> act like men..." >> >> In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, >> >> "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with tremendous >> intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or to benefit yourself >> because there are countless people who sacrificed their own education so >> that you can have yours. Your life work belongs to their service and the >> poor you have left behind in haiti. .." she went on to say, "I know all >> the stuff the white people in the university have taught you have made you >> an atheist, but you are not white, you are haitian/african, you owe your >> freedom to no man, but to the lwaes of your ancestors who blessed you with >> your intelligence to serve them and the poor...never abandon them, pray >> daily, and always remember that the universe is and must be your frame of >> reference...no matter what the white people say" >> I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the only >> tradition I came across in the West that is in line with the African >> communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me. It is from my vodou ethic >> and the spirit of communism that i see the destruction wrought on by >> Western practical consciousness, and it is from that ethic that I seek to >> change the world. >> We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and reproduce and >> participate in a practical consciousness that is bent on raping the earth >> and it's resources, and exploiting and starving the masses of people while >> a few drive automobiles...that is absurd and insane! >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. >> I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that >> is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that >> difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the >> "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every >> woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in >> the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they >> changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, >> that is just as things should be. >> There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." >> These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not >> correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your >> real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list >> you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from >> what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually >> struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing >> in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any >> effort to make the world a better place. >> Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a >> problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and >> you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You >> develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you >> hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum >> and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all >> become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its >> own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is >> now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being >> changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture >> responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project >> becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of >> the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a >> modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things >> have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise >> and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing >> social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is >> only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a >> social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of >> the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little >> step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter >> when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of >> the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a >> waste of time. Yes? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > Tom, >> > >> > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint >> louverture >> > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation >> colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change from slave labor, but to >> Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who >> wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow >> their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was >> the same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on >> the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they >> felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under >> a different name. >> > >> > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not >> identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like >> liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the >> state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and >> peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its >> discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an >> alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the >> protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social >> structure. >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < >> tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM >> (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for >> the Few | Oxfam International
>> >
Hello again Paul >> > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not >> answered >> > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that >> > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change >> in >> > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / practised >> is, >> > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too >> > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - >> > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can >> only >> > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society >> > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their >> > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting >> > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that >> > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral >> by >> > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest >> > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not >> > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence >> the >> > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to >> > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not >> themselves >> > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity >> That >> > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, >> to >> > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination >> > Enough already - I've gone on long enough >> > Tom >> > >> > >> > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> wrote: >> > >> > >> Tom, >> >> >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying >> with >> >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. >> They >> >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing >> its >> >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural >> concepts... >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >> President >> >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >> www.mocombeian.com >> >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> >> From: Tom Richardson >> >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> Dear Paul >> >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer >> to >> >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> >> Tom Richardson >> >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >>> Within the logic of >> >>> "Men make their >> >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come >> to >> >>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, >> andy, >> >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >> >>> >> movement >> >> >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a >> structural one? >> >>> >> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>> President >> >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>> >> >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >> >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> >>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> >> >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>> >> International >> >> >>>
>> >>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) >> are >> >>> >> two >> >> >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad >> category, and I >> >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >> >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is >> one >> >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify >> as >> >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or >> collectively) >> >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >> >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >> >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >> >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >> >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >> >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >> >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even >> explain >> >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >> >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general >> show >> >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >> >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce >> itself >> >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >> >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes >> to >> >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >> >>> Science is always for a purpose. >> >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism >> is >> >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >> >>> >> >>> Andy >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>> >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown >> around. >> >>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >> >>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >> >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as >> the >> >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy >> and >> >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >> >>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to establish >> >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >> >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, >> but >> >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." So it >> >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >> >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >> >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In what sense? >> >>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>> President >> >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >> >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>> >> >>>> Hello, >> >>>> >> >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >> >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >> >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative >> causality?], >> >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >> >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >> >>>> social theory. >> >>>> >> >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >> >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >> >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >> >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >> >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The >> Workers' >> >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that >> Althusserians >> >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >> >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >> >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >> >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >> >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >> >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >> >>>> party ideology. >> >>>> >> >>>> Rauno Huttunen >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >> >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >> >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >> >>>> >> "Who >> >> >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the >> answer is >> >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >> >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a >> role >> >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is >> not >> >>>> >> a >> >> >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The >> majority" >> >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >> >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >> >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> >>>> >> >>>> Andy >> >>>> >> >>>> >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >> >>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>> >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will >> take that >> >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? Where are >> >>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> >>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority have been >> >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses think they >> >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism more than >> the >> >>>>> capitalists.... >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>> President >> >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>> From: Andy Blunden >> >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >> >>>>> >> no, >> >> >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >> irrespective >> >>>>> >>> of >> >>> >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots >> which protect >> >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >> >>>>> >>> personality >> >>> >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us >> academics." What I >> >>>>> >> am >> >> >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social >> relations >> >>>>> >> and >> >> >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >> >>>>> >>> the >> >>> >>>>> social process. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Andy >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >>> >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>>> >>>>>> Bill, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >> >>>>>> >> the >> >> >>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi demonstrates in >> "the >> >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >> >>>>>> >> going >> >> >>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we have a >> humanist >> >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >> >>>>>> >>> sentiments" >> >>> >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >> Bernstein >> >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >> >>>>>> >> first >> >> >>>>>> century socialists. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>> President >> >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >> >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >> >>>>>> >> characteristics: >> >> >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >> >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >> >>>>>> >> to >> >> >>>>> grasp >> >>>>> >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda >> Gates just talk >> >>>>>> >>>>> about >> >>>>> >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/ >> SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >> >> >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other >> version of >> >>>>>> >> this >> >> >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is >> interesting: >> >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >> >>>>>> >> maintained >> >> >>>>> then >> >>>>> >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. >> Whether capitalism can >> >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >> >>>>>> >>>>> Street >> >>>>> >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do >> some serious study >> >>>>>> >> of >> >> >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic >> theories >> >>>>>> >>>>> such as >> >>>>> >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) >> which recognise the >> >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >> >>>>>> >>> we >> >>> >>>>>> just >> >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >> >>>>>> >> if >> >> >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing >> more money >> >>>>>> and the >> >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >> >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >> >>>>>> >>>> Absurd >> >>>> >>>>>> simplification on my part. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a >> counter-ethic, so to >> >>>>>>> >>>>> speak, >> >>>>> >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, >> and the maxim is >> >>>>>>> >>>>> always >> >>>>> >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is >> meaningful, I believe >> >>>>>>> >>>> only >> >>>> >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship >> to you is >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> meaningful >> >>>>>> >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, >> together. I believe that >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> "Do unto >> >>>>>> >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is >> fine as far as it >> >>>>>>> >>>>>> goes, but >> >>>>>> >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented >> world. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Andy >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >>> >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and >> social psychology, it >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> seems to >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. >> I am not sure >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> living in a >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given >> the immaturity >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> required to >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> sustain it. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> rather it >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be >> admired or >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> desired. This, >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more >> rewarding >> >>>>>>>> >> exercise. >> >> >>>>>>>> Best, >> >>>>>>>> Huw >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >> >>>>>>>> >> through >> >> >>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is more >> important >> >>>>>>>> >> than >> >> >>> a >> >>> >>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist >> said. >> >>>>>>>> Andy >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> http://www.marxists.org/ >> archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, >> >>>>>>>> >> I >> >> >>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, >> but what >> >>>>>>>> >> I >> >> >>>>> have >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> seen happen to black america has really >> disappointed me. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>> President >> >>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden >> >>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> International >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct that >> agreement on >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> fundamentals of >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> theory is >> >>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >> >>>>>>>> >>> xmca >> >>> >>>>>>>> list this is >> >>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >> >>>>>>>> >>>> "collaboration" is >> >>>> >>>>>>>> that such >> >>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, >> >>>>>>>> >> in >> >> >>>>>>>> raising the >> >>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> >>>>>>>> formation of >> >>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> invitation by >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> criticising your concept of the >> proposal. You have >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> propsed the >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> writing >> >>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >> >>>>>>>> >>>> "the >> >>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of >> advancement and >> >>>>>>>> >>> prosperity >> >>> >>>>>>>> and the >> >>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >> >>>>>>>> >> gradual >> >> >>>>>>>> shift in >> >>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> by the >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> tipping point in >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> which the >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> gains in >> >>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >> >>>>>>>> >>>> actual >> >>>> >>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is "Well, >> hello!" This is >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> hardly news, >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> David. This has been argued >> (correctly) for several >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> centuries. The >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a class of >> parasites; social >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> progress has >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> always been only in the teeth of >> opposition from all but >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> a few >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> of that >> >>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >> >>>>>>>> >>> actual >> >>> >>>>>>>> project >> >>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> in the >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> argument >> >>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >> >>>>>>>> >>>> such >> >>>> >>>>>>>> participation, I accept a somewhat arm's >> length >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> participation, >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> but the >> >>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >> >>>>>>>> >> actually >> >> >>>>>>>> engaged in >> >>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to further >> >>>>>>>> >> that >> >> >>>>>>>> struggle. Not >> >>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >> >>>>>>>> >>>> you are >> >>>> >>>>>>>> taking up >> >>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> >>>>>>>> reflections on >> >>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Andy >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> It would appear ... >> >>>>>>>> >> > >> >>>>>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> >>>>>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >> >>>>>>>> >>> Paul, >> >>> >>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one has to come >> to terms >> >>>>>>>> >> with >> >> >>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. >> >>>>>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> foundations >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it has no >> insight to offer, or >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> that a >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference can't >> provide a stable >> >>>>>>>> >>> enough >> >>> >>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward >> (collectively and >> >>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> forward in >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given the >> absence of fully >> >>>>>>>> >>>> worked out >> >>>> >>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and given the >> need to >> >>>>>>>> >>>> address the >> >>>> >>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the theorist's >> option of >> >>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> parameters)? >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> > David >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>> >>> Dr. >> >>> >>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> >>>>>>>> >> ablunden@mira.net >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > Andy and david, >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >> >>>>>>>> >>>> have to >> >>>> >>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, >> I.e., >> >>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> such a >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from a >> humanity, including us >> >>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> upward >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the expense of >> the masses of >> >>>>>>>> >> poor >> >> >>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our >> bourgeois >> >>>>>>>> lifestyle? > >> >>>>>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in >> >>>>>>>> >>> marxian >> >>> >>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has been begging >> for >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> humanity to >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> change the way it recursively reorganize >> and reproduce >> >>>>>>>> >>> it's >> >>> >>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >> consistently >> >>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> >>>>>>>> >>>> fracking, >> >>>> >>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to >> attempt to >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> resolve our >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> problems and maintain the protestant >> ethic and the >> >>>>>>>> >>>> spirit of >> >>>> >>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's >> term) >> >>>>>>>> >> ontology. >> >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >> >>>>>>>> >>>> this >> >>>> >>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do not know it >> yet. >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>> > President >> >>>>>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>>>> > www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> >
-------- Original message >> >>>>>>>> >> --------
From: >> >> >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
Date:01/21/2014 >> 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net >> >>>>>>>> ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> >>>>>>>> >>>> Activity" >> >>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >> >>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the >> Few | >> >>>>>>>> >>>> Oxfam >> >>>> >>>>>>>> International
>> >>>>>>>> >
Andy, >> >>>>>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> >>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> >>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as relative to >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> one's own >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the start. >> Still, I think it >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> provides >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> a way to understand the individual >> pursuit of wealth, >> >>>>>>>> >>>> carried >> >>>> >>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social and >> destructive; an >> >>>>>>>> >>> effective >> >>> >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of >> the >> >>>>>>>> >>>> individual >> >>>> >>>>>>>> unfettered by societal constraints. We >> badly need a >> >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >> >>>>>>>> >>> leverage >> >>> >>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. >> >>>>>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >> >>>>>>>> >>>> the form >> >>>> >>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> >>>>>>>> > Thanks. >> >>>>>>>> > David >> >>>>>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >> >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >> >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >> >>>>>>>> >>>> read and >> >>>> >>>>>>>> participate in acting out the opening >> chapter of that >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> narrative. >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >> >>>>>>>> >>>> doomed >> >>>> >>>>>>>> to failure however, as it conceived of >> itself as a >> >>>>>>>> >> linear >> >> >>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass social and >> >>>>>>>> >>> ideological >> >>> >>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as >> a project >> >>>>>>>> >>> at >> >>> >>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one true world >> which >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> everyone had >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical realism. The >> plot lies >> >>>>>>>> >>>> implicit in >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is always far >> from easy to >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> see how >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself though the >> multiple >> >>>>>>>> >>> story-lines >> >>> >>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>> > *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> >>>>>>>> >>>> context, >> >>>> >>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the >> ultra-wealthy are the >> >>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> >>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is in all of >> >>>>>>>> >>>> our best >> >>>> >>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a >> counter-narrative. >> >>>>>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> >>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> project? >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> David >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >> >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >> >>>>>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >>>>>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International >> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >> >>>>>>>> >>>> measures >> >>>> >>>>>>>> over teh >> >>>>>>>> >> past >> >>>>>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> >>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >> >>>>>>>> >> the >> >> >>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical project are >> one >> >>>>>>>> >>>> and the >> >>>> >>>>>>>> same. >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> Andy >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>> >>>>>>>> ---------- >> >>>>>>>> >> -- >> >>>>>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, >> >>>>>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> that can >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> be effective in the here and now, one >> has to step >> >>>>>>>> >>>> outside of >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. I guess, >> for some, this >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> would >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from the real >> work, perhaps a >> >>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly >> >>>>>>>> >>>> endeavor. For >> >>>> >>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate (even if >> imperfect) >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> effort to >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> apply what one has come to understand >> from the larger >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> project. >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps simply a >> political activity >> >>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >> >>>>>>>> >> actual >> >> >>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. >> >>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >> >>>>>>>> >>>> desperate >> >>>> >>>>>>>> times call for. >> >>>>>>>> >>> David >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>> ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >> >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden >> >>>>>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>>>>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>> International >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >> >>>>>>>> >> in >> >> >>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >> >>>>>>>> >> challenges, >> >> >>>>> too, >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> you know. >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social >> >>>>>>>> >>>> psychology and >> >>>> >>>>>>>> well-being: >> >>>>>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >> >>>>>>>> >>>> which is >> >>>> >>>>>>>> as valid for making observations about >> psychology as it >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> is for >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> social theory. And in general, this is >> lacking for what >> >>>>>>>> >>>> goes >> >>>> >>>>>>>> by the name of "social psychology." People >> do not of >> >>>>>>>> >>> course >> >>> >>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by evidence-based >> investigations >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> of the >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> likely results of their behaviour. >> >>>>>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >> >>>>>>>> >>>> "have >> >>>> >>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". The >> thinking of an >> >>>>>>>> >>>> individual >> >>>> >>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would contend) >> within the >> >>>>>>>> >>>> contexts of >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the projects to which they are committed. >> That is the >> >>>>>>>> >>>> reason >> >>>> >>>>>>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of >> wealth (which is >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> itself >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> of course relative). People make >> judgments according to >> >>>>>>>> >>> the >> >>> >>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they are >> participating, >> >>>>>>>> >> and >> >> >>>>> that >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical and >> practical norms. >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> Understanding >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> the psychology of political economy is >> as of one task >> >>>>>>>> >> with >> >> >>>>>>>> that of building a project to overthrow the >> existing >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> political >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> economic arrangements and build >> sustainable >> >>>>>>>> >> arrangements. >> >> >>>>> That >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> requires a multitude of projects all >> willikng and able >> >>>>>>>> >> to >> >> >>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> That's what I think. >> >>>>>>>> >>> Andy >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>> >>>>>>>> --------- >> >>>>>>>> >>> - >> >>>>>>>> >>> -- >> >>>>>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been sketching out in >> >>>>>>>> >> my >> >> >>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research and write, >> a >> >>>>>>>> >> paper >> >> >>>>>>>> tentatively titled: >> >>>>>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> >>>>>>>> Despoiling the >> >>>>>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >> >>>>>>>> >>>> Culture In >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the Quest >> >>>>>>>> >>>> for More >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> sense >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> of material well-being is not >> accumulation, relative to >> >>>>>>>> >>> our >> >>> >>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the comparative measure >> of our own >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> wealth >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> in relation to that of others. (I >> believe this is a >> >>>>>>>> well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >> >>>>>>>> >> for >> >> >>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger >> economy >> >>>>>>>> >> which >> >> >>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy middle-class (this >> is what >> >>>>>>>> >>>> would >> >>>> >>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for the >> ultra-wealthy), they >> >>>>>>>> >>> are >> >>> >>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly as they >> can--a >> >>>>>>>> >>> strategy >> >>> >>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. >> >>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> >>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the economy over >> >>>>>>>> >> the >> >> >>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a >> kind of >> >>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >> >>>>>>>> >>>> dramatic >> >>>> >>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest. >> >>>>>>>> >>>> Hence, we >> >>>> >>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and >> self-destructive >> >>>>>>>> >>>> behavior by >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent >> housing bubble >> >>>>>>>> >>> that >> >>> >>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The >> Great >> >>>>>>>> >>>>> Recession). >> >>>>> >>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is a call to >> action to take >> >>>>>>>> >>> back >> >>> >>>>>>>> control of our political systems so we can set >> more >> >>>>>>>> >>>> rational >> >>>> >>>>>>>> policies for the economy. > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From pmocombe@mocombeian.com Thu Jan 23 13:19:58 2014 From: pmocombe@mocombeian.com (Dr. Paul C. Mocombe) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:19:58 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Message-ID: Greg, What is so unique about haitian culture is how protean the traditional is...During slavery you had 4 distinct types (rada, nago, petwo, and ginen) of vodou cultures existing on the island...following bois caiman they were fused, all of the lwaes are greeted in ceremonies. ?In fact, jeans jacques dessalines (San jak) became a lwae, a manifestation of ogou, in the pantheon. ?Today they operate under one organization (knva) led by Max beauvoir...In fact, I am working on a book now titled, "vodou, contemporary quantum physics, and phenomenological structuralism"...i highlight the parallels between vodou, modern physics, and a social ontology I am calling phenomenological structuralism as representing both the phenomenal and noumenal world's of Immanuel kant. ?This is my attempt to demonstrate how "modern" vodou really is. Lastly, why is it that people doubt communalism as being problematic for a future global politics. ?We can universalize individualism via capitalism and neoliberalism, but we can not universalize communalism? ?We better because if we continue down the path we are heading we are on the verges of a clash of civilizations (huntington' s term...)...what the castro brothers and Hugo Chavez have done (free training of haitian doctors; building of hospitals, homes, and schools on the island) for haiti is on the verge of this communal principle I envision global politics must take. ?They have done all they do with respect for our sovereignty, ?the people, and culture....it is base on reciprocity. ..they are grateful for what we did for their own revolutionary struggles of the nineteenth century. Dr. Paul C. Mocombe President The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. www.mocombeian.com? www.readingroomcurriculum.com?
-------- Original message --------
From: Greg Thompson
Date:01/23/2014 2:19 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International
Sorry to jump in sideways here, but Andy, isn't your notion of "tradition" a bit too reified? That is, a bit too much like structure (which you aptly criticize)? Aren't traditions just the projects of a community of people? Changes in tradition don't change nearly as quickly as science (seldom will you see such changes that are shorter than a lifetime). But to say that traditions are not always up for the testing and failing in practice seems to ignore tens of thousands of years of human history in which precisely this process has been happening. Over and over and over again... The sacred may be "sacred" in theory/ideology, but that doesn't mean that it is unchangeable in practice. And to Paul, following Andy, I wonder if your approach leaves room for the transformation of tradition into the future, that is, allowing for it to change into something completely different altogether? Or is there some essence to tradition (e.g., of Haitian vodou) that must remain? (and I suspect that might get to Andy's question of process and processualism - processualists don't like essences...). And one last note, the communalism that you describe Paul, is a common feature of traditional cultures around the globe. Sharing resources for the common good might indeed be the hallmark of humanity (were it not for late industrial capitalism!). It is an admirable one. Yet, going forward, I have my doubts about it as a global politics b.c. it is almost always a bounded notion - i.e. the "community" is bounded. One shares in community with kin and ancestors or clan members, but one has no debt to outsiders. This seems like it would present some difficulties in terms of global politics. I think this is where Marx is sharpest - he proposed that in the future, we will come to recognize a community of humankind that has no such boundaries, such that you (we!) recognize a kinship to the Hmong woman suffering in southern China under local as well as global forms of oppression as well as the Inuit man doing the same in northern Alaska and as the child in Paraguay. I think Marx offers a way of imagining such a kinship of humanity - and he says that it turns out that it is capitalism that accomplishes this! Capitalism provides a means by which we Americans come into a kind intercourse with others around the globe. Granted most of us are blind to the hands the touched the clothes that lay against our skin right now as we speak. Quick object lesson, take a look at your shirt label and imagine the hands of the person who was sewing this garment. Suddenly the collapse of a garment factory in Bangladesh becomes a great deal more intimate than it ever could have been a hundred or so years ago. The person who made the very sweater that warms you could have died in that collapse. And this point of Marx's makes me quite a bit more agnostic about Wendell Barry's point about avoiding complicated technologies. I agree the we need to avoid dependence upon them. But why not hack it for your/our ends? But I ramble... -greg On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Andy Blunden wrote: > Paul, you make a true point, which perhaps I have overlooked. You make a > distinction between an ethic and a praxis. By ethic I mean the deontology > which specifies for you what is the right thing to do. By praxis I mean a > unity of theory and practice which guides you as someone who seeks, in > collaboration with others, some end. Now for me the two are identical, but > it has taken a lot of work to get to a point where my praxis is equally > ethical as scientific. There cannot be a sharp line between the two. But > the distinction you make clarifies what you are saying. It is not necessary > that someone is able to justify what they are doing by saying "... so that > ..." I just do this because it is the right thing to do. That is fine. > > So you have embaced, not just Western Marxism, but a specific strand of > Western Marxism which lays its emphasis on structure. This is not the only > brand of Western Marxism. > As David Preiss remarked, my comments were descriptive "not only of > politics but also of citizenship." Making projects the key concept of my > ethical and theoretical thinking is not only about how the world changes, > but how it is. That is, I do not see the world made up of either srtuctures > or individuals, but processes, in particular (us being human beings) > *projects*. But if you embrace the anti-dialectical view that the world is > individuals on one side and structures on the other, then it is blindingly > obvious that if you were to ask which is the really determining factor, the > really powerful one, it is obviously the social structures (ideologies, > etc.). But why make this dichotomy in the first place? The answer is: to do > science. The idea of structures gives one a powerful lens in which to > describe and explain the world, in particular how is reproduces and > maintains itself, how it "works." But the down side is that structures > *cannot* explain how those structures (really) change, how they come to be > broken. But you are a human being. When you put down your books and go into > the world you act like a human being, not a machine. You try, you > endeavour, you struggle. Because you are human. > > One last point. The difference between science (whether Marxist or > positivist) and tradition is that while both change over time and both have > tendencies within them which resist change, it is in the very essence of > science that its theories are always up for testing and of failing the test > of practice - nothing is sacred. This is not true of tradition. As you say, > Marxism is a science, in the best sense of the word. What proved right last > week may be thrown out next week if it fails the test of practice. > Structural Marxism has failed. > If anything unites the people on this list at all, it is an interest in > CHAT - Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Although originating in the > USSR it is not "Soviet Marxism." In fact it was brutally suppressed in the > Soviet Union. Some people still take an "Activity" to be a system or a > structure, but others, myself included, take it as a "project", that which > challenges and changes structures. "Ontological" speaking, the world is not > structures. That is just a way of seeing the world, as structures. As > static and absolutely resistant to change. But you can see it differently, > more humanly, as processes. The glass is half full. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >> Andy, >> >> I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the protestant >> ethic and the spirit of capitalism.? I was raised in a small province of >> Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents who served the lwaes of my ancestors >> and country...i am a product of the haitian/african "vodou ethic and the >> spirit of communism" of that province.? It is from that practical >> consciousness that my teaching and activism stems.? The women, like blacks >> in america, of the 70s, 80s, 90s...did not change the world...they sought >> to participate in it as constituted by rich, white, protestant, >> heterosexual men...Prior to her death my grandmother, who could not read >> and write, "could not understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and >> act like men..." >> >> In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, >> >> "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with tremendous >> intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or to benefit yourself >> because there are countless people who sacrificed their own education so >> that you can have yours.? Your life work belongs to their service and the >> poor you have left behind in haiti. .."? she went on to say, "I know all >> the stuff the white people in the university have taught you have made you >> an atheist, but you are not white, you are haitian/african, you owe your >> freedom to no man, but to the lwaes of your ancestors who blessed you with >> your intelligence to serve them and the poor...never abandon them, pray >> daily, and always remember that the universe is and must be your frame of >> reference...no matter what the white people say" >> I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the only >> tradition I came across in the West that is in line with the African >> communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me.? It is from my vodou ethic >> and the spirit of communism that i see the destruction wrought on by >> Western practical consciousness,? and it is from that ethic that I seek to >> change the world. >> We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and reproduce and >> participate in a practical consciousness that is bent on raping the earth >> and it's resources, and exploiting and starving the masses of people while >> a few drive automobiles...that is absurd and insane! >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Andy Blunden >> Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. >> I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am concerned that >> is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And that >> difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the >> "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed that every >> woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by feminists in >> the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but they >> changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still unsatisfactory, >> that is just as things should be. >> There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist action." >> These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory does not >> correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy project in your >> real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on this list >> you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could guess, from >> what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually >> struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible because nothing >> in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with making any >> effort to make the world a better place. >> Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). You see a >> problem. Others in similar a social position also see the problem and >> you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal problem). You >> develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But eventually you >> hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some momentum >> and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) You all >> become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It develops its >> own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and meaning. (It is >> now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing and being >> changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing culture >> responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and the project >> becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative collapse of >> the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or simply a >> modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. But things >> have changed and things go on quite differently now. New problems arise >> and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all existing >> social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, but it is >> only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems manifested in a >> social formation that in the end the root cause in the foundations of >> the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every little >> step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last chapter >> when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by the end of >> the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole chapter a >> waste of time. Yes? >> >> Andy >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> > Tom, >> > >> > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with that...toussaint >> louverture >> > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french plantation >> colony with wage-labor.? To him that was a change from slave labor, but to >> Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly arrived africans on the island, who >> wanted to practice their vodou and have their own plot of land to grow >> their own crops and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was >> the same system.? In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the maroons on >> the island fought against toussaint, christophe, petion, etc. because they >> felt they had become white men by attempting to reproduce their ways under >> a different name. >> > >> > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the society of not >> identifying with their christian values and liberalism had to behave like >> liberal christians to highlight the hypocrisy and contradictions of the >> state...i very much doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and >> peasant farming america would have integrated blacks into its >> discourse...however, the latter position would have presented an >> alternative way of organizing and reproducing society against the >> protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of the American social >> structure. >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> > President >> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> > www.mocombeian.com >> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> > >> >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom Richardson < >> tom.richardson3@googlemail.com>
Date:01/22/2014? 5:36 PM >>? (GMT-05:00)
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for >> the Few | Oxfam International
>> >
Hello again Paul >> > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I have not >> answered >> > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. I think that >> > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a functional change >> in >> > a concept whose behavioural demands are not? actually met / practised >> is, >> > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I getting too >> > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - >> > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever sort, can >> only >> > come about either by the efforts of those within any given society >> > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) that their >> > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by suggesting >> > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the above ) that >> > that society already has, could be more beneficial / productive / moral >> by >> > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by interest >> > groups within their society, even if those proposing such change are not >> > themselves practising or able to do so, under present conditions (hence >> the >> > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in order to get to >> > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are not >> themselves >> > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a changed entity >> That >> > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question for analysis, >> to >> > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some inclination >> > Enough already - I've gone on long enough >> > Tom >> > >> > >> > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> wrote: >> > >> >? >> Tom, >> >> >> >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were >> >> structural/humanist.? That is, as adorno points out in identitarian >> >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not identifying >> with >> >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so the black >> >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were against. >>? They >> >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully implementing >> its >> >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new structural >> concepts... >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >> President >> >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >> www.mocombeian.com >> >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> >> From: Tom Richardson >> >> Date:01/22/2014? 9:52 AM? (GMT-05:00) >> >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> >> >> Dear Paul >> >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, the answer >> to >> >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and I'm looking >> >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). >> >> Tom Richardson >> >> Middlesbrough UK >> >> >> >> >> >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>??? >>> wrote: >> >>>????? >>> Within the logic of >> >>> "Men make their >> >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it people come >> to >> >>> change the world?? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your logic, >> andy, >> >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil rights >> >>>????? >> movement >> >>??? >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act or a >> structural one? >> >>> >> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>> President >> >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>> >> >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: Andy Blunden < >> >>> ablunden@mira.net>
Date:01/22/2014? 8:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >> >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> >>>????? >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu> >> >>??? >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>????? >> International >> >>??? >>>
>> >>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or ethical) >> are >> >>>????? >> two >> >>??? >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely broad >> category, and I >> >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and structuralism >> >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the other is >> one >> >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. I identify >> as >> >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or >> collectively) >> >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and >> >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that "Men make their >> >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make >> it >> >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing >> >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is absolutely >> >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency is not an >> >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency exists. >> >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If you stand on >> >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and even >> explain >> >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray each other, >> >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in general >> show >> >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it can never tell >> >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to reproduce >> itself >> >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in solidarity >> >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out sometimes >> to >> >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. >> >>> Science is always for a purpose. >> >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the world; humanism >> is >> >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. >> >>> >> >>> Andy >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ------------ >> >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>????? >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism being thrown >> around. >> >>>>?? How is your humanism any different from althusser's "humanism"? >> >>>>?? Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in the world >> >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and ideas as >> the >> >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist claim Andy >> and >> >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or >> >>>> self-conscious individual being.? The latter two want to establish >> >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, >> >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such individual, >> but >> >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.."?? So it >> >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what capitalists >> >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist subjects be >> >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism?? In what sense? >> >>>>?? How will you reproduce them?? How will they be defined? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>> President >> >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen >> >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>> >> >>>> Hello, >> >>>> >> >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. Althusser's >> >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting >> >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative >> causality?], >> >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of Giddens is >> >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on Althusser's >> >>>> social theory. >> >>>> >> >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were >> >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Badiou, Debray...) >> >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from >> >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of humanistic >> >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: The >> Workers' >> >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that >> Althusserians >> >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, their >> >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians say that >> >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class but actually >> >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should think and feel. >> >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of ruling elite's >> >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with Althusserian >> >>>> party ideology. >> >>>> >> >>>> Rauno Huttunen >> >>>> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 >> >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>> >> >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For my part, I am >> >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. Structuralism is itself >> >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a humanist. >> >>>>??????? >> "Who >> >>??? >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. Obviously the >> answer is >> >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself the product of >> >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic intellectuals have a >> role >> >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic intellectual" is >> not >> >>>>??????? >> a >> >>??? >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. But "The >> majority" >> >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical abstraction. So >> >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity according to >> >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! >> >>>> >> >>>> Andy >> >>>> >> >>>>??????? >> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >>??? >>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>>??????? >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question who will >> take that >> >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual?? Where are >> >>>>> they?? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales in latin >> >>>>> america?? I am with althusser on this one.? The majority have been >> >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses that present >> >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such.? The masses think they >> >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta >> >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives.? They love capitalism more than >> the >> >>>>> capitalists.... >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>> President >> >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>> From: Andy Blunden >> >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by "mind," Paul, but >> >>>>>????????? >> no, >> >>??? >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism exists >> irrespective >> >>>>>????????? >>> of >> >>>????? >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political off-shoots >> which protect >> >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a >> >>>>>????????? >>> personality >> >>>????? >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or "us >> academics." What I >> >>>>>????????? >> am >> >>??? >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist social >> relations >> >>>>>????????? >> and >> >>??? >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a self-conscious act, a >> >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges mindlessly out of >> >>>>>????????? >>> the >> >>>????? >>>>> social process. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Andy >> >>>>> >> >>>>>????????? >>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >>>????? >>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> Bill, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its own, I.e., >> >>>>>>??????????? >> the >> >>??? >>>>>> free market.? No such thing as? Karl polanyi demonstrates in >> "the >> >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism alive and >> >>>>>>??????????? >> going >> >>??? >>>>>> amidst it's crises.? The question becomes can we have a >> humanist >> >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral >> >>>>>>??????????? >>> sentiments" >> >>>????? >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist Marxists such as >> Bernstein >> >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague twenty >> >>>>>>??????????? >> first >> >>??? >>>>>> century socialists. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>> President >> >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr >> >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic >> >>>>>>??????????? >> characteristics: >> >>??? >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living >> >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor >> >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then it is hard >> >>>>>>??????????? >> to >> >>??? >>>>> grasp >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill and Melinda >> Gates just talk >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>> about >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>??????????? >> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/ >> SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 >> >>??? >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are other >> version of >> >>>>>>??????????? >> this >> >>??? >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) is >> interesting: >> >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is >> >>>>>>??????????? >> maintained >> >>??? >>>>> then >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate capitalism. >> Whether capitalism can >> >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the Occupy Wall >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>> Street >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was time to do >> some serious study >> >>>>>>??????????? >> of >> >>??? >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other economic >> theories >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>> such as >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen et al) >> which recognise the >> >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative conclusion is that >> >>>>>>??????????? >>> we >> >>>????? >>>>>> just >> >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to understand. eg. >> >>>>>>??????????? >> if >> >>??? >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by printing >> more money >> >>>>>> and the >> >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 years (Great >> >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for survival (?) >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>> Absurd >> >>>>??????? >>>>>> simplification on my part. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, propagating a >> counter-ethic, so to >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>> speak, >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are just words, >> and the maxim is >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>> always >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic is >> meaningful, I believe >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>> only >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My relationship >> to you is >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>>> meaningful >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as we, >> together. I believe that >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>>> "Do unto >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>> others as you would have them do unto you," is >> fine as far as it >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>>> goes, but >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, fragmented >> world. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Andy >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------------------ >> >>>????? >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>????????????? >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the bubble and >> social psychology, it >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> seems to >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be pitied too. >>? I am not sure >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> living in a >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, especially given >> the immaturity >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> required to >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>> sustain it. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be combatted, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> rather it >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is something to be >> admired or >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> desired.? This, >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more obtainable and more >> rewarding >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> exercise. >> >>??? >>>>>>>> Best, >> >>>>>>>> Huw >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> > >>??? >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????? But your foundation is active in combatting inequality >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> through >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????? literacy. "Every step of real movement is more >> important >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> than >> >>??? >>> a >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????? dozen programmes," as one very serious theorist >> said. >> >>>>>>>>????? Andy >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> http://www.marxists.org/ >> archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????? ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>>????? *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>>????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? At 38 I am differing to my elders on this one...albeit, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> I >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? agree with Andy...too young to be pessimistic, >> but what >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> I >> >>??? >>>>> have >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? seen happen to black america has really >> disappointed me. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>>????????? President >> >>>>>>>>????????? The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>>>>????????? www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>>>>????????? www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? -------- Original message -------- >> >>>>>>>>????????? From: Andy Blunden >> >>>>>>>>????????? Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>>>>????????? To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >> >>>>>>>>????????? Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> International >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? David, you are quite correct that >> agreement on >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> fundamentals of >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? theory is >> >>>>>>>>????????? by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> xmca >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? list this is >> >>>>>>>>????????? feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> "collaboration" is >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? that such >> >>>>>>>>????????? disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> in >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? raising the >> >>>>>>>>????????? proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on >> >>>>>>>>????????? formation of >> >>>>>>>>????????? the concept of this project, and I have accepted the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> invitation by >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? criticising your concept of the >> proposal. You have >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> propsed the >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? writing >> >>>>>>>>????????? of an article countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> "the >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy are the engines of >> advancement and >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> prosperity >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? and the >> >>>>>>>>????????? saviors of society" and to argue instead that "the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> gradual >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? shift in >> >>>>>>>>????????? political control of the economy over the past 50 years >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> by the >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of >> tipping point in >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> which the >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? gains in >> >>>>>>>>????????? disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> actual >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? self-interest." My response is "Well, >> hello!" This is >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> hardly news, >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? David. This has been argued >> (correctly) for several >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> centuries. The >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? wealthy have always been a class of >> parasites; social >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> progress has >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? always been only in the teeth of >> opposition from all but >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> a few >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of that >> >>>>>>>>????????? class. I would argue that it is better to enter some >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> actual >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? project >> >>>>>>>>????????? aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> in the >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? argument >> >>>>>>>>????????? about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> such >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? participation, I accept a somewhat arm's >> length >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> participation, >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? but the >> >>>>>>>>????????? protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> actually >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? engaged in >> >>>>>>>>????????? that struggle in any formm about how best to further >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> that >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? struggle. Not >> >>>>>>>>????????? the *generalities*, in my view. But I am pleased that >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> you are >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? taking up >> >>>>>>>>????????? the battle and I wish you well. All I can do is offer my >> >>>>>>>>????????? reflections on >> >>>>>>>>????????? your object-concept, as others have and will. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? Andy >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>>????????? *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>>????????? http://home.mira.net/~andy/ < >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> >> >>>????? >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> It would appear ... >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>??? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Doesn't appear that way to me. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> Paul, >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? that in a practical endeavor one has to come >> to terms >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> with >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? foundational issues, at all. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > The fact that social psychology may not have the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> foundations >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? right doesn't imply that it has no >> insight to offer, or >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> that a >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? make-shift frame of reference can't >> provide a stable >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> enough >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? foundation to move people forward >> (collectively and >> >>>>>>>>????????? individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary way >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> forward in >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? any practical endeavor, given the >> absence of fully >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> worked out >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? foundational perspectives (and given the >> need to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> address the >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? world as we find it, without the theorist's >> option of >> >>>>>>>>????????? restricting the domain of inquiry within tractable >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> parameters)? >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > David >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> Dr. >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> ablunden@mira.net >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> International >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Andy and david, >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > It would appear that any counter - narrative would >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> have to >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? be anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, >> I.e., >> >>>>>>>>????????? anti-individual, anti-capitalist, anti-humanity...? Can >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> such a >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? counter - narrative come from a >> humanity, including us >> >>>>>>>>????????? academics, subjectified to reproduce individual wealth, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> upward >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? mobility, and status at the expense of >> the masses of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> poor >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? around the world, paradoxically, seeking our >> bourgeois >> >>>>>>>>????????? lifestyle? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > I ask because,? it would appear that the earth,in >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> marxian >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? terms, as a class for itself, has been begging >> for >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> humanity to >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? change the way it recursively reorganize >> and reproduce >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> it's >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? being-in-it over the last 100 years, but we >> consistently >> >>>>>>>>????????? refuse.? Instead, turning to dialectical measures, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> fracking, >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to >> attempt to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> resolve our >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? problems and maintain the protestant >> ethic and the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> spirit of >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's >> term) >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> ontology. >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> this >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? case we are all dead we just do not know it >> yet. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> >>>>>>>>????????? > President >> >>>>>>>>????????? > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > www.mocombeian.com >> >>>>>>>>????????? > www.readingroomcurriculum.com >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? >
-------- Original message >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> --------
From: >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? David H Kirshner > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>>>>?????????
Date:01/21/2014 >>? 2:50 AM? (GMT-05:00) >> >>>>>>>>?????????
To: ablunden@mira.net >> >>>>>>>>????????? ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> Activity" >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>??? >>>>>>>>?????????
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the >> Few | >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> Oxfam >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? International
>> >>>>>>>>????????? >
Andy, >> >>>>>>>>????????? > I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical >> >>>>>>>>????????? ascription of the human sense of material well-being as >> >>>>>>>>????????? relative to other people (rather than as relative to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> one's own >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? past) gets it wrong from the start. >> Still, I think it >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> provides >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? a way to understand the individual >> pursuit of wealth, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> carried >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? to its limits, as anti-social and >> destructive; an >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> effective >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of >> the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> individual >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? unfettered by societal constraints. We >> badly need a >> >>>>>>>>????????? counter-narrative to regain some kind of political >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> leverage >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? for ordinary citizens. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > If anyone would like to help pull that together in >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> the form >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Thanks. >> >>>>>>>>????????? > David >> >>>>>>>>????????? > dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>>????????? > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> Andy >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> >>>>>>>>????????? > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>>????????? > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> International >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> read and >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? participate in acting out the opening >> chapter of that >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> narrative. >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> doomed >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? to failure however, as it conceived of >> itself as a >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> linear >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? expansion which would somehow bypass social and >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> ideological >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? differences. It did not conceive of itselfr as >> a project >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> at >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? all. Just a mesage about the one true world >> which >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> everyone had >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? to come to. Truly magical realism. The >> plot lies >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> implicit in >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? the opening chapter, but it is always far >> from easy to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> see how >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? the plot will unfold itself though the >> multiple >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> story-lines >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? entailed in this conundrum, Andy >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>> ------------ >> >>>>>>>>????????? > *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>>????????? > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > >> >>>>>>>>????????? > David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >? >> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> context, >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? dictated by Ayn Rand, is that the >> ultra-wealthy are the >> >>>>>>>>????????? engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of >> >>>>>>>>????????? society. What is in their best interest is in all of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> our best >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? interests. We very badly need a >> counter-narrative. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy, is this practical project something that can be >> >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken and completed in real-time as a theoretical >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> project? >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> David >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> Andy >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>>> International >> >>>>>>??????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> David I have plenty of experience with desparate >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> measures >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? over teh >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> past >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader >> >>>>>>>>????????? theoretical project." It is absolutely essential that >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> the >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? practical project and the theoretical project are >> one >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> and the >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? same. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> Andy >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>> ---------- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> -- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>?? >>??? >>> Andy, >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> that can >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? be effective in the here and now, one >> has to step >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> outside of >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? the broader theoretical project. I guess, >> for some, this >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> would >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? constitute a distraction from the real >> work, perhaps a >> >>>>>>>>????????? violation of the true mission of that scholarly >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> endeavor. For >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? others, it might be a legitimate (even if >> imperfect) >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> effort to >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? apply what one has come to understand >> from the larger >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> project. >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? For others, still, perhaps simply a >> political activity >> >>>>>>>>????????? undertaken with theoretical tools, but with little >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> actual >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? relation to the theoretical project. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> desperate >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? times call for. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu >> >>>>>>>>????????? ] On Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> Andy >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? Blunden >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam >> >>>>>>>>????????? International >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> in >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? since I was a teenager, David, but it has its >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> challenges, >> >>??? >>>>> too, >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? you know. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> First off, these observations about social >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> psychology and >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? well-being: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> which is >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? as valid for making observations about >> psychology as it >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> is for >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? social theory. And in general, this is >> lacking for what >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> goes >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? by the name of "social psychology." People >> do not of >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> course >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? govern their behaviour by evidence-based >> investigations >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> of the >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? likely results of their behaviour. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger economy" or >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> "have >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? more wealth than someone else". The >> thinking of an >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> individual >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? has to be understood (I would contend) >> within the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> contexts of >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? the projects to which they are committed. >> That is the >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> reason >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? for the relativity in the enjoyment of >> wealth (which is >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> itself >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of course relative). People make >> judgments according to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> the >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? norms of the project in which they are >> participating, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> and >> >>??? >>>>> that >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? means semantic, theoretical and >> practical norms. >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> Understanding >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? the psychology of political economy is >> as of one task >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> with >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? that of building a project to overthrow the >> existing >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> political >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? economic arrangements and build >> sustainable >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> arrangements. >> >>??? >>>>> That >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? requires a multitude of projects all >> willikng and able >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> to >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? collaborate with one another. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> That's what I think. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> Andy >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> ------------------------------ >> ------------------------------ >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>> --------- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> - >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> -- >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> *Andy Blunden* >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>?? >>>???? >>>????? >>>> I've been sketching out in >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> my >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? mind, but not yet had time to research and write, >> a >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> paper >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? tentatively titled: >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the Ultra-wealthy are >> >>>>>>>>????????? Despoiling the >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting our >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> Culture In >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? the Quest >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> for More >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> sense >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? of material well-being is not >> accumulation, relative to >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> our >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? own past wealth, but the comparative measure >> of our own >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> wealth >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? in relation to that of others. (I >> believe this is a >> >>>>>>>>????????? well-established principle of social psychology.) So, >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> for >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? example, instead of trying to grow a bigger >> economy >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> which >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? requires a large and healthy middle-class (this >> is what >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> would >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? provide more actual wealth for the >> ultra-wealthy), they >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> are >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? eroding the middle-class as quickly as they >> can--a >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> strategy >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? that maximizes disparity. >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> >> >>>>>>>>????????? >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the >> >>>>>>>>????????? gradual shift in political control of the economy over >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >> the >> >>??? >>>>>>>>????????? past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a >> kind of >> >>>>>>>>????????? tipping point in which the gains in disparity are so >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> dramatic >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? as to overwhelm any sense of actual >> self-interest. >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> Hence, we >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? see increasingly irrational and >> self-destructive >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> behavior by >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent >> housing bubble >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> that >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? created what U.S. economists refer to as The >> Great >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>>> Recession). >> >>>>>????????? >>>>>>>>????????? The conclusion, of course, is a call to >> action to take >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>> back >> >>>????? >>>>>>>>????????? control of our political systems so we can set >> more >> >>>>>>>>??????????????? >>>> rational >> >>>>??????? >>>>>>>>????????? policies for the economy. > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From ablunden@mira.net Thu Jan 23 14:46:01 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 09:46:01 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52E105E1.7000602@mira.net> Message-ID: <52E19BA9.5050400@mira.net> Greg, the contrast I made was between science and tradition as the source of authority for knowledge. It is, as I said, not an absolute or sharp distinction - science is largely tradition and tradition must withstand the test of the viability of its lifestyle and change when necessary. Nothing to do with structures and projects. I agree, both science and the various traditional forms of praxis are projects. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Greg Thompson wrote: > Sorry to jump in sideways here, but Andy, isn't your notion of > "tradition" a bit too reified? That is, a bit too much like structure > (which you aptly criticize)? > Aren't traditions just the projects of a community of people? > > Changes in tradition don't change nearly as quickly as science (seldom > will you see such changes that are shorter than a lifetime). But to > say that traditions are not always up for the testing and failing in > practice seems to ignore tens of thousands of years of human history > in which precisely this process has been happening. Over and over and > over again... > > The sacred may be "sacred" in theory/ideology, but that doesn't mean > that it is unchangeable in practice. > > And to Paul, following Andy, I wonder if your approach leaves room for > the transformation of tradition into the future, that is, allowing for > it to change into something completely different altogether? Or is > there some essence to tradition (e.g., of Haitian vodou) that must > remain? > (and I suspect that might get to Andy's question of process and > processualism - processualists don't like essences...). > > And one last note, the communalism that you describe Paul, is a common > feature of traditional cultures around the globe. Sharing resources > for the common good might indeed be the hallmark of humanity (were it > not for late industrial capitalism!). It is an admirable one. Yet, > going forward, I have my doubts about it as a global politics b.c. it > is almost always a bounded notion - i.e. the "community" is bounded. > One shares in community with kin and ancestors or clan members, but > one has no debt to outsiders. This seems like it would present some > difficulties in terms of global politics. I think this is where Marx > is sharpest - he proposed that in the future, we will come to > recognize a community of humankind that has no such boundaries, such > that you (we!) recognize a kinship to the Hmong woman suffering in > southern China under local as well as global forms of oppression as > well as the Inuit man doing the same in northern Alaska and as the > child in Paraguay. I think Marx offers a way of imagining such a > kinship of humanity - and he says that it turns out that it is > capitalism that accomplishes this! Capitalism provides a means by > which we Americans come into a kind intercourse with others around the > globe. Granted most of us are blind to the hands the touched the > clothes that lay against our skin right now as we speak. > > Quick object lesson, take a look at your shirt label and imagine the > hands of the person who was sewing this garment. Suddenly the collapse > of a garment factory in Bangladesh becomes a great deal more intimate > than it ever could have been a hundred or so years ago. The person who > made the very sweater that warms you could have died in that collapse. > > And this point of Marx's makes me quite a bit more agnostic about > Wendell Barry's point about avoiding complicated technologies. I agree > the we need to avoid dependence upon them. But why not hack it for > your/our ends? > > But I ramble... > -greg > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > Paul, you make a true point, which perhaps I have overlooked. You > make a distinction between an ethic and a praxis. By ethic I mean > the deontology which specifies for you what is the right thing to > do. By praxis I mean a unity of theory and practice which guides > you as someone who seeks, in collaboration with others, some end. > Now for me the two are identical, but it has taken a lot of work > to get to a point where my praxis is equally ethical as > scientific. There cannot be a sharp line between the two. But the > distinction you make clarifies what you are saying. It is not > necessary that someone is able to justify what they are doing by > saying "... so that ..." I just do this because it is the right > thing to do. That is fine. > > So you have embaced, not just Western Marxism, but a specific > strand of Western Marxism which lays its emphasis on structure. > This is not the only brand of Western Marxism. > As David Preiss remarked, my comments were descriptive "not only > of politics but also of citizenship." Making projects the key > concept of my ethical and theoretical thinking is not only about > how the world changes, but how it is. That is, I do not see the > world made up of either srtuctures or individuals, but processes, > in particular (us being human beings) *projects*. But if you > embrace the anti-dialectical view that the world is individuals on > one side and structures on the other, then it is blindingly > obvious that if you were to ask which is the really determining > factor, the really powerful one, it is obviously the social > structures (ideologies, etc.). But why make this dichotomy in the > first place? The answer is: to do science. The idea of structures > gives one a powerful lens in which to describe and explain the > world, in particular how is reproduces and maintains itself, how > it "works." But the down side is that structures *cannot* explain > how those structures (really) change, how they come to be broken. > But you are a human being. When you put down your books and go > into the world you act like a human being, not a machine. You try, > you endeavour, you struggle. Because you are human. > > One last point. The difference between science (whether Marxist or > positivist) and tradition is that while both change over time and > both have tendencies within them which resist change, it is in the > very essence of science that its theories are always up for > testing and of failing the test of practice - nothing is sacred. > This is not true of tradition. As you say, Marxism is a science, > in the best sense of the word. What proved right last week may be > thrown out next week if it fails the test of practice. Structural > Marxism has failed. > If anything unites the people on this list at all, it is an > interest in CHAT - Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Although > originating in the USSR it is not "Soviet Marxism." In fact it was > brutally suppressed in the Soviet Union. Some people still take an > "Activity" to be a system or a structure, but others, myself > included, take it as a "project", that which challenges and > changes structures. "Ontological" speaking, the world is not > structures. That is just a way of seeing the world, as structures. > As static and absolutely resistant to change. But you can see it > differently, more humanly, as processes. The glass is half full. > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Andy, > > I am a product of an alternative structuring than that of the > protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. I was raised > in a small province of Haiti, Le borgne, by my grandparents > who served the lwaes of my ancestors and country...i am a > product of the haitian/african "vodou ethic and the spirit of > communism" of that province. It is from that practical > consciousness that my teaching and activism stems. The women, > like blacks in america, of the 70s, 80s, 90s...did not change > the world...they sought to participate in it as constituted by > rich, white, protestant, heterosexual men...Prior to her death > my grandmother, who could not read and write, "could not > understand why women wanted to wear pant suits and act like > men..." > > In my 3rd year in grad school my grandmother sat me down and said, > > "Poh (her nickname for me)...the universe blessed you with > tremendous intelligence do not use it for personal wealth or > to benefit yourself because there are countless people who > sacrificed their own education so that you can have yours. > Your life work belongs to their service and the poor you have > left behind in haiti. .." she went on to say, "I know all the > stuff the white people in the university have taught you have > made you an atheist, but you are not white, you are > haitian/african, you owe your freedom to no man, but to the > lwaes of your ancestors who blessed you with your intelligence > to serve them and the poor...never abandon them, pray daily, > and always remember that the universe is and must be your > frame of reference...no matter what the white people say" > I am a Marxist in the western tradition because that is the > only tradition I came across in the West that is in line with > the African communal ethic my grandparents instilled in me. > It is from my vodou ethic and the spirit of communism that i > see the destruction wrought on by Western practical > consciousness, and it is from that ethic that I seek to > change the world. > We must not fight and protest to recursively reorganize and > reproduce and participate in a practical consciousness that is > bent on raping the earth and it's resources, and exploiting > and starving the masses of people while a few drive > automobiles...that is absurd and insane! > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Andy Blunden > Date:01/22/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > > Paul, I think Tom's points in his last email are spot on. > I have been a wage worker all my life, and so far as I am > concerned that > is not "the same system" as slavery or subsistent farming. And > that > difference matters to me. Likewise, women who participated in the > "second wave" feminist movement are doubtless disappointed > that every > woman who today enjoys the benefits of the rights won by > feminists in > the 70s, 80s and 90s do not always identify as a feminist, but > they > changed the world irreversibly and if the world is still > unsatisfactory, > that is just as things should be. > There is no such thing as "structuralist action" and "humanist > action." > These terms are applicable to theories, and oftentimes theory > does not > correspond well to practice. Although you run a literacy > project in your > real life (so to speak) Paul, in your written contributions on > this list > you have been a consistent structuralist, and no-one could > guess, from > what you write, that outside the discussion of theory you actually > struggle to make a difference. It is not comprehensible > because nothing > in what you say in theoretical discussions is consistent with > making any > effort to make the world a better place. > Here is now it works (as I see it, modeled on Hegel's Logic). > You see a > problem. Others in similar a social position also see the > problem and > you begin to collaborate. (It is no longer a personal > problem). You > develop and act upon solutions, but mostly they fail. But > eventually you > hit upon some course of (collaborative) action which gets some > momentum > and seems to make a difference. (It is no longer subjective.) > You all > become self-conscious of this new project and name it. It > develops its > own self-concept, rules and norms of belief, action and > meaning. (It is > now a new concept entering into the existing culture, changing > and being > changed). After resisting it almost to the death, the existing > culture > responds by co-opting it (albeit in some modified form) and > the project > becomes mainstreamed. Whether this leads to a qualitative > collapse of > the former social formation and an entirely new identity, or > simply a > modification remains to be seen. It is not given in advance. > But things > have changed and things go on quite differently now. New > problems arise > and new solutions are possible. The total overthrow of all > existing > social conditions are events which are separated by centuries, > but it is > only by means of efforts to resolve particular problems > manifested in a > social formation that in the end the root cause in the > foundations of > the social formation itself are exposed and transformed. Every > little > step is a revolution. But you can't turn straight to the last > chapter > when you open the book. And if the hero has not triumphed by > the end of > the first chapter it would be a mistake to declare the whole > chapter a > waste of time. Yes? > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > > Tom, > > > > I hear what you are saying...i would disagree with > that...toussaint louverture > > During the haitian revolution maintained haiti as a french > plantation colony with wage-labor. To him that was a change > from slave labor, but to Macaya and Sans Souci and the newly > arrived africans on the island, who wanted to practice their > vodou and have their own plot of land to grow their own crops > and practice peasant farming as they did in Africa, it was the > same system. In fact, Macaya and Sans Souci and many of the > maroons on the island fought against toussaint, christophe, > petion, etc. because they felt they had become white men by > attempting to reproduce their ways under a different name. > > > > Similarly, the black american in order to convict the > society of not identifying with their christian values and > liberalism had to behave like liberal christians to highlight > the hypocrisy and contradictions of the state...i very much > doubt it had King protested to practice vodou and peasant > farming america would have integrated blacks into its > discourse...however, the latter position would have presented > an alternative way of organizing and reproducing society > against the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism of > the American social structure. > > > > > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > President > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > > www.mocombeian.com > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > > > >
-------- Original message --------
From: Tom > Richardson > >
Date:01/22/2014 5:36 PM (GMT-05:00) >
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > >
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International
> >
Hello again Paul > > Re-reading your reservation/explanation I can see that I > have not answered > > your assertion that no new structural concept was proposed. > I think that > > the thought behind my answer is that to bring about a > functional change in > > a concept whose behavioural demands are not actually met / > practised is, > > effectively to have posited a structural concept - or am I > getting too > > sophisticated (pejorative sense intended) here - > > I'm not sure what the problem is, since change, of whatever > sort, can only > > come about either by the efforts of those within any given > society > > attempting to achieve an actual adherence to behaviour(s) > that their > > society posits as arising from its guiding principles, or by > suggesting > > that certain forms (social/economic/political or all of the > above ) that > > that society already has, could be more beneficial / > productive / moral by > > changing them in certain ways that are presently resisted by > interest > > groups within their society, even if those proposing such > change are not > > themselves practising or able to do so, under present > conditions (hence the > > necessity of Andy B.'s 'collaborative effort/actions in > order to get to > > where the change-wishers want to be); i.e the proposers are > not themselves > > able at the moment of proposing change to constitute a > changed entity That > > state of affairs seems unavoidable and so, not a question > for analysis, to > > me, but I have no philosophical training, despite some > inclination > > Enough already - I've gone on long enough > > Tom > > > > > > On 22 January 2014 15:14, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >wrote: > > > > >> Tom, > >> > >> I would agree with your yes...but for me their actions were > >> structural/humanist. That is, as adorno points out in > identitarian > >> logic...the thing (human) convicting the society of not > identifying with > >> itself....is identical with the thing it is convicting...so > the black > >> american leaders, like king, remained the thing they were > against. They > >> were americans simply convicting the society of not fully > implementing its > >> structural concepts...they were not asking for new > structural concepts... > >> > >> > >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >> President > >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >> www.mocombeian.com > >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >> > >> > >> > >> -------- Original message -------- > >> From: Tom Richardson > > >> Date:01/22/2014 9:52 AM (GMT-05:00) > >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International > >> > >> Dear Paul > >> At the risk of being facetious, and I am actually serious, > the answer to > >> all three questions must be yes. But you didn't ask me and > I'm looking > >> forward to Andy B.'s answer(s). > >> Tom Richardson > >> Middlesbrough UK > >> > >> > >> On 22 January 2014 14:47, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > > >> >>> wrote: > >>> >>> Within the logic of > >>> "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they > do not make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances > existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past", how is it > people come to > >>> change the world? Dialectically (negative)? Based on your > logic, andy, > >>> would you say that the leaders of the black american civil > rights > >>> >> movement > >> >>> changed the world?... if so, was that a humanist act > or a structural one? > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>> President > >>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>> www.mocombeian.com > >>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>> > >>>
-------- Original message --------
From: > Andy Blunden < > >>> ablunden@mira.net > >
Date:01/22/2014 8:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>
To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < > >>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > > >> >>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few > | Oxfam > >>> >> International > >> >>>
> >>>
Humanism and individualism (either methodological or > ethical) are > >>> >> two > >> >>> quite different things. Humanism is an extremely > broad category, and I > >>> think that very broadly humanism on one side, and > structuralism > >>> (together with functionalism and poststructuralism) on the > other is one > >>> way of viewing the social theoretical and ethical matrix. > I identify as > >>> a humanist because I do *not* see people (individually or > collectively) > >>> as prisoners of structures and functions, "interpellated" and > >>> "subjectified" by great social powers, but rather that > "Men make their > >>> own history, but they do not make it as they please; they > do not make it > >>> under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances > existing > >>> already, given and transmitted from the past". There is > absolutely > >>> nothing individalist about that position, but since agency > is not an > >>> illusion, it does pose the serious problem of how agency > exists. > >>> This is an important ethical and scientific question. If > you stand on > >>> the side of structuralism, you may be able to describe and > even explain > >>> how societies reproduce themselves, and how people betray > each other, > >>> make wars, waste their time in fruitless struggles, and in > general show > >>> themselves to be subjectified and interpellated, but it > can never tell > >>> you how a social formation at a certain point failed to > reproduce itself > >>> and was overthrow in favour of another, how people act in > solidarity > >>> with others, how people stop a war, how struggles turn out > sometimes to > >>> not be fruitless and in general how people change the world. > >>> Science is always for a purpose. > >>> Structuralism is for the purpose of interpreting the > world; humanism is > >>> for the purpose of both understanding and changing it. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>> > >>> > >>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>> >>>> I have a problem with this notion of humanism > being thrown around. > >>>> How is your humanism any different from althusser's > "humanism"? > >>>> Althusser, for me, represents an aspect of our being in > the world > >>>> which highlights our unreflective acceptance of rules and > ideas as the > >>>> nature of our being in the world...Whereas the humanist > claim Andy and > >>>> rauno point to speaks to a sort of cartesian rational or > >>>> self-conscious individual being. The latter two want to > establish > >>>> society based on such an individual, I.e., subject...whereas, > >>>> althusser is suggesting that not only is there no such > individual, but > >>>> "there is no subject but by and for their subjection.." > So it > >>>> appears as though you humanists are attempting to do what > capitalists > >>>> have done, manufacture subjects...will your humanist > subjects be > >>>> better than the laborers and consumers of capitalism? In > what sense? > >>>> How will you reproduce them? How will they be defined? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>> President > >>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>> From: Rauno Huttunen > >>>> Date:01/22/2014 5:13 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>> To: ablunden@mira.net > ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I am also a humanist but I still like to read Althusser. > Althusser's > >>>> theory of science and social theory are very interesting > >>>> (generalization I-III, intransitive causality [generative > causality?], > >>>> ideological state apparatus etc.). With the help of > Giddens is > >>>> possible to make kind of humanistic interpretation on > Althusser's > >>>> social theory. > >>>> > >>>> Althusser's former student (many famous French thinker were > >>>> Althusser's students; Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, > Badiou, Debray...) > >>>> Jacques Ranciere is also very interesting. He break away from > >>>> Althusser's school in 1970th and started his own kind of > humanistic > >>>> critical social theory. In his book "The Nights of Labor: > The Workers' > >>>> Dream in Nineteenth-Century France" Ranciere claims that > Althusserians > >>>> really don't care about working class, their intentions, > their > >>>> feelings, their thought, their dreams etc.. Althusserians > say that > >>>> they represents the objective interests of working class > but actually > >>>> they are telling to working class how workers should > think and feel. > >>>> For Ranciere Alhusserianism is just another form of > ruling elite's > >>>> ideology; ruling class ideology is just replaced with > Althusserian > >>>> party ideology. > >>>> > >>>> Rauno Huttunen > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > ] On Behalf Of Andy > Blunden > >>>> Sent: 22. tammikuuta 2014 4:34 > >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>>> > >>>> I don't know how you claim to be an optimist, Paul. For > my part, I am > >>>> deeply hostile to Althusser's entire project. > Structuralism is itself > >>>> the paradigm of the ideology of modern capitalism. I am a > humanist. > >>>> >> "Who > >> >>>> will take that self-conscious act?" you ask. > Obviously the answer is > >>>> that the agent will be a collaborative project, itself > the product of > >>>> many collaborative projects, and yes, organic > intellectuals have a role > >>>> to play it that project. But "a gramscian organic > intellectual" is not > >>>> >> a > >> >>>> serious answer, as if it were a case of one person. > But "The majority" > >>>> (or intellectuals I presume you mean) is an empirical > abstraction. So > >>>> what? Who is counting? As if intellectual act as a unity > according to > >>>> majority votes of all intellectuals? Abstractions! > >>>> > >>>> Andy > >>>> > >>>> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>> >>>>> But your position, andy, begs the question > who will take that > >>>>> self-conscious act...a gramscian organic intellectual? > Where are > >>>>> they? They are not in africa for instance...evo morales > in latin > >>>>> america? I am with althusser on this one. The majority > have been > >>>>> interpellated by and through ideological apparatuses > that present > >>>>> capitalism as the nature of reality as such. The masses > think they > >>>>> can all be and live like Mike (michael jordan), the atlanta > >>>>> housewives, and basketball wives. They love capitalism > more than the > >>>>> capitalists.... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>> President > >>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>> From: Andy Blunden > >>>>> Date:01/21/2014 9:00 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>>>> > >>>>> Which brings us back to what on Earth is meant by > "mind," Paul, but > >>>>> >> no, > >> >>>>> it is not my understanding at all that capitalism > exists irrespective > >>>>> >>> of > >>> >>>>> the armed bodies of men and their political > off-shoots which protect > >>>>> those relations. Unlike you though, Paul, I do not ascribe a > >>>>> >>> personality > >>> >>>>> to "the Earth," or "humanity," "the poor," or > "us academics." What I > >>>>> >> am > >> >>>>> saying however is that the overthrow of capitalist > social relations > >>>>> >> and > >> >>>>> thus the state which protects it, is a > self-conscious act, a > >>>>> collaborative project, not something which emerges > mindlessly out of > >>>>> >>> the > >>> >>>>> social process. > >>>>> > >>>>> Andy > >>>>> > >>>>> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> >>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>> >>>>>> Bill, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You speak of capitalism as though it has a mind of its > own, I.e., > >>>>>> >> the > >> >>>>>> free market. No such thing as Karl polanyi > demonstrates in "the > >>>>>> great transformation...The state has kept capitalism > alive and > >>>>>> >> going > >> >>>>>> amidst it's crises. The question becomes can we > have a humanist > >>>>>> capitalism somewhere between adam smith's "theory of moral > >>>>>> >>> sentiments" > >>> >>>>>> and his "wealth of nations." Revisionist > Marxists such as Bernstein > >>>>>> grappled with this question, and it continues to plague > twenty > >>>>>> >> first > >> >>>>>> century socialists. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>> President > >>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>> www.mocombeian.com > >>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>> From: Bill Kerr > >>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 8:15 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>> To: Andy Blunden ,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam > International > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My contention is that capitalism has these economic > >>>>>> >> characteristics: > >> >>>>>> 1) General increase in standard of living > >>>>>> 2) Increasing gap b/w rich and poor > >>>>>> 3) Instability: periodic economic crises > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If you only talk about (2) without mentioning (1) then > it is hard > >>>>>> >> to > >> >>>>> grasp > >>>>> >>>>>> why people put up with capitalism. Bill > and Melinda Gates just talk > >>>>>> >>>>> about > >>>>> >>>>>> (1) and ignore the other aspects. See > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> > http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304149404579324530112590864 > >> >>>>>> If you can't stomach Bill and Melinda there are > other version of > >>>>>> >> this > >> >>>>>> narrative. This video (Hans Rosling, GapMinder) > is interesting: > >>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The historical record suggests to me that provided (1) is > >>>>>> >> maintained > >> >>>>> then > >>>>> >>>>>> people will continue to tolerate > capitalism. Whether capitalism can > >>>>>> maintain (1) depends on (3). The crisis of 2008 and the > Occupy Wall > >>>>>> >>>>> Street > >>>>> >>>>>> movement suggested to me that it was > time to do some serious study > >>>>>> >> of > >> >>>>>> Marx's unfinished project or alternatively other > economic theories > >>>>>> >>>>> such as > >>>>> >>>>>> Post Keynesian (Hyman Minsky, Steve Keen > et al) which recognise the > >>>>>> inherent instability of capitalism. My tentative > conclusion is that > >>>>>> >>> we > >>> >>>>>> just > >>>>>> don't understand capitalism and it is very hard to > understand. eg. > >>>>>> >> if > >> >>>>>> capitalists can muddle through the downturns by > printing more money > >>>>>> and the > >>>>>> very serious economic downturns can be delayed by 70 > years (Great > >>>>>> Depression to 2008) then that might be a formula for > survival (?) > >>>>>> >>>> Absurd > >>>> >>>>>> simplification on my part. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andy Blunden > > > >>>>>> >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> >>>>>>> Which means, does it not Huw, > propagating a counter-ethic, so to > >>>>>>> >>>>> speak, > >>>>> >>>>>>> since arguments against an ethic are > just words, and the maxim is > >>>>>>> >>>>> always > >>>>> >>>>>>> "do as I do not as I say." But an ethic > is meaningful, I believe > >>>>>>> >>>> only > >>>> >>>>>>> within some collaborative endeavour. My > relationship to you is > >>>>>>> >>>>>> meaningful > >>>>>> >>>>>>> only in connection of what we do, as > we, together. I believe that > >>>>>>> >>>>>> "Do unto > >>>>>> >>>>>>> others as you would have them do > unto you," is fine as far as it > >>>>>>> >>>>>> goes, but > >>>>>> >>>>>>> is inadequate to this mtulicultural, > fragmented world. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> >>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Huw Lloyd wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Going back to reference to the > bubble and social psychology, it > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> seems to > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> me that the "super rich" are to be > pitied too. I am not sure > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> living in a > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> bubble is such a nice thing, > especially given the immaturity > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> required to > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> sustain it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I don't think it is the super rich which are to be > combatted, > >>>>>>>> >>>>> rather it > >>>>> >>>>>>>> is the inane notion that this is > something to be admired or > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> desired. This, > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> it seems to me, is a more > obtainable and more rewarding > >>>>>>>> >> exercise. > >> >>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>> Huw > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 22 January 2014 00:07, Andy Blunden > > >>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>> ablunden@mira.net >> > wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> But your foundation is active in combatting > inequality > >>>>>>>> >> through > >> >>>>>>>> literacy. "Every step of real movement is > more important > >>>>>>>> >> than > >> >>> a > >>> >>>>>>>> dozen programmes," as one very serious > theorist said. > >>>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> > http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_05_05.htm > >> >>>>>>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> At 38 I am differing to my elders on this > one...albeit, > >>>>>>>> >> I > >> >>>>>>>> agree with Andy...too young to be > pessimistic, but what > >>>>>>>> >> I > >> >>>>> have > >>>>> >>>>>>>> seen happen to black america > has really disappointed me. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> President > >>>>>>>> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>> www.mocombeian.com > > >>>>>>>> www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- > >>>>>>>> From: Andy Blunden > >>>>>>>> Date:01/21/2014 6:36 PM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >>>>>>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | > Oxfam > >>>>>>>> >>>>> International > >>>>> >>>>>>>> David, you are quite correct > that agreement on > >>>>>>>> >>>>> fundamentals of > >>>>> >>>>>>>> theory is > >>>>>>>> by no means necessary for collaboration > (though on the > >>>>>>>> >>> xmca > >>> >>>>>>>> list this is > >>>>>>>> feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of > >>>>>>>> >>>> "collaboration" is > >>>> >>>>>>>> that such > >>>>>>>> disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. > Nonetheless, > >>>>>>>> >> in > >> >>>>>>>> raising the > >>>>>>>> proposal on this list your are inviting > collaboration on > >>>>>>>> formation of > >>>>>>>> the concept of this project, and I have > accepted the > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> invitation by > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> criticising your concept > of the proposal. You have > >>>>>>>> >>>>> propsed the > >>>>> >>>>>>>> writing > >>>>>>>> of an article countering the narrative of > Ayn Rand that > >>>>>>>> >>>> "the > >>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy are the engines of > advancement and > >>>>>>>> >>> prosperity > >>> >>>>>>>> and the > >>>>>>>> saviors of society" and to argue instead > that "the > >>>>>>>> >> gradual > >> >>>>>>>> shift in > >>>>>>>> political control of the economy over the > past 50 years > >>>>>>>> >>>>> by the > >>>>> >>>>>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a > kind of tipping point in > >>>>>>>> >>>>> which the > >>>>> >>>>>>>> gains in > >>>>>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm > any sense of > >>>>>>>> >>>> actual > >>>> >>>>>>>> self-interest." My response is > "Well, hello!" This is > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> hardly news, > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> David. This has been > argued (correctly) for several > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> centuries. The > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> wealthy have always been a > class of parasites; social > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> progress has > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> always been only in the > teeth of opposition from all but > >>>>>>>> >>>>> a few > >>>>> >>>>>>>> of that > >>>>>>>> class. I would argue that it is better to > enter some > >>>>>>>> >>> actual > >>> >>>>>>>> project > >>>>>>>> aimed against capitalism and ineqaulity and > participate > >>>>>>>> >>>>> in the > >>>>> >>>>>>>> argument > >>>>>>>> about strategy and tactics. Being 68, after > 50 years of > >>>>>>>> >>>> such > >>>> >>>>>>>> participation, I accept a > somewhat arm's length > >>>>>>>> >>>>> participation, > >>>>> >>>>>>>> but the > >>>>>>>> protagonists (wether real or imagined) are those > >>>>>>>> >> actually > >> >>>>>>>> engaged in > >>>>>>>> that struggle in any formm about how best to > further > >>>>>>>> >> that > >> >>>>>>>> struggle. Not > >>>>>>>> the *generalities*, in my view. But I am > pleased that > >>>>>>>> >>>> you are > >>>> >>>>>>>> taking up > >>>>>>>> the battle and I wish you well. All I can do > is offer my > >>>>>>>> reflections on > >>>>>>>> your object-concept, as others have and will. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Andy > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > < > >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/%7Eandy/> > >>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >> It would appear ... > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> > Doesn't appear that way to me. > >>>>>>>> > In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to > Andy and > >>>>>>>> >>> Paul, > >>> >>>>>>>> that in a practical endeavor one > has to come to terms > >>>>>>>> >> with > >> >>>>>>>> foundational issues, at all. > >>>>>>>> > The fact that social psychology may not > have the > >>>>>>>> >>>>> foundations > >>>>> >>>>>>>> right doesn't imply that it > has no insight to offer, or > >>>>>>>> >>>>> that a > >>>>> >>>>>>>> make-shift frame of reference > can't provide a stable > >>>>>>>> >>> enough > >>> >>>>>>>> foundation to move people forward > (collectively and > >>>>>>>> individually). Indeed, isn't that the > necessary way > >>>>>>>> >>>>> forward in > >>>>> >>>>>>>> any practical endeavor, given > the absence of fully > >>>>>>>> >>>> worked out > >>>> >>>>>>>> foundational perspectives (and > given the need to > >>>>>>>> >>>> address the > >>>> >>>>>>>> world as we find it, without the > theorist's option of > >>>>>>>> restricting the domain of inquiry within > tractable > >>>>>>>> >>>>> parameters)? > >>>>> >>>>>>>> > David > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> >] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> >>> Dr. > >>> >>>>>>>> Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM > >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; > >>>>>>>> >> ablunden@mira.net > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few > | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > Andy and david, > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > It would appear that any counter - > narrative would > >>>>>>>> >>>> have to > >>>> >>>>>>>> be anti-dialectical and > counter-hegemonic, I.e., > >>>>>>>> anti-individual, anti-capitalist, > anti-humanity... Can > >>>>>>>> >>>>> such a > >>>>> >>>>>>>> counter - narrative come from > a humanity, including us > >>>>>>>> academics, subjectified to reproduce > individual wealth, > >>>>>>>> >>>>> upward > >>>>> >>>>>>>> mobility, and status at the > expense of the masses of > >>>>>>>> >> poor > >> >>>>>>>> around the world, paradoxically, > seeking our bourgeois > >>>>>>>> lifestyle? > > >>>>>>>> > I ask because, it would appear that the > earth,in > >>>>>>>> >>> marxian > >>> >>>>>>>> terms, as a class for itself, has > been begging for > >>>>>>>> >>>>> humanity to > >>>>> >>>>>>>> change the way it recursively > reorganize and reproduce > >>>>>>>> >>> it's > >>> >>>>>>>> being-in-it over the last 100 > years, but we consistently > >>>>>>>> refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical > measures, > >>>>>>>> >>>> fracking, > >>>> >>>>>>>> carbon credits, neoliberalism, > etc., to attempt to > >>>>>>>> >>>>> resolve our > >>>>> >>>>>>>> problems and maintain the > protestant ethic and the > >>>>>>>> >>>> spirit of > >>>> >>>>>>>> capitalism as an "enframing" > (heidegger's term) > >>>>>>>> >> ontology. > >> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I am not a pessimistic person, but it > appears that in > >>>>>>>> >>>> this > >>>> >>>>>>>> case we are all dead we just do > not know it yet. > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > >>>>>>>> > President > >>>>>>>> > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > >>>>>>>> > www.mocombeian.com > > >>>>>>>> > www.readingroomcurriculum.com > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >
-------- Original message > >>>>>>>> >> --------
From: > >> >>>>>>>> David H Kirshner > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) > >>>>>>>>
To: ablunden@mira.net > > >>>>>>>> >,"eXtended Mind, Culture, > >>>>>>>> >>>> Activity" > >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >> >>>>>>>>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: > Working for the Few | > >>>>>>>> >>>> Oxfam > >>>> >>>>>>>> International
> >>>>>>>> >
Andy, > >>>>>>>> > I suppose social psychology's unitary and > a-historical > >>>>>>>> ascription of the human sense of material > well-being as > >>>>>>>> relative to other people (rather than as > relative to > >>>>>>>> >>>>> one's own > >>>>> >>>>>>>> past) gets it wrong from the > start. Still, I think it > >>>>>>>> >>>>> provides > >>>>> >>>>>>>> a way to understand the > individual pursuit of wealth, > >>>>>>>> >>>> carried > >>>> >>>>>>>> to its limits, as anti-social > and destructive; an > >>>>>>>> >>> effective > >>> >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to the > libertarian ideal of the > >>>>>>>> >>>> individual > >>>> >>>>>>>> unfettered by societal > constraints. We badly need a > >>>>>>>> counter-narrative to regain some kind of > political > >>>>>>>> >>> leverage > >>> >>>>>>>> for ordinary citizens. > >>>>>>>> > If anyone would like to help pull that > together in > >>>>>>>> >>>> the form > >>>> >>>>>>>> of a paper, please reply, > on-line or off-. > >>>>>>>> > Thanks. > >>>>>>>> > David > >>>>>>>> > dkirsh@lsu.edu > > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> >] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> >>> Andy > >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM > >>>>>>>> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few > | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I > hope to > >>>>>>>> >>>> read and > >>>> >>>>>>>> participate in acting out the > opening chapter of that > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> narrative. > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was > a project > >>>>>>>> >>>> doomed > >>>> >>>>>>>> to failure however, as it > conceived of itself as a > >>>>>>>> >> linear > >> >>>>>>>> expansion which would somehow bypass > social and > >>>>>>>> >>> ideological > >>> >>>>>>>> differences. It did not conceive of > itselfr as a project > >>>>>>>> >>> at > >>> >>>>>>>> all. Just a mesage about the one > true world which > >>>>>>>> >>>>> everyone had > >>>>> >>>>>>>> to come to. Truly magical > realism. The plot lies > >>>>>>>> >>>> implicit in > >>>> >>>>>>>> the opening chapter, but it is > always far from easy to > >>>>>>>> >>>>> see how > >>>>> >>>>>>>> the plot will unfold itself > though the multiple > >>>>>>>> >>> story-lines > >>> >>>>>>>> entailed in this conundrum, Andy > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> >>>>>>>> ------------ > >>>>>>>> > *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >> The operative narrative, at least in > the U.S. > >>>>>>>> >>>> context, > >>>> >>>>>>>> dictated by Ayn Rand, is that > the ultra-wealthy are the > >>>>>>>> engines of advancement and prosperity and > the saviors of > >>>>>>>> society. What is in their best interest is > in all of > >>>>>>>> >>>> our best > >>>> >>>>>>>> interests. We very badly need a > counter-narrative. > >>>>>>>> >> Andy, is this practical project something > that can be > >>>>>>>> undertaken and completed in real-time as a > theoretical > >>>>>>>> >>>>> project? > >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> David > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> >] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> >>> Andy > >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> >> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM > >>>>>>>> >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few > | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> >>>>>> International > >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> David I have plenty of experience with > desparate > >>>>>>>> >>>> measures > >>>> >>>>>>>> over teh > >>>>>>>> >> past > >>>>>>>> >> 50 years, and I have come very late to > "the broader > >>>>>>>> theoretical project." It is absolutely > essential that > >>>>>>>> >> the > >> >>>>>>>> practical project and the theoretical > project are one > >>>>>>>> >>>> and the > >>>> >>>>>>>> same. > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> Andy > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> >>>>>>>> ---------- > >>>>>>>> >> -- > >>>>>>>> >> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >>>>>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> >> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >> >> >>> Andy, > >>>>>>>> >>> Sometimes, in order to create a > counter-narrative > >>>>>>>> >>>>> that can > >>>>> >>>>>>>> be effective in the here and > now, one has to step > >>>>>>>> >>>> outside of > >>>> >>>>>>>> the broader theoretical project. > I guess, for some, this > >>>>>>>> >>>>> would > >>>>> >>>>>>>> constitute a distraction from > the real work, perhaps a > >>>>>>>> violation of the true mission of that scholarly > >>>>>>>> >>>> endeavor. For > >>>> >>>>>>>> others, it might be a legitimate > (even if imperfect) > >>>>>>>> >>>>> effort to > >>>>> >>>>>>>> apply what one has come to > understand from the larger > >>>>>>>> >>>>> project. > >>>>> >>>>>>>> For others, still, perhaps > simply a political activity > >>>>>>>> undertaken with theoretical tools, but with > little > >>>>>>>> >> actual > >> >>>>>>>> relation to the theoretical project. > >>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps these are desperate measures > that these > >>>>>>>> >>>> desperate > >>>> >>>>>>>> times call for. > >>>>>>>> >>> David > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> >>> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu > > >>>>>>>> >] On Behalf Of > >>>>>>>> >>> Andy > >>> >>>>>>>> Blunden > >>>>>>>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM > >>>>>>>> >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the > Few | Oxfam > >>>>>>>> International > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> Well, that's the project I have been > collaborating > >>>>>>>> >> in > >> >>>>>>>> since I was a teenager, David, but it > has its > >>>>>>>> >> challenges, > >> >>>>> too, > >>>>> >>>>>>>> you know. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> First off, these observations about social > >>>>>>>> >>>> psychology and > >>>> >>>>>>>> well-being: > >>>>>>>> >>> The point is to have a unit of analysis > and one > >>>>>>>> >>>> which is > >>>> >>>>>>>> as valid for making observations > about psychology as it > >>>>>>>> >>>>> is for > >>>>> >>>>>>>> social theory. And in > general, this is lacking for what > >>>>>>>> >>>> goes > >>>> >>>>>>>> by the name of "social > psychology." People do not of > >>>>>>>> >>> course > >>> >>>>>>>> govern their behaviour by > evidence-based investigations > >>>>>>>> >>>>> of the > >>>>> >>>>>>>> likely results of their > behaviour. > >>>>>>>> >>> People don't set out to "grow a bigger > economy" or > >>>>>>>> >>>> "have > >>>> >>>>>>>> more wealth than someone else". > The thinking of an > >>>>>>>> >>>> individual > >>>> >>>>>>>> has to be understood (I would > contend) within the > >>>>>>>> >>>> contexts of > >>>> >>>>>>>> the projects to which they are > committed. That is the > >>>>>>>> >>>> reason > >>>> >>>>>>>> for the relativity in the > enjoyment of wealth (which is > >>>>>>>> >>>>> itself > >>>>> >>>>>>>> of course relative). People > make judgments according to > >>>>>>>> >>> the > >>> >>>>>>>> norms of the project in which they > are participating, > >>>>>>>> >> and > >> >>>>> that > >>>>> >>>>>>>> means semantic, theoretical > and practical norms. > >>>>>>>> >>>>> Understanding > >>>>> >>>>>>>> the psychology of political > economy is as of one task > >>>>>>>> >> with > >> >>>>>>>> that of building a project to > overthrow the existing > >>>>>>>> >>>>> political > >>>>> >>>>>>>> economic arrangements and > build sustainable > >>>>>>>> >> arrangements. > >> >>>>> That > >>>>> >>>>>>>> requires a multitude of > projects all willikng and able > >>>>>>>> >> to > >> >>>>>>>> collaborate with one another. > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> That's what I think. > >>>>>>>> >>> Andy > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> >>>>>>>> --------- > >>>>>>>> >>> - > >>>>>>>> >>> -- > >>>>>>>> >>> *Andy Blunden* > >>>>>>>> >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > >>>>>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: > >>>>>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I've been > sketching out in > >>>>>>>> >> my > >> >>>>>>>> mind, but not yet had time to research > and write, a > >>>>>>>> >> paper > >> >>>>>>>> tentatively titled: > >>>>>>>> >>>> The Psychology of Greed: Why the > Ultra-wealthy are > >>>>>>>> Despoiling the > >>>>>>>> >>>> Planet, Tanking the Economy, and > Gutting our > >>>>>>>> >>>> Culture In > >>>> >>>>>>>> the Quest > >>>>>>>> >>>> for More > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> The premise is that the psychological > metric of our > >>>>>>>> >>>>> sense > >>>>> >>>>>>>> of material well-being is not > accumulation, relative to > >>>>>>>> >>> our > >>> >>>>>>>> own past wealth, but the > comparative measure of our own > >>>>>>>> >>>>> wealth > >>>>> >>>>>>>> in relation to that of > others. (I believe this is a > >>>>>>>> well-established principle of social > psychology.) So, > >>>>>>>> >> for > >> >>>>>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a > bigger economy > >>>>>>>> >> which > >> >>>>>>>> requires a large and healthy > middle-class (this is what > >>>>>>>> >>>> would > >>>> >>>>>>>> provide more actual wealth for > the ultra-wealthy), they > >>>>>>>> >>> are > >>> >>>>>>>> eroding the middle-class as quickly > as they can--a > >>>>>>>> >>> strategy > >>> >>>>>>>> that maximizes disparity. > >>>>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) > is that the > >>>>>>>> gradual shift in political control of the > economy over > >>>>>>>> >> the > >> >>>>>>>> past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has > reached a kind of > >>>>>>>> tipping point in which the gains in > disparity are so > >>>>>>>> >>>> dramatic > >>>> >>>>>>>> as to overwhelm any sense of > actual self-interest. > >>>>>>>> >>>> Hence, we > >>>> >>>>>>>> see increasingly irrational and > self-destructive > >>>>>>>> >>>> behavior by > >>>> >>>>>>>> the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the > fraudulent housing bubble > >>>>>>>> >>> that > >>> >>>>>>>> created what U.S. economists refer > to as The Great > >>>>>>>> >>>>> Recession). > >>>>> >>>>>>>> The conclusion, of course, is > a call to action to take > >>>>>>>> >>> back > >>> >>>>>>>> control of our political systems so > we can set more > >>>>>>>> >>>> rational > >>>> >>>>>>>> policies for the economy. > > > > > -- > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. > Visiting Assistant Professor > Department of Anthropology > 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From lchcmike@gmail.com Thu Jan 23 20:42:39 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 20:42:39 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Watch "HAITI IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS" on YouTube In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Very thought provoking, Paul. And probably, in its own terms, super optimistic hype. mike On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe < pmocombe@mocombeian.com> wrote: > Tom, > > This is the government's, backed by the US, plan for haiti... > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLeHSnLPybo&feature=youtube_gdata_player > > > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe > President > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. > www.mocombeian.com > www.readingroomcurriculum.com From mpacker@uniandes.edu.co Fri Jan 24 15:10:56 2014 From: mpacker@uniandes.edu.co (Martin John Packer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 23:10:56 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0EF5DAF8-F2C9-413D-94D3-044A80057415@uniandes.edu.co> This article is not a very penetrating analysis, but it is interesting to see capitalism being forced to absorb and respond to costs that to this point have been treated as "externalities" to its economic processes. It makes one wonder whether the system can in fact avoid a tipping point caused by the despoiling of the planet that David K. originally pointed to, just as it has apparently survived the tanking of the economy. Martin From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Sat Jan 25 14:01:17 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:01:17 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: <52DF0494.90100@mira.net> References: <52DF0494.90100@mira.net> Message-ID: Lately I've come across some bees in my thinking and trying to figure out where to fit them into my oversimplified vision of Smith-inspired vs. Marx-inspired thinking. Here is a link about the bees (yes, I really meant bees): http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/seeley.shtml The basic idea that Seeley proposes is that "whenever there is collective decision-making, there is the potential for swarm intelligence", and that Swarm Intelligence happens when a group of animals is able to solve cognitive problems much better than any individual animal could have solved them. I know that Mandeville's parable of the bees was used by Smith (approvingly) and I thought Marx references it as well (although I can't find the cite). As I was reading about Seeley's work, I could help but think that, on the one hand, this was grist for the mill of the bourgeois capitalist economist (I say that against Paul Thibault's advice to me that nobody uses "bourgeois" anymore). In particular, those bees prove, as Seeley gestures towards on his home page, that markets can produce the best decisions for all. Here we hear echoes of Smith's invisible hand (as it is interpreted by the aforementioned economists - and despite the very minor role that this concept played in Smith's thinking...). On the other hand, this notion of Swarm Intelligence seems to run counter to the deep individualism of our day. And I wonder if it doesn't seem to resonate in some ways with Marx (hence the need for the citation, and the basis for my question of fitting in). At the least, the bees do seem to demonstrate the value of collaboration. Anyway, I was hoping someone could help me to make sense of this particular "bee in my bonnet". -greg On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is > by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is > feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such > disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the > proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of the > concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by criticising > your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing of an article > countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the ultra-wealthy are the > engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society" and to > argue instead that "the gradual shift in political control of the economy > over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping > point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any > sense of actual self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > hardly news, David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. > The wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has > always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that > class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project aimed > against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument about > strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such participation, I > accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the protagonists (wether > real or imagined) are those actually engaged in that struggle in any formm > about how best to further that struggle. Not the *generalities*, in my > view. But I am pleased that you are taking up the battle and I wish you > well. All I can do is offer my reflections on your object-concept, as > others have and will. > > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> It would appear ... >>> >>> >> >> Doesn't appear that way to me. >> In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a >> practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at >> all. >> The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right >> doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame >> of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people >> forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary >> way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked >> out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as >> we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of >> inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Andy and david, >> >> It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be >> anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, >> anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come from >> a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual >> wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? >> I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a >> class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it >> recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 >> years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical >> measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> >> I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are >> all dead we just do not know it yet. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner < >> dkirsh@lsu.edu>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for >> the Few | Oxfam International
>>
Andy, >> I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the >> human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than >> as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think >> it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by >> societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind >> of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help >> pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> Thanks. >> David >> dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate >> in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> >> I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure >> however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would >> somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of >> itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot >> will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this >> conundrum, Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >>> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn >>> Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>> prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in >>> all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. Andy, is >>> this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in >>> real-time as a theoretical project? >>> David >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh past >>> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical >>> project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the >>> theoretical project are one and the same. >>> >>> Andy >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Andy, >>>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective >>>> in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical >>>> project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the >>>> real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>> endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort >>>> to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For >>>> others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with >>>> theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical >>>> project. >>>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call >>>> for. >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a >>>> teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >>>> >>>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >>>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for >>>> making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in >>>> general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." >>>> People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based >>>> investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. People don't set >>>> out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The >>>> thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>> contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course >>>> relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in >>>> which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and >>>> practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of >>>> one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>> political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with >>>> one another. >>>> >>>> That's what I think. >>>> Andy >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> - >>>> -- >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research >>>>> and write, a paper tentatively titled: The Psychology of Greed: Why the >>>>> Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting >>>>> our Culture In the Quest for More >>>>> >>>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material >>>>> well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the >>>>> comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I >>>>> believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large >>>>> and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for >>>>> the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they >>>>> can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>>>> >>>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in >>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in >>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >>>>> self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>> behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The >>>>> conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our >>>>> political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. >>>>> situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a >>>>> collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole >>>>> XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From blantonwe@comcast.net Sat Jan 25 16:36:04 2014 From: blantonwe@comcast.net (Bill Blanton) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 00:36:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International In-Reply-To: References: <52DF0494.90100@mira.net> Message-ID: <1494061308.21022902.1390696564646.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> Greg, take a look at the work of Edward O. Wilson. He studied ants and other socially organized insects. It a is a great body of work. BB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Thompson" To: "Andy Blunden" , "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:01:17 PM Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International Lately I've come across some bees in my thinking and trying to figure out where to fit them into my oversimplified vision of Smith-inspired vs. Marx-inspired thinking. Here is a link about the bees (yes, I really meant bees): http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/seeley.shtml The basic idea that Seeley proposes is that "whenever there is collective decision-making, there is the potential for swarm intelligence", and that Swarm Intelligence happens when a group of animals is able to solve cognitive problems much better than any individual animal could have solved them. I know that Mandeville's parable of the bees was used by Smith (approvingly) and I thought Marx references it as well (although I can't find the cite). As I was reading about Seeley's work, I could help but think that, on the one hand, this was grist for the mill of the bourgeois capitalist economist (I say that against Paul Thibault's advice to me that nobody uses "bourgeois" anymore). In particular, those bees prove, as Seeley gestures towards on his home page, that markets can produce the best decisions for all. Here we hear echoes of Smith's invisible hand (as it is interpreted by the aforementioned economists - and despite the very minor role that this concept played in Smith's thinking...). On the other hand, this notion of Swarm Intelligence seems to run counter to the deep individualism of our day. And I wonder if it doesn't seem to resonate in some ways with Marx (hence the need for the citation, and the basis for my question of fitting in). At the least, the bees do seem to demonstrate the value of collaboration. Anyway, I was hoping someone could help me to make sense of this particular "bee in my bonnet". -greg On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > David, you are quite correct that agreement on fundamentals of theory is > by no means necessary for collaboration (though on the xmca list this is > feasible). In a sense, the very meaning of "collaboration" is that such > disagreement on fundamentals is suspended. Nonetheless, in raising the > proposal on this list your are inviting collaboration on formation of the > concept of this project, and I have accepted the invitation by criticising > your concept of the proposal. You have propsed the writing of an article > countering the narrative of Ayn Rand that "the ultra-wealthy are the > engines of advancement and prosperity and the saviors of society" and to > argue instead that "the gradual shift in political control of the economy > over the past 50 years by the ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping > point in which the gains in disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any > sense of actual self-interest." My response is "Well, hello!" This is > hardly news, David. This has been argued (correctly) for several centuries. > The wealthy have always been a class of parasites; social progress has > always been only in the teeth of opposition from all but a few of that > class. I would argue that it is better to enter some actual project aimed > against capitalism and ineqaulity and participate in the argument about > strategy and tactics. Being 68, after 50 years of such participation, I > accept a somewhat arm's length participation, but the protagonists (wether > real or imagined) are those actually engaged in that struggle in any formm > about how best to further that struggle. Not the *generalities*, in my > view. But I am pleased that you are taking up the battle and I wish you > well. All I can do is offer my reflections on your object-concept, as > others have and will. > > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > David H Kirshner wrote: > >> It would appear ... >>> >>> >> >> Doesn't appear that way to me. >> In fact, it's not clear to me, contrary to Andy and Paul, that in a >> practical endeavor one has to come to terms with foundational issues, at >> all. >> The fact that social psychology may not have the foundations right >> doesn't imply that it has no insight to offer, or that a make-shift frame >> of reference can't provide a stable enough foundation to move people >> forward (collectively and individually). Indeed, isn't that the necessary >> way forward in any practical endeavor, given the absence of fully worked >> out foundational perspectives (and given the need to address the world as >> we find it, without the theorist's option of restricting the domain of >> inquiry within tractable parameters)? >> David >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 6:12 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; ablunden@mira.net >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> Andy and david, >> >> It would appear that any counter - narrative would have to be >> anti-dialectical and counter-hegemonic, I.e., anti-individual, >> anti-capitalist, anti-humanity... Can such a counter - narrative come from >> a humanity, including us academics, subjectified to reproduce individual >> wealth, upward mobility, and status at the expense of the masses of poor >> around the world, paradoxically, seeking our bourgeois lifestyle? >> I ask because, it would appear that the earth,in marxian terms, as a >> class for itself, has been begging for humanity to change the way it >> recursively reorganize and reproduce it's being-in-it over the last 100 >> years, but we consistently refuse. Instead, turning to dialectical >> measures, fracking, carbon credits, neoliberalism, etc., to attempt to >> resolve our problems and maintain the protestant ethic and the spirit of >> capitalism as an "enframing" (heidegger's term) ontology. >> >> I am not a pessimistic person, but it appears that in this case we are >> all dead we just do not know it yet. >> >> >> Dr. Paul C. Mocombe >> President >> The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc. >> www.mocombeian.com >> www.readingroomcurriculum.com >>
-------- Original message --------
From: David H Kirshner < >> dkirsh@lsu.edu>
Date:01/21/2014 2:50 AM (GMT-05:00) >>
To: ablunden@mira.net,"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" < >> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for >> the Few | Oxfam International
>>
Andy, >> I suppose social psychology's unitary and a-historical ascription of the >> human sense of material well-being as relative to other people (rather than >> as relative to one's own past) gets it wrong from the start. Still, I think >> it provides a way to understand the individual pursuit of wealth, carried >> to its limits, as anti-social and destructive; an effective >> counter-narrative to the libertarian ideal of the individual unfettered by >> societal constraints. We badly need a counter-narrative to regain some kind >> of political leverage for ordinary citizens. If anyone would like to help >> pull that together in the form of a paper, please reply, on-line or off-. >> Thanks. >> David >> dkirsh@lsu.edu >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:13 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >> >> I certainly hope so, David, or at least, I hope to read and participate >> in acting out the opening chapter of that narrative. >> >> I do think that the "99%/1%" narrative was a project doomed to failure >> however, as it conceived of itself as a linear expansion which would >> somehow bypass social and ideological differences. It did not conceive of >> itselfr as a project at all. Just a mesage about the one true world which >> everyone had to come to. Truly magical realism. The plot lies implicit in >> the opening chapter, but it is always far from easy to see how the plot >> will unfold itself though the multiple story-lines entailed in this >> conundrum, Andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> David H Kirshner wrote: >> >> >>> The operative narrative, at least in the U.S. context, dictated by Ayn >>> Rand, is that the ultra-wealthy are the engines of advancement and >>> prosperity and the saviors of society. What is in their best interest is in >>> all of our best interests. We very badly need a counter-narrative. Andy, is >>> this practical project something that can be undertaken and completed in >>> real-time as a theoretical project? >>> David >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 11:06 PM >>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>> >>> David I have plenty of experience with desparate measures over teh past >>> 50 years, and I have come very late to "the broader theoretical >>> project." It is absolutely essential that the practical project and the >>> theoretical project are one and the same. >>> >>> Andy >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Andy, >>>> Sometimes, in order to create a counter-narrative that can be effective >>>> in the here and now, one has to step outside of the broader theoretical >>>> project. I guess, for some, this would constitute a distraction from the >>>> real work, perhaps a violation of the true mission of that scholarly >>>> endeavor. For others, it might be a legitimate (even if imperfect) effort >>>> to apply what one has come to understand from the larger project. For >>>> others, still, perhaps simply a political activity undertaken with >>>> theoretical tools, but with little actual relation to the theoretical >>>> project. >>>> Perhaps these are desperate measures that these desperate times call >>>> for. >>>> David >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@ >>>> mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden >>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 10:29 PM >>>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >>>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Working for the Few | Oxfam International >>>> >>>> Well, that's the project I have been collaborating in since I was a >>>> teenager, David, but it has its challenges, too, you know. >>>> >>>> First off, these observations about social psychology and well-being: >>>> The point is to have a unit of analysis and one which is as valid for >>>> making observations about psychology as it is for social theory. And in >>>> general, this is lacking for what goes by the name of "social psychology." >>>> People do not of course govern their behaviour by evidence-based >>>> investigations of the likely results of their behaviour. People don't set >>>> out to "grow a bigger economy" or "have more wealth than someone else". The >>>> thinking of an individual has to be understood (I would contend) within the >>>> contexts of the projects to which they are committed. That is the reason >>>> for the relativity in the enjoyment of wealth (which is itself of course >>>> relative). People make judgments according to the norms of the project in >>>> which they are participating, and that means semantic, theoretical and >>>> practical norms. Understanding the psychology of political economy is as of >>>> one task with that of building a project to overthrow the existing >>>> political economic arrangements and build sustainable arrangements. That >>>> requires a multitude of projects all willikng and able to collaborate with >>>> one another. >>>> >>>> That's what I think. >>>> Andy >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> - >>>> -- >>>> *Andy Blunden* >>>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>>> >>>> >>>> David H Kirshner wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I've been sketching out in my mind, but not yet had time to research >>>>> and write, a paper tentatively titled: The Psychology of Greed: Why the >>>>> Ultra-wealthy are Despoiling the Planet, Tanking the Economy, and Gutting >>>>> our Culture In the Quest for More >>>>> >>>>> The premise is that the psychological metric of our sense of material >>>>> well-being is not accumulation, relative to our own past wealth, but the >>>>> comparative measure of our own wealth in relation to that of others. (I >>>>> believe this is a well-established principle of social psychology.) So, for >>>>> example, instead of trying to grow a bigger economy which requires a large >>>>> and healthy middle-class (this is what would provide more actual wealth for >>>>> the ultra-wealthy), they are eroding the middle-class as quickly as they >>>>> can--a strategy that maximizes disparity. >>>>> >>>>> The major thesis (in the U.S. context) is that the gradual shift in >>>>> political control of the economy over the past 50 years by the >>>>> ultra-wealthy has reached a kind of tipping point in which the gains in >>>>> disparity are so dramatic as to overwhelm any sense of actual >>>>> self-interest. Hence, we see increasingly irrational and self-destructive >>>>> behavior by the ultra-wealthy (e.g., the fraudulent housing bubble that >>>>> created what U.S. economists refer to as The Great Recession). The >>>>> conclusion, of course, is a call to action to take back control of our >>>>> political systems so we can set more rational policies for the economy. >>>>> >>>>> I don't know if this thesis extends so easily beyond the U.S. >>>>> situation to the world, but if this project appeals, I would welcome a >>>>> collaborative effort--perhaps even one that somehow encompasses the whole >>>>> XMCA listserv as co-authors. >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Anthropology 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson From kellogg59@hanmail.net Sun Jan 26 20:13:16 2014 From: kellogg59@hanmail.net (kellogg) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:13:16 +0900 (KST) Subject: [Xmca-l] Boal and Brecht Message-ID: <20140127131316.HM.b0000000008eH7Y@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Sun Jan 26 23:48:11 2014 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 07:48:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <20140127131316.HM.b0000000008eH7Y@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> References: <20140127131316.HM.b0000000008eH7Y@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> Message-ID: <1390808891.95670.YahooMailNeo@web173204.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Hi Blank ! May you resend it ! Or is this a spam ?? H ________________________________ From: kellogg To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014, 7:43:16 Subject: [Xmca-l] Boal and Brecht From kellogg59@hanmail.net Mon Jan 27 02:51:29 2014 From: kellogg59@hanmail.net (kellogg) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 19:51:29 +0900 (KST) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht Message-ID: <20140127195129.HM.b0000000008eH7e@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> From smago@uga.edu Mon Jan 27 02:59:46 2014 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:59:46 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] how-do-we-know-whatwhen-young-kids-are-ready-to-learn/ Message-ID: <7f930c3c1d4b45478b21462819ada5a2@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/01/27/how-do-we-know-whatwhen-young-kids-are-ready-to-learn/ "A dominant theme within cognitive developmental psychology over the last thirty years has been that children look more clever in proportion to the cleverness of experimenters. That is, as experimenters develop more subtle ways to evaluate children, it becomes clear that children understand more at a younger age than we appreciated. They were capable of learning it all the time. The problem lay in how we were looking." I thought of some of Mike's work when I read this interesting piece. Willingham is a cognitive psychologist but I see him making a cultural psychology claim here. From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Mon Jan 27 08:47:01 2014 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 16:47:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <20140127195129.HM.b0000000008eH7e@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> References: <20140127195129.HM.b0000000008eH7e@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> Message-ID: <1390841221.41726.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Oh ! David ! So happy to see you here again ! Welcome really ! I have many unread mails but I tried yours in the hope I might come across some old friend of ours which I now see got realized . Best Haydi ________________________________ From: kellogg To: Haydi Zulfei ; "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014, 14:21:29 Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht It's not a spam, Haydi! I just resubscribed after being mysteriously desubscribed. Apparently a few bugs in the works, still.... ? (If you get this, and the list doesn't, can you repost?) ? A few years ago, there was some discussion on this list of Augusto Boal and the "Theatre of the Oppressed". I've been reading some of his work and trying to make sense of some interesting data I've collected from children doing classroom role plays (in one case, the kids use their mother tongue first and then try the role play in English and in the second case they enact a scene in English and discuss some of the moral issues in Korean). Within the Theatre of the Oppressed, Boal distinguishes an "Image Theatre", a "Forum Theatre", and an "Invisible Theatre". Am I right in thinking that "Image Theatre" is mostly NON-verbal, while "Forum Theatre" is more or less what we have been doing in class (that is, a scripted performance and some discussion of ethico-political issues), while "Invisible Theatre" is a kind of public performance, along the lines of a Michael Moore documentary, or the old show "Candid Camera"? ? I recently returned from a conference in New Zealand (Hi, Eugene and Ana!) where I met a woman who had actually worked with Boal. She told me that Boal had essentially no following in Brazil or in the other countries where he worked, because people often found it impossible to deal with the government backlash that his work provoked. Boal himself talks about this problem in a youtube interview: ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOgv91qQyJc ? (see around 6:50) ? The other question I have is the relationship between Boal and Brecht. On the one hand, Boal seems very interested in Brechtian ideas about a theatre which teaches alternative possibilities. But on the other much of what he writes seems quite hostile to language, and of course the idea of deceiving the audience into thinking that they are not observing a performance but an unmediated social reality is quite un-Brechtian. Can anybody comment on this? David Kellogg Hankuk University of Foreign Studies ? ?--------- ?? ?? --------- ????: Haydi Zulfei >???? : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" >??: 2014? 1? 27? ???, 16? 48? 11? +0900 >??: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht > >Hi >Blank ! May you resend it ! Or is this a spam ?? H > > >________________________________ >From: kellogg >To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu >Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014, 7:43:16 >Subject: [Xmca-l] Boal and Brecht > > > From leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com Tue Jan 28 00:39:27 2014 From: leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com (Leif Strandberg) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:39:27 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Pete Seeger Message-ID: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important cultural activity? we are moved but we know: "We shall not be moved" Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world Leif Sweden From bazerman@education.ucsb.edu Tue Jan 28 00:53:31 2014 From: bazerman@education.ucsb.edu (Charles Bazerman) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:53:31 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Message-ID: Pete was and remains a great hero of mine. Particularly as I was trying to define my own path as an adolescent and young man, his concerts and recordings gave me strength and hope to struggle on. He served that role for many, forging them into social movements of consequence and strengthening many other social movements. All with joy. Sing on, Pete. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: Leif Strandberg Date: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:40 am Subject: [Xmca-l] Pete Seeger To: "eXtended Mind, Culture,Activity" > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important > cultural activity? we are moved but we know: > > "We shall not be moved" > > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > > Leif > Sweden From ulvi.icil@gmail.com Tue Jan 28 03:12:48 2014 From: ulvi.icil@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VWx2aSDEsMOnaWw=?=) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 13:12:48 +0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Message-ID: Big condolences to dear United States people first of all, and to the working-class of the United States in particular, and to the whole humanity...from Turkey. Ulvi 2014-01-28 Leif Strandberg > Pete Seeger is dead... but we will remember him and his important cultural > activity... we are moved but we know: > > "We shall not be moved" > > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > > Leif > Sweden > From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Jan 28 05:54:40 2014 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:54:40 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Message-ID: Thank-you Leif. Pete's passing leaves a large chasm in the cultural/historical landscape not only of the U.S. but the whole world he embraced. The New Times Obituary provides a good overview. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/arts/music/pete-seeger-songwriter-and-champion-of-folk-music-dies-at-94.html?emc=edit_na_20140128&_r=0 So long Pete, its been good to know ya! Robert Lake On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Leif Strandberg < leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com> wrote: > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important cultural > activity? we are moved but we know: > > "We shall not be moved" > > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > > Leif > Sweden > From smago@uga.edu Tue Jan 28 06:18:24 2014 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:18:24 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Message-ID: <44f0be9379f84c9e9f1d0b155ba48875@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> I would add my appreciation to all the others. I would not want to overlook the fact that he was a long-time member of a group, the Weavers, who were just as committed to the issues as Seeger and important singers/activists in their own right. Ronnie Gilbert was a champion of woman's/lesbians' rights throughout her lifetime. There are several "best of" albums listed at http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20weavers&sprefix=the+weav%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20weavers that are worth the investment for oldtimers and newbies alike. I saw the band several times as a kid and even went backstage once because my dad worked with Saul Hellerman at the National Weather Bureau in Washington, DC; Saul's brother Fred was a Weaver, and invited his brother and guests back after the show. Probably in the late 1950s. Interesting thing I learned while looking some things up: The group took its name from a play by Gerhart Hauptmann, Die Weber (The Weavers 1892), a powerful play depicting the uprising of the Silesian weavers in 1844, containing the lines, "I'll stand it no more, come what may". More, for the curious: Because of the deepening Red Scare of the early 1950s, their manager, Pete Cameron, advised them not to sing their most explicitly political songs and to avoid performing at "progressive" venues and events. Because of this, some folk song fans criticized them for watering down their beliefs and commercializing their singing style. But the Weavers felt it was worth it to get their songs before the public, and to avoid the explicit type of commitment which had led to the demise of the Almanacs. The new approach proved a success, leading to many bookings and increased demand for the groups recordings. During the Red Scare, however, Pete Seeger and Lee Hays were identified as Communist Party members by FBI informant Harvey Matusow (who later recanted) and ended up being called up to testify to the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1955. Hays took the Fifth Amendment. Seeger, however, refused to answer, claiming First Amendment grounds, the first to do so after the conviction of the Hollywood Ten in 1950. Seeger was found guilty of contempt and placed under restrictions by the court pending appeal, but in 1961 his conviction was overturned on technical grounds.[1] Because Seeger was among those listed in the entertainment industry blacklist publication, Red Channels, all of the Weavers were placed under FBI surveillance and not allowed to perform on television or radio during the McCarthy era. Decca Records terminated their recording contract and deleted their songs from its catalog in 1953,[2] and their records were denied airplay, which curtailed their income from royalties. Right-wing and anti-Communist groups protested at their performances and harassed promoters. As a result, the group's economic viability diminished rapidly and in 1952 it disbanded. After this, Pete Seeger continued his solo career, although like all of them he continued to suffer from the effects of blacklisting. In December 1955, the group reunited to play a sold-out concert at Carnegie Hall. The concert was a huge success. A recording of the concert was issued by the independent Vanguard Records, and this led to their signing by that record label. By the late 1950s, folk music was surging in popularity and McCarthyism was fading. Yet the media industry of the time was so timid and conventional that it wasn't until the height of the revolutionary '60s that Seeger was able to end his blacklisting by appearing on a nationally distributed US television show, The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, in 1968.[3] When in the late fifties The Weavers agreed to provide the vocals for a TV cigarette commercial, Pete Seeger, opposed to the dangers of tobacco and discouraged by the group's apparent sell-out to commercial interests, decided to resign. He spent his last year with the Weavers honoring his commitments, but described himself as feeling like a prisoner. He left the group on April 1, 1958. p -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Lake Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 8:55 AM To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger Thank-you Leif. Pete's passing leaves a large chasm in the cultural/historical landscape not only of the U.S. but the whole world he embraced. The New Times Obituary provides a good overview. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/arts/music/pete-seeger-songwriter-and-champion-of-folk-music-dies-at-94.html?emc=edit_na_20140128&_r=0 So long Pete, its been good to know ya! Robert Lake On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Leif Strandberg < leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com> wrote: > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important > cultural activity? we are moved but we know: > > "We shall not be moved" > > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > > Leif > Sweden > From goncu@uic.edu Tue Jan 28 08:46:54 2014 From: goncu@uic.edu (Goncu, Artin) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:46:54 -0600 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> Message-ID: <625e3926ad73a5b49d2e55388e1dae78.squirrel@webmail.uic.edu> I am too overcome by a profound sense of sadness.. He was the voice of many all over the world.. ag On Tue, January 28, 2014 5:12 am, Ulvi ????il wrote: > Big condolences to dear United States people first of all, and to the > working-class of the United States in particular, and to the whole > humanity...from Turkey. > > Ulvi > > > > > > > 2014-01-28 Leif Strandberg > >> Pete Seeger is dead... but we will remember him and his important >> cultural >> activity... we are moved but we know: >> >> "We shall not be moved" >> >> Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world >> >> Leif >> Sweden >> > > Artin Goncu, Ph.D Co-editor, Mind, Culture, and Activity:An International Journal Professor Emeritus, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education M/C 147 1040 W. Harrison St. Chicago, IL 60607 From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 28 08:55:00 2014 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 08:55:00 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: <625e3926ad73a5b49d2e55388e1dae78.squirrel@webmail.uic.edu> References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> <625e3926ad73a5b49d2e55388e1dae78.squirrel@webmail.uic.edu> Message-ID: Pete Seeger was indeed a powerful, kind presence who made a real difference. Ronnie Gilbert is not dead, incidentally. She was alive and onstage, albeit with walking carefully with a cane, at a recent memorial service for Faith Petric, member of the Freedom Song Network and mother of the San Francisco folk music society. Faith was 98 and good to the last drop. John McCutcheon told of visiting her in hospice and singing "Solidarity Forever" with her. Pete Seeger sent a message which was read at the concert. These old heroes are a bunch of tough cookies. Helena Worthen On 1/28/14 8:46 AM, "Goncu, Artin" wrote: > > > > >I am too overcome by a profound sense of sadness.. He was the voice of >many all over the world.. ag > > > >On Tue, January 28, 2014 5:12 am, Ulvi ????il wrote: >> Big condolences to dear United States people first of all, and to the >> working-class of the United States in particular, and to the whole >> humanity...from Turkey. >> >> Ulvi >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2014-01-28 Leif Strandberg >> >>> Pete Seeger is dead... but we will remember him and his important >>> cultural >>> activity... we are moved but we know: >>> >>> "We shall not be moved" >>> >>> Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world >>> >>> Leif >>> Sweden >>> >> >> > > >Artin Goncu, Ph.D >Co-editor, Mind, Culture, and Activity:An International Journal >Professor Emeritus, >University of Illinois at Chicago >College of Education M/C 147 >1040 W. Harrison St. >Chicago, IL 60607 > > From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Jan 28 09:06:48 2014 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 12:06:48 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: <44f0be9379f84c9e9f1d0b155ba48875@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> <44f0be9379f84c9e9f1d0b155ba48875@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Thanks for adding this Peter. I love what Seeger said when brought before congress in 1955. Again from today's New York Times piece.?*I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be asked, especially under such compulsion as this.?*Mr. Seeger offered to sing the songs mentioned by the congressmen who questioned him. The committee declined. I literally began my career in education by teaching Pete's anti-war songs, (and some others from the mid- 20th century roots music era). in English classes, first to refugees from South East Asia, then later from Ukraine and Bosnia and finally to migrant farm workers here in South Georgia. Later I would officially learn about the power of ZPD's, and was enabled to historically identify the consciousness raising dynamic and multidimensional aspects of collective and affective pedagogy through musical/linguistic artefacts. Seeger always sought to create this environment throughout his music career. It was never just entertainment to him. For example listen to him teach Jose Marti's poem through song here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDU5kAnHB8I RL On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > I would add my appreciation to all the others. I would not want to > overlook the fact that he was a long-time member of a group, the Weavers, > who were just as committed to the issues as Seeger and important > singers/activists in their own right. Ronnie Gilbert was a champion of > woman's/lesbians' rights throughout her lifetime. > > There are several "best of" albums listed at > http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20weavers&sprefix=the+weav%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20weaversthat are worth the investment for oldtimers and newbies alike. I saw the > band several times as a kid and even went backstage once because my dad > worked with Saul Hellerman at the National Weather Bureau in Washington, > DC; Saul's brother Fred was a Weaver, and invited his brother and guests > back after the show. Probably in the late 1950s. > > Interesting thing I learned while looking some things up: The group took > its name from a play by Gerhart Hauptmann, Die Weber (The Weavers 1892), a > powerful play depicting the uprising of the Silesian weavers in 1844, > containing the lines, "I'll stand it no more, come what may". > > More, for the curious: > Because of the deepening Red Scare of the early 1950s, their manager, Pete > Cameron, advised them not to sing their most explicitly political songs and > to avoid performing at "progressive" venues and events. Because of this, > some folk song fans criticized them for watering down their beliefs and > commercializing their singing style. But the Weavers felt it was worth it > to get their songs before the public, and to avoid the explicit type of > commitment which had led to the demise of the Almanacs. The new approach > proved a success, leading to many bookings and increased demand for the > groups recordings. > > During the Red Scare, however, Pete Seeger and Lee Hays were identified as > Communist Party members by FBI informant Harvey Matusow (who later > recanted) and ended up being called up to testify to the House Committee on > Un-American Activities in 1955. Hays took the Fifth Amendment. Seeger, > however, refused to answer, claiming First Amendment grounds, the first to > do so after the conviction of the Hollywood Ten in 1950. Seeger was found > guilty of contempt and placed under restrictions by the court pending > appeal, but in 1961 his conviction was overturned on technical grounds.[1] > Because Seeger was among those listed in the entertainment industry > blacklist publication, Red Channels, all of the Weavers were placed under > FBI surveillance and not allowed to perform on television or radio during > the McCarthy era. Decca Records terminated their recording contract and > deleted their songs from its catalog in 1953,[2] and their records were > denied airplay, which curtailed their income from royalties. Right-wing and > anti-Communist groups protested at their performances and harassed > promoters. As a result, the group's economic viability diminished rapidly > and in 1952 it disbanded. After this, Pete Seeger continued his solo > career, although like all of them he continued to suffer from the effects > of blacklisting. > > In December 1955, the group reunited to play a sold-out concert at > Carnegie Hall. The concert was a huge success. A recording of the concert > was issued by the independent Vanguard Records, and this led to their > signing by that record label. By the late 1950s, folk music was surging in > popularity and McCarthyism was fading. Yet the media industry of the time > was so timid and conventional that it wasn't until the height of the > revolutionary '60s that Seeger was able to end his blacklisting by > appearing on a nationally distributed US television show, The Smothers > Brothers Comedy Hour, in 1968.[3] > > When in the late fifties The Weavers agreed to provide the vocals for a TV > cigarette commercial, Pete Seeger, opposed to the dangers of tobacco and > discouraged by the group's apparent sell-out to commercial interests, > decided to resign. He spent his last year with the Weavers honoring his > commitments, but described himself as feeling like a prisoner. He left the > group on April 1, 1958. > p > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Lake > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 8:55 AM > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger > > Thank-you Leif. > Pete's passing leaves a large chasm in the cultural/historical landscape > not only of the U.S. > but the whole world he embraced. The New Times Obituary provides a good > overview. > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/arts/music/pete-seeger-songwriter-and-champion-of-folk-music-dies-at-94.html?emc=edit_na_20140128&_r=0 > > So long Pete, its been good to know ya! > Robert Lake > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Leif Strandberg < > leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com> wrote: > > > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important > > cultural activity? we are moved but we know: > > > > "We shall not be moved" > > > > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > > > > Leif > > Sweden > > > > From greg.a.thompson@gmail.com Tue Jan 28 09:24:38 2014 From: greg.a.thompson@gmail.com (Greg Thompson) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:24:38 -0700 Subject: [Xmca-l] A propos Pete Seeger and Wealth Extraction Message-ID: I imagine if Pete Seeger were getting his start today, issues like global inequality would be at the top of his list. Consider this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNYemuiAOfU (part of a series available on Youtube called "Why Poverty?") This video looks particularly at wealth disparities between Switzerland and Zambia, while making a broader point about wealth disparity around the globe. The video notes that if you look at aid to developing countries and the amount of capital extracted from those countries, you find that ten times the amount of aid that goes into those countries is extracted from these countries in wealth (and the youtube video provides a nice metaphor with the extraction of copper from Zambia). What a wonderful system of wealth redistribution - not only do wealthy individuals in wealthy countries get the majority of the wealth, they also get to appear as benevolent benefactors in the process! (and add to that the fact that much of the development aid comes from public dollars and you have another strong case for the public subsidizing the wealth of the rich). Better than anything P.T. Barnum could have cooked up - this may be the greatest boondoggle of our times. -greg From helenaworthen@gmail.com Tue Jan 28 09:46:13 2014 From: helenaworthen@gmail.com (Helena Worthen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:46:13 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> <44f0be9379f84c9e9f1d0b155ba48875@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Yes, thanks to Peter and Robert for adding this background. This is the context that's missing from "Inside Llewyn Davis", the new Coen brother movie about a folk singer in the 1960's. Helena Worthen On 1/28/14 9:06 AM, "Robert Lake" wrote: >Thanks for adding this Peter. I love what Seeger said when brought before >congress in 1955. >Again from today's New York Times piece.?*I am not going to answer any >questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or >my >political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private >affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be >asked, especially under such compulsion as this.?*Mr. Seeger offered to >sing the songs mentioned by the congressmen who questioned him. The >committee declined. > >I literally began my career in education by teaching Pete's anti-war >songs, >(and some others from the mid- 20th century roots music era). in English >classes, first to refugees from South East Asia, then later from Ukraine >and Bosnia and finally to migrant farm workers here in South Georgia. > >Later I would officially learn about the power of ZPD's, and was enabled >to >historically identify the consciousness raising dynamic and >multidimensional aspects of collective and affective pedagogy through >musical/linguistic artefacts. Seeger always sought to create this >environment throughout his music career. It was never just entertainment >to >him. For example listen to him teach Jose Marti's poem through song here. > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDU5kAnHB8I > >RL > > > > >On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > >> I would add my appreciation to all the others. I would not want to >> overlook the fact that he was a long-time member of a group, the >>Weavers, >> who were just as committed to the issues as Seeger and important >> singers/activists in their own right. Ronnie Gilbert was a champion of >> woman's/lesbians' rights throughout her lifetime. >> >> There are several "best of" albums listed at >> >>http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-key >>words=the%20weavers&sprefix=the+weav%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20weavers >>that are worth the investment for oldtimers and newbies alike. I saw the >> band several times as a kid and even went backstage once because my dad >> worked with Saul Hellerman at the National Weather Bureau in Washington, >> DC; Saul's brother Fred was a Weaver, and invited his brother and guests >> back after the show. Probably in the late 1950s. >> >> Interesting thing I learned while looking some things up: The group took >> its name from a play by Gerhart Hauptmann, Die Weber (The Weavers >>1892), a >> powerful play depicting the uprising of the Silesian weavers in 1844, >> containing the lines, "I'll stand it no more, come what may". >> >> More, for the curious: >> Because of the deepening Red Scare of the early 1950s, their manager, >>Pete >> Cameron, advised them not to sing their most explicitly political songs >>and >> to avoid performing at "progressive" venues and events. Because of this, >> some folk song fans criticized them for watering down their beliefs and >> commercializing their singing style. But the Weavers felt it was worth >>it >> to get their songs before the public, and to avoid the explicit type of >> commitment which had led to the demise of the Almanacs. The new approach >> proved a success, leading to many bookings and increased demand for the >> groups recordings. >> >> During the Red Scare, however, Pete Seeger and Lee Hays were identified >>as >> Communist Party members by FBI informant Harvey Matusow (who later >> recanted) and ended up being called up to testify to the House >>Committee on >> Un-American Activities in 1955. Hays took the Fifth Amendment. Seeger, >> however, refused to answer, claiming First Amendment grounds, the first >>to >> do so after the conviction of the Hollywood Ten in 1950. Seeger was >>found >> guilty of contempt and placed under restrictions by the court pending >> appeal, but in 1961 his conviction was overturned on technical >>grounds.[1] >> Because Seeger was among those listed in the entertainment industry >> blacklist publication, Red Channels, all of the Weavers were placed >>under >> FBI surveillance and not allowed to perform on television or radio >>during >> the McCarthy era. Decca Records terminated their recording contract and >> deleted their songs from its catalog in 1953,[2] and their records were >> denied airplay, which curtailed their income from royalties. Right-wing >>and >> anti-Communist groups protested at their performances and harassed >> promoters. As a result, the group's economic viability diminished >>rapidly >> and in 1952 it disbanded. After this, Pete Seeger continued his solo >> career, although like all of them he continued to suffer from the >>effects >> of blacklisting. >> >> In December 1955, the group reunited to play a sold-out concert at >> Carnegie Hall. The concert was a huge success. A recording of the >>concert >> was issued by the independent Vanguard Records, and this led to their >> signing by that record label. By the late 1950s, folk music was surging >>in >> popularity and McCarthyism was fading. Yet the media industry of the >>time >> was so timid and conventional that it wasn't until the height of the >> revolutionary '60s that Seeger was able to end his blacklisting by >> appearing on a nationally distributed US television show, The Smothers >> Brothers Comedy Hour, in 1968.[3] >> >> When in the late fifties The Weavers agreed to provide the vocals for a >>TV >> cigarette commercial, Pete Seeger, opposed to the dangers of tobacco and >> discouraged by the group's apparent sell-out to commercial interests, >> decided to resign. He spent his last year with the Weavers honoring his >> commitments, but described himself as feeling like a prisoner. He left >>the >> group on April 1, 1958. >> p >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Lake >> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 8:55 AM >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger >> >> Thank-you Leif. >> Pete's passing leaves a large chasm in the cultural/historical landscape >> not only of the U.S. >> but the whole world he embraced. The New Times Obituary provides a good >> overview. >> >> >> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/arts/music/pete-seeger-songwriter-and-c >>hampion-of-folk-music-dies-at-94.html?emc=edit_na_20140128&_r=0 >> >> So long Pete, its been good to know ya! >> Robert Lake >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Leif Strandberg < >> leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com> wrote: >> >> > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important >> > cultural activity? we are moved but we know: >> > >> > "We shall not be moved" >> > >> > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world >> > >> > Leif >> > Sweden >> > >> >> From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Tue Jan 28 13:29:22 2014 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 16:29:22 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger In-Reply-To: References: <264F0BF5-C4AA-45FC-9225-C5C22B4D8649@telia.com> <44f0be9379f84c9e9f1d0b155ba48875@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Yes Helena, Absolutely and tragically missing! On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Helena Worthen wrote: > Yes, thanks to Peter and Robert for adding this background. > > This is the context that's missing from "Inside Llewyn Davis", the new > Coen brother movie about a folk singer in the 1960's. > > Helena Worthen > > On 1/28/14 9:06 AM, "Robert Lake" wrote: > > >Thanks for adding this Peter. I love what Seeger said when brought before > >congress in 1955. > >Again from today's New York Times piece.?*I am not going to answer any > >questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or > >my > >political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private > >affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be > >asked, especially under such compulsion as this.?*Mr. Seeger offered to > >sing the songs mentioned by the congressmen who questioned him. The > >committee declined. > > > >I literally began my career in education by teaching Pete's anti-war > >songs, > >(and some others from the mid- 20th century roots music era). in English > >classes, first to refugees from South East Asia, then later from Ukraine > >and Bosnia and finally to migrant farm workers here in South Georgia. > > > >Later I would officially learn about the power of ZPD's, and was enabled > >to > >historically identify the consciousness raising dynamic and > >multidimensional aspects of collective and affective pedagogy through > >musical/linguistic artefacts. Seeger always sought to create this > >environment throughout his music career. It was never just entertainment > >to > >him. For example listen to him teach Jose Marti's poem through song here. > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDU5kAnHB8I > > > >RL > > > > > > > > > >On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > > > >> I would add my appreciation to all the others. I would not want to > >> overlook the fact that he was a long-time member of a group, the > >>Weavers, > >> who were just as committed to the issues as Seeger and important > >> singers/activists in their own right. Ronnie Gilbert was a champion of > >> woman's/lesbians' rights throughout her lifetime. > >> > >> There are several "best of" albums listed at > >> > >> > http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-key > >>words=the%20weavers&sprefix=the+weav%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20weavers > >>that are worth the investment for oldtimers and newbies alike. I saw the > >> band several times as a kid and even went backstage once because my dad > >> worked with Saul Hellerman at the National Weather Bureau in Washington, > >> DC; Saul's brother Fred was a Weaver, and invited his brother and guests > >> back after the show. Probably in the late 1950s. > >> > >> Interesting thing I learned while looking some things up: The group took > >> its name from a play by Gerhart Hauptmann, Die Weber (The Weavers > >>1892), a > >> powerful play depicting the uprising of the Silesian weavers in 1844, > >> containing the lines, "I'll stand it no more, come what may". > >> > >> More, for the curious: > >> Because of the deepening Red Scare of the early 1950s, their manager, > >>Pete > >> Cameron, advised them not to sing their most explicitly political songs > >>and > >> to avoid performing at "progressive" venues and events. Because of this, > >> some folk song fans criticized them for watering down their beliefs and > >> commercializing their singing style. But the Weavers felt it was worth > >>it > >> to get their songs before the public, and to avoid the explicit type of > >> commitment which had led to the demise of the Almanacs. The new approach > >> proved a success, leading to many bookings and increased demand for the > >> groups recordings. > >> > >> During the Red Scare, however, Pete Seeger and Lee Hays were identified > >>as > >> Communist Party members by FBI informant Harvey Matusow (who later > >> recanted) and ended up being called up to testify to the House > >>Committee on > >> Un-American Activities in 1955. Hays took the Fifth Amendment. Seeger, > >> however, refused to answer, claiming First Amendment grounds, the first > >>to > >> do so after the conviction of the Hollywood Ten in 1950. Seeger was > >>found > >> guilty of contempt and placed under restrictions by the court pending > >> appeal, but in 1961 his conviction was overturned on technical > >>grounds.[1] > >> Because Seeger was among those listed in the entertainment industry > >> blacklist publication, Red Channels, all of the Weavers were placed > >>under > >> FBI surveillance and not allowed to perform on television or radio > >>during > >> the McCarthy era. Decca Records terminated their recording contract and > >> deleted their songs from its catalog in 1953,[2] and their records were > >> denied airplay, which curtailed their income from royalties. Right-wing > >>and > >> anti-Communist groups protested at their performances and harassed > >> promoters. As a result, the group's economic viability diminished > >>rapidly > >> and in 1952 it disbanded. After this, Pete Seeger continued his solo > >> career, although like all of them he continued to suffer from the > >>effects > >> of blacklisting. > >> > >> In December 1955, the group reunited to play a sold-out concert at > >> Carnegie Hall. The concert was a huge success. A recording of the > >>concert > >> was issued by the independent Vanguard Records, and this led to their > >> signing by that record label. By the late 1950s, folk music was surging > >>in > >> popularity and McCarthyism was fading. Yet the media industry of the > >>time > >> was so timid and conventional that it wasn't until the height of the > >> revolutionary '60s that Seeger was able to end his blacklisting by > >> appearing on a nationally distributed US television show, The Smothers > >> Brothers Comedy Hour, in 1968.[3] > >> > >> When in the late fifties The Weavers agreed to provide the vocals for a > >>TV > >> cigarette commercial, Pete Seeger, opposed to the dangers of tobacco and > >> discouraged by the group's apparent sell-out to commercial interests, > >> decided to resign. He spent his last year with the Weavers honoring his > >> commitments, but described himself as feeling like a prisoner. He left > >>the > >> group on April 1, 1958. > >> p > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > >> xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Lake > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 8:55 AM > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Pete Seeger > >> > >> Thank-you Leif. > >> Pete's passing leaves a large chasm in the cultural/historical landscape > >> not only of the U.S. > >> but the whole world he embraced. The New Times Obituary provides a good > >> overview. > >> > >> > >> > >> > http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/arts/music/pete-seeger-songwriter-and-c > >>hampion-of-folk-music-dies-at-94.html?emc=edit_na_20140128&_r=0 > >> > >> So long Pete, its been good to know ya! > >> Robert Lake > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Leif Strandberg < > >> leifstrandberg.ab@telia.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Pete Seeger is dead? but we will remember him and his important > >> > cultural activity? we are moved but we know: > >> > > >> > "We shall not be moved" > >> > > >> > Love to Pete Seeger and his big family all over the world > >> > > >> > Leif > >> > Sweden > >> > > >> > >> > > > > From shirinvossoughi@gmail.com Tue Jan 28 14:38:01 2014 From: shirinvossoughi@gmail.com (Shirin Vossoughi) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:38:01 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <1390841221.41726.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <20140127195129.HM.b0000000008eH7e@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> <1390841221.41726.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Haydi, In my experience (one among many versions of Boalian theater) - Image theater is mostly non-verbal - though there is often a narrator, and the human statues sometimes speak anyway! Whereas forum theatre often involves both scripted and unscripted elements. It is scripted in the sense that actors develop a scene with a central problem or conflict. But it becomes unscripted at the point at which the central protagonist "fails" dramatically (in confrontation with the central antagonist) and audience members are invited to rewind the scene, replace the protagonist and try out alternative outcomes. This improvisation includes discussion with everyone of the ethico-political issues as you described. Perhaps what distinguishes forum theatre in a more classic boalian sense from role play and discussion is the organization of the scene as a "game" between the actors and the audience, mediated usually by a "joker" character who disregards the "4th wall," helps to complicate/deepen the discussion and the possibilities for action within the scene. With regards to invisible theater - I have seen it done in two ways. In our own work with migrant youth in a summer program, when we did in invisible theatre, we always eventually "broke" the scene (making it recognizable as a theatrical scene) and engaged students in a discussion of what had just transpired. On a recent trip to Iran, I had the chance to work with some folks doing Boalian theatre in Tehran whose practice is to sustain the invisibility of the scene (never letting on that they are actors). I'm curious to know more about the notion that Boal was "hostile to language" as I'm not sure what you mean here? Thanks for the discussion! Shirin On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Haydi Zulfei wrote: > Oh ! David ! So happy to see you here again ! Welcome really ! I have many > unread mails but I tried yours in the hope I might come across some old > friend of ours which I now see got realized . > Best > Haydi > > > ________________________________ > From: kellogg > To: Haydi Zulfei ; "eXtended Mind, > Culture,Activity" > Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014, 14:21:29 > Subject: RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht > > > > It's not a spam, Haydi! I just resubscribed after being mysteriously > desubscribed. Apparently a few bugs in the works, still.... > > (If you get this, and the list doesn't, can you repost?) > > A few years ago, there was some discussion on this list of Augusto Boal > and the "Theatre of the Oppressed". I've been reading some of his work and > trying to make sense of some interesting data I've collected from children > doing classroom role plays (in one case, the kids use their mother tongue > first and then try the role play in English and in the second case they > enact a scene in English and discuss some of the moral issues in Korean). > > Within the Theatre of the Oppressed, Boal distinguishes an "Image > Theatre", a "Forum Theatre", and an "Invisible Theatre". Am I right in > thinking that "Image Theatre" is mostly NON-verbal, while "Forum Theatre" > is more or less what we have been doing in class (that is, a scripted > performance and some discussion of ethico-political issues), while > "Invisible Theatre" is a kind of public performance, along the lines of a > Michael Moore documentary, or the old show "Candid Camera"? > > I recently returned from a conference in New Zealand (Hi, Eugene and Ana!) > where I met a woman who had actually worked with Boal. She told me that > Boal had essentially no following in Brazil or in the other countries where > he worked, because people often found it impossible to deal with the > government backlash that his work provoked. Boal himself talks about this > problem in a youtube interview: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOgv91qQyJc > > (see around 6:50) > > > The other question I have is the relationship between Boal and Brecht. On > the one hand, Boal seems very interested in Brechtian ideas about a theatre > which teaches alternative possibilities. But on the other much of what he > writes seems quite hostile to language, and of course the idea of deceiving > the audience into thinking that they are not observing a performance but an > unmediated social reality is quite un-Brechtian. Can anybody comment on > this? > > David Kellogg > Hankuk University of Foreign Studies > > --------- ?? ?? --------- > > ????: Haydi Zulfei > >???? : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > >??: 2014? 1? 27? ???, 16? 48? 11? +0900 > >??: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht > > > >Hi > >Blank ! May you resend it ! Or is this a spam ? H > > > > > >________________________________ > >From: kellogg > >To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu > >Sent: Monday, 27 January 2014, 7:43:16 > >Subject: [Xmca-l] Boal and Brecht > > > > > > > From kellogg59@hanmail.net Tue Jan 28 15:54:17 2014 From: kellogg59@hanmail.net (kellogg) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:54:17 +0900 (KST) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht Message-ID: <20140129085417.HM.b0000000008eH8B@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Tue Jan 28 21:57:26 2014 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 05:57:26 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <20140129085417.HM.b0000000008eH8B@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> References: <20140129085417.HM.b0000000008eH8B@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> Message-ID: <1390975046.95515.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Hi David and Shirin As this mail from David is yet blank , and I don't know what the cause might be , I have to ask Shirin to kindly tell me if she has got?David'd reply . Thanks ! Best Haydi? p.s. It's not so bad , however :-) This makes up for the problem of receiving SOME mails in doublets or treblets due to the action of some dear folk copying all three adresses of the Forum as explained by the dear colleague in charge . BTW , all three machines here?pronounce the same problem . ? ________________________________ From: kellogg To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" Sent: Wednesday, 29 January 2014, 3:24:17 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht From smago@uga.edu Wed Jan 29 03:01:20 2014 From: smago@uga.edu (Peter Smagorinsky) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:01:20 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] =?windows-1252?q?Pete_Seeger=3A_=91Do_you_know_the_difference_be?= =?windows-1252?q?tween_education_and_experience=3F=92?= Message-ID: <6a6cd9f8157d4a12ba3d11140daa4999@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Pete Seeger: ?Do you know the difference between education and experience?? The great Pete Seeger on education. By Valerie Strauss 12 hours ago 2 From boblake@georgiasouthern.edu Wed Jan 29 07:01:23 2014 From: boblake@georgiasouthern.edu (Robert Lake) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:01:23 -0500 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: =?utf-8?q?Pete_Seeger=3A_=E2=80=98Do_you_know_the_difference_?= =?utf-8?q?between_education_and_experience=3F=E2=80=99?= In-Reply-To: <6a6cd9f8157d4a12ba3d11140daa4999@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> References: <6a6cd9f8157d4a12ba3d11140daa4999@CO1PR02MB175.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: Thanks Peter. I just signed the petition "New York Governor Andrew Cuomo: Name the new Tappan Zee Bridge after Pete Seeger." on Change.org. Here's the link: http://www.change.org/petitions/new-york-governor-andrew-cuomo-name-the-new-tappan-zee-bridge-after-pete-seeger?share_id=GpyRHNERVK&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition *Robert* On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Peter Smagorinsky wrote: > Pete Seeger: ?Do you know the difference between education and > experience??< > http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/01/28/pete-seeger-do-you-know-the-difference-between-education-and-experience/ > > > The great Pete Seeger on education. > By Valerie Strauss< > http://www.washingtonpost.com/valerie-strauss/2011/03/07/ABZrToO_page.html> > 12 hours ago < > http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/01/28/pete-seeger-do-you-know-the-difference-between-education-and-experience/#comments > > > 2< > http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/01/28/pete-seeger-do-you-know-the-difference-between-education-and-experience/#comments > > > > > From shirinvossoughi@gmail.com Wed Jan 29 08:57:45 2014 From: shirinvossoughi@gmail.com (Shirin Vossoughi) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 08:57:45 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <1390975046.95515.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <20140129085417.HM.b0000000008eH8B@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> <1390975046.95515.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi David, Thanks for your response. On the question of scripted vs. unscripted - my sense is that the distinction is less about the people (actors vs. spectators) and more about the action. Hence Boal's term "spect-actors." I read this as suggesting that actors on stage may observe and improvise and audience members may similarly observe and intervene. the larger goal, as I see it, is to practice being a "spect-actor" in the theater in order to become a "spect-actor" with expanded capacities to observe and intervene in the scenes of everyday life. on the question of language - again I could be wrong here - I see Boal as interested in the generative potentials of certain rules and structures at certain moments. Like rules within play (in a Vygotskian sense), momentarily suspending the use of verbal language in image theater allows the participants to develop other kinds of expression and thinking/feeling. similarly in forum theater, we used to rehearse scenes by asking students to run the play once through without any verbal language - thus exaggerating and expanding their gestures and movements as a means of communication. We would then run the scene suspending movement and using only verbal language - which pushed us to speak louder and with more emotion. In the actual performance, the two came back together newly strengthened. I'm not sure I understand how image theater can be seen as "anti-symbolic" ? I wonder if there is a similar dynamic going on in Boal's statement regarding the authority inherent in any social code. Like the dialectic of rules & play, I'm not sure if authority and freedom are in opposition or in a potentially generative relationship within his statement. Perhaps in a foucaldian sense, we must submit ourselves to the authority of particular social rules in order to participate in a society, or a classroom, or a forum theater scene. this dynamic can be used to analyze authoritarian structures and contexts, hegemony, etc. but it can also be used to understand how rules/structure give life to new forms of participation, community, development, etc. in a range of social-political configurations, including what could be seen as more democratic or humane ones ? looking forward to hearing your thoughts. shirin On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Haydi Zulfei wrote: > Hi David and Shirin > As this mail from David is yet blank , and I don't know what the cause > might be , I have to ask Shirin to kindly tell me if she has got David'd > reply . Thanks ! > Best > Haydi > p.s. It's not so bad , however :-) This makes up for the problem of > receiving SOME mails in doublets or treblets due to the action of some dear > folk copying all three adresses of the Forum as explained by the dear > colleague in charge . BTW , all three machines here pronounce the same > problem . > > > ________________________________ > From: kellogg > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" > Sent: Wednesday, 29 January 2014, 3:24:17 > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht > From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Wed Jan 29 18:30:47 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 23:30:47 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing Message-ID: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special section of Learning and Individual Differences The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students? performance on school related abilities requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported that there are individual differences not only in people?s tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek contributions that represent innovative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and school related performance at different stages of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human development. Original research and review articles will be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have questions about the submission. From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 29 18:36:58 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:36:58 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. Interesting, David. andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ David Preiss wrote: > Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special section of Learning and Individual Differences > > The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students? performance on school related abilities requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported that there are individual differences not only in people?s tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek contributions that represent inno > vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and school related performance at different stages of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human development. Original research and review articles wil > l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have questions about the submission. > > > From lchcmike@gmail.com Wed Jan 29 19:56:06 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:56:06 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> Message-ID: David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? There was an article, I believe in the NYTimes about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was supposed to take care of. Right? I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. But maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, imagination. mike On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. > Interesting, David. > andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > David Preiss wrote: > >> Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special >> section of Learning and Individual Differences >> The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and >> education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering >> negatively impacts students' performance on school related abilities >> requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, >> attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized >> measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that >> mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have >> called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity >> and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported >> that there are individual differences not only in people's tendency to >> engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These >> differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in >> everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, >> we seek contributions that represent inno >> vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) >> synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual >> differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on >> mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with >> special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the >> schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind >> wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although >> not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education >> such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, >> among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and >> school related performance at different stages of schooling, from >> elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to >> articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human >> development. Original research and review articles wil >> l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles >> (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); >> the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or >> tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to >> receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should >> indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind >> wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have >> questions about the submission. >> >> >> >> > > > > From ablunden@mira.net Wed Jan 29 20:08:34 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:08:34 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> Message-ID: <52E9D042.3070003@mira.net> Without any scientific justification at all, I tend to see it that way as well, Mike. I have a terrible deficit of focus and (much to Vonney's annoyance) often don't see what is under my nose, but that is because my mind is wandering all the time, and I have no intention, and never had, of trying to do anything about that, to "discipline" my mind, because I absolutely rely on whatever it is which is going on when I am not thinking about something. Some people are different. Vonney has incredible perception. She sees things (and smells, and hears) which are invisible to me, but she has great difficulty in seeing what is not there. This becomes an issue for us when it comes to interior design/renovations, etc. She always does a fantastic job, in the end, but it takes lots of work to visualise the object before it is produced, usually relying on finding pictures of the same thing done by someone else in magazine. The opposite for me. I can see it before it is built easily, but I do not have the same discrimination, so it is no use. I would love to read whatever comes out of this call for papers. But I would be interested even more if it were not exclusively focussed on education and children. Us adults apprehend the world differently too. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ mike cole wrote: > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? > There was an article, I believe in the NYTimes > about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power > that included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind > was supposed to take care of. > > Right? > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. > But maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > imagination. > > mike > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. > Interesting, David. > andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > David Preiss wrote: > > Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for > a special section of Learning and Individual Differences > The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning > process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have > noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students? > performance on school related abilities requiring high levels > of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending > lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized > measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have > noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday > normal functioning and have called attention to its positive > impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem > solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported > that there are individual differences not only in people?s > tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content > of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how > adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, > specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek > contributions that represent inno > vative research on individual differences in mind wandering > that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and > perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) > focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with > research on school related cognitive abilities with special > attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the > schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) > relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and > processes that, although not specifically academic, play a > relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, > divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among > others; d) and investigate the connection between mind > wandering and school related performance at different stages > of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special > consideration will be given to articles that place mind > wandering in the context of overall human development. > Original research and review articles wil > l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length > articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case > studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the > abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should > reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive > full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should > indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special > issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss > (davidpreiss@uc.cl ) if you have > questions about the submission. > > > > > > > From R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk Thu Jan 30 00:08:27 2014 From: R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk (Rod Parker-Rees) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 08:08:27 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: <52E9D042.3070003@mira.net> References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> <52E9D042.3070003@mira.net> Message-ID: <8F385CC13313CC47B866739C3A4BC31107B2DE@TIS105.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> I am looking forward to these papers too! I have always thought of mind-wandering and daydreaming as an internalised form of playfulness and a useful way of making it more likely that you will come across hitherto unnoticed connections and paths. But I think there is also much to be said for helping children (and adults) to develop their ability to move between wandering and more focused (even blinkered) forms of attention - one of which would be mindfulness. Wandering is lovely when you are not under pressure to be somewhere by a certain time but sometimes it makes sense to take a familiar route or to plan a route in advance! All the best, Rod -----Original Message----- From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden Sent: 30 January 2014 04:09 To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing Without any scientific justification at all, I tend to see it that way as well, Mike. I have a terrible deficit of focus and (much to Vonney's annoyance) often don't see what is under my nose, but that is because my mind is wandering all the time, and I have no intention, and never had, of trying to do anything about that, to "discipline" my mind, because I absolutely rely on whatever it is which is going on when I am not thinking about something. Some people are different. Vonney has incredible perception. She sees things (and smells, and hears) which are invisible to me, but she has great difficulty in seeing what is not there. This becomes an issue for us when it comes to interior design/renovations, etc. She always does a fantastic job, in the end, but it takes lots of work to visualise the object before it is produced, usually relying on finding pictures of the same thing done by someone else in magazine. The opposite for me. I can see it before it is built easily, but I do not have the same discrimination, so it is no use. I would love to read whatever comes out of this call for papers. But I would be interested even more if it were not exclusively focussed on education and children. Us adults apprehend the world differently too. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ mike cole wrote: > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? > There was an article, I believe in the NYTimes about the differential > efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that included a flip > side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was supposed to take > care of. > > Right? > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. > But maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > imagination. > > mike > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden > wrote: > > What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. > Interesting, David. > andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > David Preiss wrote: > > Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for > a special section of Learning and Individual Differences > The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning > process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have > noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students' > performance on school related abilities requiring high levels > of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending > lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized > measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have > noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday > normal functioning and have called attention to its positive > impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem > solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported > that there are individual differences not only in people's > tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content > of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how > adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, > specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek > contributions that represent inno > vative research on individual differences in mind wandering > that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and > perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) > focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with > research on school related cognitive abilities with special > attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the > schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) > relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and > processes that, although not specifically academic, play a > relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, > divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among > others; d) and investigate the connection between mind > wandering and school related performance at different stages > of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special > consideration will be given to articles that place mind > wandering in the context of overall human development. > Original research and review articles wil > l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length > articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case > studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the > abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should > reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive > full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should > indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special > issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss > (davidpreiss@uc.cl ) if you have > questions about the submission. > > > > > > > ________________________________ [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif] This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form. From haydizulfei@rocketmail.com Thu Jan 30 04:14:09 2014 From: haydizulfei@rocketmail.com (Haydi Zulfei) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:14:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Fw: Re: Re: Boal and Brecht In-Reply-To: <20140130065849.HM.b0000000008eH8u@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> References: <20140130065849.HM.b0000000008eH8u@kellogg59.wwl1601.hanmail.net> Message-ID: <1391084049.14261.YahooMailNeo@web173201.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: kellogg To: Haydi Zulfei Sent: Thursday, 30 January 2014, 1:28:49 Subject: FW: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht Haydi--just got this from Shirin. Can you repost? ? Thanks, dk ?--------- ?? ?? --------- ????: Shirin Vossoughi >????: kellogg , Haydi Zulfei >??: 2014? 1? 30? ???, 06? 55? 03? +0900 >??: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht > > > >Thanks for this! yes feel free to post on xmca >more from me soon >s > > > > >Here's my reply to Shirin: >? >? >? >Dear Shirin: >? >? >? >Haydi reposted that at my request--I'm having some trouble getting into XMCA these days. So the comments are mine and not Haydi's. >? >? >? >First, thanks for your long and very helpful answer: it makes a lot more sense to me now. In fact, it seems very similar to something we were doing in Algeria in the early 1980s. The actors I was working with were members of the Parti d l'avant garde socialiste (the illegal Communist Party) and it is possible that they had heard of Boal, particularly since some of them had returned to Algeria from theatre studies in France. >? >? >? >I think the point you make about the two different moments (scripted and unscripted) in Forum Theatre is very important: it suggests that there is, after all, a distinction between actors (scripted) and spectators (unscripted), unlike Invisible Theatre. I also think that the role of the joker in Boalian theatre is an important distinction between Forum and Invisible Theatre. As you say, it is precisely a matter of mediating and complicating and deepening the discussion. This is, by the way, precisely the role of the teacher in my "role play + discussion" data. >? >? >? >My comments on Boal's "hostility to language" may be based on a misunderstanding. But there are some quotes from "Games for Actors and Non-Actors" which rather struck me that way: >? >? >? >On p. 128, Boal is describing the "human statues" exercise that you talk about (and which I also remember from my Algerian days). He says: >? >? >? >"...(B)y introducing the violence of verbal language, one abruptly breaks the visual communication." >? >? >? >He also suggests that if the exercise fails, the participants should not speak but instead touch each other. >? >? >? >On p. 169, Boal says: >? >? >? >"It is important that the person who is 'sculpting' the image works fast, so that she will not be tempted to think in words (verbal language) and then translate into images (visual language). If the work is not done in this way, the images are generally poor, like a translation which is an impoverishment of the original." >? >? >? >Now, from these two points it might seem that I am overgeneralizing from Boal's comments on a single exercise, and one which is explicitly designed to do away with language and train non-verbal skills in actors. But the overall tenor of the exercises in "Image Theatre" is in favor of feeling and against thinking (and in most languages thoughts are quotable while feelings are not). A very large number of the exercises (probably more than two thirds of them) are nonverbal. The very name of "Image Theatre" seems anti-symbolic and anti-linguistic to me. >? >? >? >And what about this, on p. 184? >? >? >? >"If however, a social code is absolutely and indispensable (a society without any form of social code would be unthinkable), then equally it cannot avoid being to some extent authoritarian." >? >? >? >Is a conversation authoritarian? Compared to a silence, a frown, a threatening gesture? >? >? >? >David Kellogg >? >Hankuk University of Foreign Studies >? >? >? >? >? >Here's Shirin's reply, with some rejoinders by me interpolated:: >? >? >? >SHIRIN: >? >? >? >Hi David, >? >Thanks for your response. On the question of scripted vs. unscripted - my >sense is that the distinction is less about the people (actors vs. >spectators) and more about the action. Hence Boal's term "spect-actors." I >read this as suggesting that actors on stage may observe and improvise and >audience members may similarly observe and intervene. the larger goal, as I >see it, is to practice being a "spect-actor" in the theater in order to >become a "spect-actor" with expanded capacities to observe and intervene in >the scenes of everyday life. >? >? >ME: In Bakhtin's early work on ethics and esthetics, he argues that all forms of "theoretism", including all known forms of ethics and esthetics, take lived experience (perezhivanie) and reduce it to a transcendental abstraction (Hegel's "Geist", Kant's "a priori"). None of these have the immediacy, the non-replaceability, the once-occuredness of lived experience, and all must be rejected. This leaves Bakhtin in a solipsistic bind ("I for myself") which he breaks with a move which I find far more convincing and brilliant than any "Copernican Revolution" (actually an anti-Copernican one, since it places human consciousness at the centre of the universe!) on the part of Kant. Bakhtin says that there are parts of myself, e.g. the bald spot on the back of my head, that I will never see--only the other can see it. And that's where the "surplus of seeing" comes in. By going out to viewpoint of the other, we get all the concrete, irreplaceable, once-occurredness of lived experience; we escape from "I for myself" to "the other for me". It's not a theoretistic escape--it's a concrete, sensuous, real one that has all the rich empirical detail of lived experience. He hasn't really come up with dialogue as a concept yet, so his writing gets pretty sexy. In order to "consummate" myself, I need the other. Bakhtin has to insist in several places that he is not talking about sex, and he uses the masculine pronoun for the other throughout, which today reads rather differently than it must have done in his day. >? >? >? >ME: But this consummation absolutely depends on the separation between individuals. In several places, Bakhtin talks about what happens when we go out to the viewpoint of the other and forget to return to our own. And here Bakhtin says something that is incredibly obtuse. For example, says Bakhtin, there is what happens when children play; he thinks that children who fantasize about being robber chieftains GENUINELY identify their horizons with those of robber chieftains and want to become them. (Presumably, Bakhtin also thinks that the poor child who plays the robber chieftain's prey also identifies with the victim and wants to be beaten, robbed and killed.) It's all a little reminiscent of Leontiev's theory of play--it's a kind of rehearsal for real life. Bakhtin says that only an adult contemplator transforms child play into an aesthetic object. (Presumably, Bakhtin has never been one.) >? >? >? >ME: Bakhtin is not nearly so obtuse when he is talking about art. He points out that the naive novel reader simply daydreams about being a hero (and it is hard not to think of naive novel writers here). Interestingly, he has positive things to say about the spect-actor who rushes on stage to try to help the principals in a play, forgetting that it is only a play. (There is a great and utterly apocryphal anecdote about Stanislavsky and Brecht in China concerning their different attitudees to this phenomenon.) Bakhtin points out that the spect-actor?s intervention is an ethical one?but it has lost all its esthetic value, because there is no return to the contemplator?s viewpoint (in Brecht?s terms, no ?alienation effect?). >? >ME: Yes, Bakhtin DOES talk about the art of the actor. He says that the actor actually on stage is not an artist at all, for the same reason that the child at play is not an artist; he is only the tool of another artist (e.g. the make up artist). But he also says that the actor himself or herself can be the other artist?and must be, for example, when the actor prepares. >? >? >SHIRIN: on the question of language - again I could be wrong here - I see Boal as >interested in the generative potentials of certain rules and structures at >certain moments. Like rules within play (in a Vygotskian sense), >momentarily suspending the use of verbal language in image theater allows >the participants to develop other kinds of expression and thinking/feeling. >similarly in forum theater, we used to rehearse scenes by asking students >to run the play once through without any verbal language - thus >exaggerating and expanding their gestures and movements as a means of >communication. We would then run the scene suspending movement and using >only verbal language - which pushed us to speak louder and with more >emotion. In the actual performance, the two came back together newly >strengthened. >? >ME: A wonderful idea! (I wonder if it would work with the kids in my data.) >? >SHIRIN: I'm not sure I understand how image theater can be seen as "anti-symbolic"? >? >ME: An image is, to be sure, a sign. But it?s not a symbol. All that is necessary for a sign is for me to look at it and understand?that is why animals have signs (barking, howling, growling, grunting). But for a symbol I need to have someone else around, and we need to agree on what to call the symbol?that is why animals don?t use symbols (numbers, words, scripts). For the sign, all you need is primary intersubjectivity. For the symbol, you need secondary intersubjectivity as well. >? >ME: Boal?s attempt to bypass language and to create images that are prior to words is, to me, an attempt to create a theatre which can be understood by animals. But such a theatre already exists; it is what you get when you go to the latest hollywood blockbuster, horror movie, or action thriller. >? >SHIRIN: I wonder if there is a similar dynamic going on in Boal's statement >regarding the authority inherent in any social code. Like the dialectic of >rules & play, I'm not sure if authority and freedom are in opposition or in >a potentially generative relationship within his statement. Perhaps in a >foucaldian sense, we must submit ourselves to the authority of particular >social rules in order to participate in a society, or a classroom, or a >forum theater scene. this dynamic can be used to analyze authoritarian >structures and contexts, hegemony, etc. but it can also be used to >understand how rules/structure give life to new forms of participation, >community, development, etc. in a range of social-political configurations, >including what could be seen as more democratic or humane ones ? >? >ME: Yes, I think that?s what Boal is saying. All of this rather ignores the key issue of CONSENT, does it not? ? >? >? >looking forward to hearing your thoughts. >shirin >? >? >ME: Well, my thoughts are only a slight improvement on the blank emails that have been circulating under my name. But here?s where I got them: >? >Bakhtin, M.M. (1990). Art and Answerability (Austin: University of Texas Press). pp. 74-78 >? >? From lpscholar2@gmail.com Thu Jan 30 06:25:33 2014 From: lpscholar2@gmail.com (Larry Purss) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 06:25:33 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: <8F385CC13313CC47B866739C3A4BC31107B2DE@TIS105.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> <52E9D042.3070003@mira.net> <8F385CC13313CC47B866739C3A4BC31107B2DE@TIS105.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> Message-ID: Reverie, revelation, revealing, seem to be notions of wandering in and surprising us. I also am intrigued with this topic and its relation to [intentionality] and the now current focus on *self*-regulation AND co-regulation. This notion on focussing AND discipline AS learning as the process from moving through intentionality towards automaticity. Is this process related to wander kind as pivoting [synthesis] betwee wondering and wandering. Programs such as *tools of the mind* whose intent is to help adults become far more intentional on how they intervene to bring the child to intentional ways of being focused and directed as the way to move towards automaticity. Intentionality within the zone of proximal development may need to be EXPANDED to INCLUDE wander kind? Larry On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Rod Parker-Rees < R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > I am looking forward to these papers too! I have always thought of > mind-wandering and daydreaming as an internalised form of playfulness and a > useful way of making it more likely that you will come across hitherto > unnoticed connections and paths. But I think there is also much to be said > for helping children (and adults) to develop their ability to move between > wandering and more focused (even blinkered) forms of attention - one of > which would be mindfulness. Wandering is lovely when you are not under > pressure to be somewhere by a certain time but sometimes it makes sense to > take a familiar route or to plan a route in advance! > > All the best, > > Rod > > -----Original Message----- > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > Sent: 30 January 2014 04:09 > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and > writing > > Without any scientific justification at all, I tend to see it that way as > well, Mike. I have a terrible deficit of focus and (much to Vonney's > annoyance) often don't see what is under my nose, but that is because my > mind is wandering all the time, and I have no intention, and never had, of > trying to do anything about that, to "discipline" my mind, because I > absolutely rely on whatever it is which is going on when I am not thinking > about something. > Some people are different. Vonney has incredible perception. She sees > things (and smells, and hears) which are invisible to me, but she has great > difficulty in seeing what is not there. This becomes an issue for us when > it comes to interior design/renovations, etc. She always does a fantastic > job, in the end, but it takes lots of work to visualise the object before > it is produced, usually relying on finding pictures of the same thing done > by someone else in magazine. The opposite for me. I can see it before it is > built easily, but I do not have the same discrimination, so it is no use. > I would love to read whatever comes out of this call for papers. But I > would be interested even more if it were not exclusively focussed on > education and children. Us adults apprehend the world differently too. > > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > mike cole wrote: > > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? > > There was an article, I believe in the NYTimes about the differential > > efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that included a flip > > side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was supposed to take > > care of. > > > > Right? > > > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. > > But maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > > imagination. > > > > mike > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden > > wrote: > > > > What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... > er. > > Interesting, David. > > andy > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > David Preiss wrote: > > > > Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for > > a special section of Learning and Individual Differences > > The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning > > process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have > > noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students' > > performance on school related abilities requiring high levels > > of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending > > lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized > > measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have > > noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday > > normal functioning and have called attention to its positive > > impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem > > solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported > > that there are individual differences not only in people's > > tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content > > of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how > > adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, > > specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek > > contributions that represent inno > > vative research on individual differences in mind wandering > > that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and > > perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) > > focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with > > research on school related cognitive abilities with special > > attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the > > schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) > > relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and > > processes that, although not specifically academic, play a > > relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, > > divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among > > others; d) and investigate the connection between mind > > wandering and school related performance at different stages > > of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special > > consideration will be given to articles that place mind > > wandering in the context of overall human development. > > Original research and review articles wil > > l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length > > articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case > > studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the > > abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should > > reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive > > full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should > > indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special > > issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss > > (davidpreiss@uc.cl ) if you have > > questions about the submission. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]< > http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > by an official order form. > > From huw.softdesigns@gmail.com Thu Jan 30 07:45:11 2014 From: huw.softdesigns@gmail.com (Huw Lloyd) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:45:11 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> <52E9D042.3070003@mira.net> <8F385CC13313CC47B866739C3A4BC31107B2DE@TIS105.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> Message-ID: On 30 January 2014 14:25, Larry Purss wrote: > Reverie, revelation, revealing, seem to be notions of wandering in and > surprising us. > I also am intrigued with this topic and its relation to [intentionality] > and the now current focus on *self*-regulation AND co-regulation. > This notion on focussing AND discipline AS learning as the process from > moving through intentionality towards automaticity. Is this process related > to wander kind as pivoting [synthesis] betwee wondering and wandering. > > Programs such as *tools of the mind* whose intent is to help adults become > far more intentional on how they intervene to bring the child to > intentional ways of being focused and directed as the way to move towards > automaticity. > > Intentionality within the zone of proximal development may need to be > EXPANDED to INCLUDE wander kind? > I think it already is, Larry. Intentionality is construed as goal, whilst nascent proximal formations are expressed in terms of motive. Best, Huw > Larry > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Rod Parker-Rees < > R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk> wrote: > > > I am looking forward to these papers too! I have always thought of > > mind-wandering and daydreaming as an internalised form of playfulness > and a > > useful way of making it more likely that you will come across hitherto > > unnoticed connections and paths. But I think there is also much to be > said > > for helping children (and adults) to develop their ability to move > between > > wandering and more focused (even blinkered) forms of attention - one of > > which would be mindfulness. Wandering is lovely when you are not under > > pressure to be somewhere by a certain time but sometimes it makes sense > to > > take a familiar route or to plan a route in advance! > > > > All the best, > > > > Rod > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto: > > xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Andy Blunden > > Sent: 30 January 2014 04:09 > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and > > writing > > > > Without any scientific justification at all, I tend to see it that way as > > well, Mike. I have a terrible deficit of focus and (much to Vonney's > > annoyance) often don't see what is under my nose, but that is because my > > mind is wandering all the time, and I have no intention, and never had, > of > > trying to do anything about that, to "discipline" my mind, because I > > absolutely rely on whatever it is which is going on when I am not > thinking > > about something. > > Some people are different. Vonney has incredible perception. She sees > > things (and smells, and hears) which are invisible to me, but she has > great > > difficulty in seeing what is not there. This becomes an issue for us when > > it comes to interior design/renovations, etc. She always does a fantastic > > job, in the end, but it takes lots of work to visualise the object before > > it is produced, usually relying on finding pictures of the same thing > done > > by someone else in magazine. The opposite for me. I can see it before it > is > > built easily, but I do not have the same discrimination, so it is no use. > > I would love to read whatever comes out of this call for papers. But I > > would be interested even more if it were not exclusively focussed on > > education and children. Us adults apprehend the world differently too. > > > > Andy > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Andy Blunden* > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > mike cole wrote: > > > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? > > > There was an article, I believe in the NYTimes about the differential > > > efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that included a flip > > > side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was supposed to take > > > care of. > > > > > > Right? > > > > > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. > > > But maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > > > imagination. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden > > > wrote: > > > > > > What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... > > er. > > > Interesting, David. > > > andy > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > *Andy Blunden* > > > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > > > > > > > > > > David Preiss wrote: > > > > > > Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for > > > a special section of Learning and Individual Differences > > > The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning > > > process and education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have > > > noted that mind wandering negatively impacts students' > > > performance on school related abilities requiring high levels > > > of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, attending > > > lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized > > > measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have > > > noticed that mind wandering is a regular part of everyday > > > normal functioning and have called attention to its positive > > > impact on emotional processing, creativity and problem > > > solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported > > > that there are individual differences not only in people's > > > tendency to engage in mind wandering but also in the content > > > of this wandering. These differences have consequences for how > > > adaptive mind wandering may be in everyday functioning and, > > > specifically, within educational contexts. Here, we seek > > > contributions that represent inno > > > vative research on individual differences in mind wandering > > > that: a) synthesize insights from multiple approaches and > > > perspectives on individual differences in mind wandering; b) > > > focus on the integration of research on mind wandering with > > > research on school related cognitive abilities with special > > > attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the > > > schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) > > > relate mind wandering with the development of abilities and > > > processes that, although not specifically academic, play a > > > relevant role in schooling and education such as creativity, > > > divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, among > > > others; d) and investigate the connection between mind > > > wandering and school related performance at different stages > > > of schooling, from elementary school through college. Special > > > consideration will be given to articles that place mind > > > wandering in the context of overall human development. > > > Original research and review articles wil > > > l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length > > > articles (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case > > > studies (5,000 words); the page limits do not include the > > > abstract, references, figures, or tables. Articles should > > > reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to receive > > > full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should > > > indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special > > > issue (mind wandering). Contact David Preiss > > > (davidpreiss@uc.cl ) if you have > > > questions about the submission. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > [http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]< > > http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass> > > > > This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for > > the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the > > information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on > it. > > If you have received this email in error please let the sender know > > immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not > > necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts > > no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan > emails > > and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility > > for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its > > attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied > > by an official order form. > > > > > From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Thu Jan 30 08:45:17 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:45:17 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> Message-ID: I think the contrast is appropriate. But that does not mean that mindfulness is good and mind wandering bad. Indeed part of my interest in the topic is that the property to wander is one of the most attacked ones by contemporary schooling (e.g. the overdiagnosis of attention deficits). Certainly the academically focused mind is not the same than mindfulness but the impact is similar. I can't personally imagine a productive and generative life without the serendipity related to a wandering mind. It has also a link with the episodic nature of human memory. And we can go back to James if we want to understand it better. The focus on schooling is relevant as we are educating the new generations without room to mind wander. Not only within school but also after school with the almost complete adult management of children's lives. That loss of freedom will haunt them. On the other hand, mind wandering impacts reading and so on. Thus the question is what is the best balance. Enviado desde mi iPhone El 30-01-2014, a las 0:56, mike cole escribi?: > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? There > was an article, I believe in the NYTimes > about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that > included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was > supposed to take care of. > > Right? > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. But > maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > imagination. > > mike > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. >> Interesting, David. >> andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David Preiss wrote: >> >>> Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special >>> section of Learning and Individual Differences >>> The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and >>> education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering >>> negatively impacts students' performance on school related abilities >>> requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, >>> attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized >>> measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that >>> mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have >>> called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity >>> and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported >>> that there are individual differences not only in people's tendency to >>> engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These >>> differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in >>> everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, >>> we seek contributions that represent inno >>> vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) >>> synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual >>> differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on >>> mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with >>> special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the >>> schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind >>> wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although >>> not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education >>> such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, >>> among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and >>> school related performance at different stages of schooling, from >>> elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to >>> articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human >>> development. Original research and review articles wil >>> l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles >>> (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); >>> the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or >>> tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to >>> receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should >>> indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind >>> wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have >>> questions about the submission. >> >> >> >> From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Thu Jan 30 08:46:23 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 13:46:23 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> Message-ID: <7E0287D8-8153-4FB5-862F-7D8E373D0126@gmail.com> I think the contrast is appropriate. But that does not mean that mindfulness is good and mind wandering bad. Indeed part of my interest in the topic is that the property to wander is one of the most attacked ones by contemporary schooling (e.g. the overdiagnosis of attention deficits). Certainly the academically focused mind is not the same than mindfulness but the impact is similar. I can't personally imagine a productive and generative life without the serendipity related to a wandering mind. It has also a link with the episodic nature of human memory. And we can go back to James if we want to understand it better. The focus on schooling is relevant as we are educating the new generations without room to mind wander. Not only within school but also after school with the almost complete adult management of children's lives. That loss of freedom will haunt them Enviado desde mi iPhone El 30-01-2014, a las 0:56, mike cole escribi?: > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? There > was an article, I believe in the NYTimes > about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that > included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was > supposed to take care of. > > Right? > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. But > maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > imagination. > > mike > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. >> Interesting, David. >> andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David Preiss wrote: >> >>> Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special >>> section of Learning and Individual Differences >>> The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and >>> education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering >>> negatively impacts students' performance on school related abilities >>> requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, >>> attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized >>> measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that >>> mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have >>> called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity >>> and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported >>> that there are individual differences not only in people's tendency to >>> engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These >>> differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in >>> everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, >>> we seek contributions that represent inno >>> vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) >>> synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual >>> differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on >>> mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with >>> special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the >>> schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind >>> wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although >>> not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education >>> such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, >>> among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and >>> school related performance at different stages of schooling, from >>> elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to >>> articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human >>> development. Original research and review articles wil >>> l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles >>> (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); >>> the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or >>> tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to >>> receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should >>> indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind >>> wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have >>> questions about the submission. >> >> >> >> From glassman.13@osu.edu Thu Jan 30 10:32:12 2014 From: glassman.13@osu.edu (Glassman, Michael) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:32:12 +0000 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: <7E0287D8-8153-4FB5-862F-7D8E373D0126@gmail.com> References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> , <7E0287D8-8153-4FB5-862F-7D8E373D0126@gmail.com> Message-ID: <54248F6464A3874BB28FFF75F616AED6AB152847@CIO-KRC-D1MBX01.osuad.osu.edu> David, I agree completely with what you say. The idea of the wandering mind is frowned upon in our educational-industrial complex. Perhaps because they make a hash of the timed tests that have become such a large part of the educational mission. We are pummeled with the need to focus over and over again. But is focus itself a good thing, or even the natural way our mind works. Or does it very often limit us in what we allow ourselves to think about. I think you are right to bring up James and Dewey as well - I think much of what they have to say is a warning against focus, that human action is dispersed, non-linear, and often surprising, and so too should be human thinking. We find the new roads and byways by wandering the world. I think the Internet has made the need for focus less important, and even in many ways challenged assumptions about self-regulation and meta-cognition. Why do we naturally keep so many windows open (come on be honest, how many do you have open right now) if focus were so important. Why do we rush to our e-mail as soon as we hear a bing, or to Wikipedia the second an idea interests us. Perhaps human thinking is a self-correcting process. I don't know enough about mindfulness to say very much intelligent. I seem to remember a few years ago speaking to some people who placed it closer to an almost Buddhist sense of self-awareness rather than a meta-cognitive self regulation. Maybe I am remembering it wrong, or maybe the neo-liberal project has appropriated mindfulness just as they appropriate so many other things. Michael ________________________________________ From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] on behalf of David Preiss [daviddpreiss@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 11:46 AM To: lchcmike@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing I think the contrast is appropriate. But that does not mean that mindfulness is good and mind wandering bad. Indeed part of my interest in the topic is that the property to wander is one of the most attacked ones by contemporary schooling (e.g. the overdiagnosis of attention deficits). Certainly the academically focused mind is not the same than mindfulness but the impact is similar. I can't personally imagine a productive and generative life without the serendipity related to a wandering mind. It has also a link with the episodic nature of human memory. And we can go back to James if we want to understand it better. The focus on schooling is relevant as we are educating the new generations without room to mind wander. Not only within school but also after school with the almost complete adult management of children's lives. That loss of freedom will haunt them Enviado desde mi iPhone El 30-01-2014, a las 0:56, mike cole escribi?: > David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? There > was an article, I believe in the NYTimes > about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that > included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was > supposed to take care of. > > Right? > > I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. But > maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, > imagination. > > mike > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: > >> What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. >> Interesting, David. >> andy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *Andy Blunden* >> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >> >> >> >> David Preiss wrote: >> >>> Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special >>> section of Learning and Individual Differences >>> The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and >>> education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering >>> negatively impacts students' performance on school related abilities >>> requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, >>> attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized >>> measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that >>> mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have >>> called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity >>> and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported >>> that there are individual differences not only in people's tendency to >>> engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These >>> differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in >>> everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, >>> we seek contributions that represent inno >>> vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) >>> synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual >>> differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on >>> mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with >>> special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the >>> schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind >>> wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although >>> not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education >>> such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, >>> among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and >>> school related performance at different stages of schooling, from >>> elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to >>> articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human >>> development. Original research and review articles wil >>> l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles >>> (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); >>> the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or >>> tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to >>> receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should >>> indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind >>> wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have >>> questions about the submission. >> >> >> >> From l.woods@iicedu.org Thu Jan 30 08:36:48 2014 From: l.woods@iicedu.org (L inda Woods) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:36:48 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Xmca-l] Ireland International Conference on Education (IICE-2014): Final Call for Submissions! Message-ID: <1798355675.167545.1391099808887.open-xchange@email.1and1.co.uk> > Apologies for cross-postings. Kindly email this call for papers to your colleagues, faculty members and postgraduate students. Final Call for Papers, Student Papers, Case Studies, Reports and Posters! ******************************************************************* Ireland International Conference on Education (IICE-2014) April 28-30, 2014, Dublin, Ireland www.iicedu.org ******************************************************************* The IICE is an international refereed conference dedicated to the advancement of the theory and practices in education. The IICE promotes collaborative excellence between academicians and professionals from Education. The aim of IICE is to provide an opportunity for academicians and professionals from various educational fields with cross-disciplinary interests to bridge the knowledge gap, promote research esteem and the evolution of pedagogy. The IICE 2014 invites research papers that encompass conceptual analysis, design implementation and performance evaluation. All the accepted papers will appear in the proceedings and modified version of selected papers will be published in special issues peer reviewed journals. The topics in IICE-2014 include but are not confined to the following areas: *Academic Advising and Counselling *Art Education *Adult Education *APD/Listening and Acoustics in Education Environment *Business Education *Counsellor Education *Curriculum, Research and Development *Competitive Skills *Continuing Education *Distance Education *Early Childhood Education *Educational Administration *Educational Foundations *Educational Psychology *Educational Technology *Education Policy and Leadership *Elementary Education *E-Learning *E-Manufacturing *ESL/TESL *E-Society *Geographical Education *Geographic information systems *Health Education *Higher Education *History *Home Education *Human Computer Interaction *Human Resource Development *Indigenous Education *ICT Education *Internet technologies *Imaginative Education *Kinesiology & Leisure Science *K12 *Language Education *Mathematics Education *Mobile Applications *Multi-Virtual Environment *Music Education *Pedagogy *Physical Education (PE) *Reading Education *Writing Education *Religion and Education Studies *Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) *Rural Education *Science Education *Secondary Education *Second life Educators *Social Studies Education *Special Education *Student Affairs *Teacher Education *Cross-disciplinary areas of Education *Ubiquitous Computing *Virtual Reality *Wireless applications *Other Areas of Education - You can submit your research paper at http://www.iicedu.org/IICE-2014%20April/Paper%20Submission.html or email it to papers-2014@iicedu.org Important Dates: *Research Paper, Student Paper, Case Study, Report Submission Date: February 10, 2014 *Extended Abstract (Work in Progress) Submission Date: January 25, 2014 *Proposal for Workshops Submission Date: January 20, 2014 *Notification of Workshop Acceptance/Rejection: January 31, 2014 *Posters Proposal Submission Date: January 25, 2014 *Notification of Posters Acceptance/Rejection: January 30, 2014 *Notification of Extended Abstract (Work in Progress) Acceptance/Rejection: February 01, 2014 *Notification of Research Paper, Student Paper, Case Study, Report Acceptance/Rejection: February 20, 2014 *Camera Ready Paper Due: March 05, 2014 *Early Bird Registration (Authors and Participants): December 30, 2013 - March 15, 2014 *Late Bird Registration Deadline (Authors only): March 16, 2014 - March 30, 2014 *Late Bird Registration Deadline (Participants only): March 16, 2014 - April 14, 2014 *Conference Dates: April 28-30, 2014 For further information please visit IICE-2014 at www.iicedu.org > > From daviddpreiss@gmail.com Thu Jan 30 14:53:41 2014 From: daviddpreiss@gmail.com (David Preiss) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:53:41 -0300 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: <54248F6464A3874BB28FFF75F616AED6AB152847@CIO-KRC-D1MBX01.osuad.osu.edu> References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> , <7E0287D8-8153-4FB5-862F-7D8E373D0126@gmail.com> <54248F6464A3874BB28FFF75F616AED6AB152847@CIO-KRC-D1MBX01.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: I am glad to see that the topic called the attention of the list. Hopefully somebody will get inspired, find a good fit for her or his work and submit! On Jan 30, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Glassman, Michael wrote: > David, > > I agree completely with what you say. The idea of the wandering mind is frowned upon in our educational-industrial complex. Perhaps because they make a hash of the timed tests that have become such a large part of the educational mission. We are pummeled with the need to focus over and over again. But is focus itself a good thing, or even the natural way our mind works. Or does it very often limit us in what we allow ourselves to think about. I think you are right to bring up James and Dewey as well - I think much of what they have to say is a warning against focus, that human action is dispersed, non-linear, and often surprising, and so too should be human thinking. We find the new roads and byways by wandering the world. I think the Internet has made the need for focus less important, and even in many ways challenged assumptions about self-regulation and meta-cognition. Why do we naturally keep so many windows open (come on be honest, how many do you have open right now) if focus were so important. Why do we rush to our e-mail as soon as we hear a bing, or to Wikipedia the second an idea interests us. Perhaps human thinking is a self-correcting process. > > I don't know enough about mindfulness to say very much intelligent. I seem to remember a few years ago speaking to some people who placed it closer to an almost Buddhist sense of self-awareness rather than a meta-cognitive self regulation. Maybe I am remembering it wrong, or maybe the neo-liberal project has appropriated mindfulness just as they appropriate so many other things. > > Michael > ________________________________________ > From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] on behalf of David Preiss [daviddpreiss@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 11:46 AM > To: lchcmike@gmail.com; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing > > I think the contrast is appropriate. But that does not mean that mindfulness is good and mind wandering bad. Indeed part of my interest in the topic is that the property to wander is one of the most attacked ones by contemporary schooling (e.g. the overdiagnosis of attention deficits). Certainly the academically focused mind is not the same than mindfulness but the impact is similar. I can't personally imagine a productive and generative life without the serendipity related to a wandering mind. It has also a link with the episodic nature of human memory. And we can go back to James if we want to understand it better. The focus on schooling is relevant as we are educating the new generations without room to mind wander. Not only within school but also after school with the almost complete adult management of children's lives. That loss of freedom will haunt them > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 30-01-2014, a las 0:56, mike cole escribi?: > >> David-- Mind wandering is the flip side of mindful meditation, right? There >> was an article, I believe in the NYTimes >> about the differential efficacy of mindful mediation on mental power that >> included a flip side of lack of creativity which mind wanderwind was >> supposed to take care of. >> >> Right? >> >> I believe this discussion bears an important relation to CHAT theory. But >> maybe I have the topic all wrong and its all in my, lets call it, >> imagination. >> >> mike >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Andy Blunden wrote: >> >>> What a ....er fascinating topic .... um ... I was going to say ... er. >>> Interesting, David. >>> andy >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *Andy Blunden* >>> http://home.mira.net/~andy/ >>> >>> >>> >>> David Preiss wrote: >>> >>>> Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing for a special >>>> section of Learning and Individual Differences >>>> The research on the impact of mind wandering on the learning process and >>>> education is mixed. Thus, some researchers have noted that mind wandering >>>> negatively impacts students' performance on school related abilities >>>> requiring high levels of concentration and metacognition, such as reading, >>>> attending lectures or, more specifically, performance on standardized >>>> measures of academic achievement. Yet, other researchers have noticed that >>>> mind wandering is a regular part of everyday normal functioning and have >>>> called attention to its positive impact on emotional processing, creativity >>>> and problem solving. Additionally, the research literature has reported >>>> that there are individual differences not only in people's tendency to >>>> engage in mind wandering but also in the content of this wandering. These >>>> differences have consequences for how adaptive mind wandering may be in >>>> everyday functioning and, specifically, within educational contexts. Here, >>>> we seek contributions that represent inno >>>> vative research on individual differences in mind wandering that: a) >>>> synthesize insights from multiple approaches and perspectives on individual >>>> differences in mind wandering; b) focus on the integration of research on >>>> mind wandering with research on school related cognitive abilities with >>>> special attention on those that are part and parcel of the core of the >>>> schooling process (reading, writing and mathematics); c) relate mind >>>> wandering with the development of abilities and processes that, although >>>> not specifically academic, play a relevant role in schooling and education >>>> such as creativity, divergent thinking, imagination, and problem solving, >>>> among others; d) and investigate the connection between mind wandering and >>>> school related performance at different stages of schooling, from >>>> elementary school through college. Special consideration will be given to >>>> articles that place mind wandering in the context of overall human >>>> development. Original research and review articles wil >>>> l be considered. Submissions allow two formats: full-length articles >>>> (10,000 words) and short empirical reports or case studies (5,000 words); >>>> the page limits do not include the abstract, references, figures, or >>>> tables. Articles should reach the editorial office before June 30th 2014 to >>>> receive full consideration. When submitting articles, authors should >>>> indicate that their manuscript is intended for the special issue (mind >>>> wandering). Contact David Preiss (davidpreiss@uc.cl) if you have >>>> questions about the submission. >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > From nacho.montero@uam.es Fri Jan 31 08:16:04 2014 From: nacho.montero@uam.es (nacho.montero@uam.es) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 17:16:04 +0100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Call for papers on mind wandering and reading and writing In-Reply-To: References: <52E9BACA.4000105@mira.net> , <7E0287D8-8153-4FB5-862F-7D8E373D0126@gmail.com> <54248F6464A3874BB28FFF75F616AED6AB152847@CIO-KRC-D1MBX01.osuad.osu.edu> Message-ID: <20140131171604.Horde.m0ZwXKGm_rVS68xEjuOkJfA@webmail.uam.es> David, How are you, my dear compatriota? I did not know neither the word wander,nor the wandering mind... But I recognized my self just when I took a look on the dictionary... It has been as therapeutical insight!! YES, my mind and me, BOTH are wander! Thank you for this, David! NACHO PS: It was very hard to be a good student, or just a plane one... From achilles@delari.net Fri Jan 31 13:20:23 2014 From: achilles@delari.net (Achilles Delari Junior) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 19:20:23 -0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Vasiliuk "The Psychology of Experiencing" 1992 Russian version - how to buy? In-Reply-To: 20140131171604.Horde.m0ZwXKGm_rVS68xEjuOkJfA@webmail.uam.es Message-ID: <52ec1397ab962_14a758c0302869f@a4-winter25.mail> From achilles@delari.net Fri Jan 31 13:50:56 2014 From: achilles@delari.net (Achilles Delari Junior) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 19:50:56 -0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Vasiliuk "The Psychology of Experiencing" 1992 Russian version - how to buy? In-Reply-To: 52ec1397ab962_14a758c0302869f@a4-winter25.mail Message-ID: <52ec1ac0f0465_85daf1282c48840@a4-winter15.mail> From achilles@delari.net Fri Jan 31 13:59:15 2014 From: achilles@delari.net (Achilles Delari Junior) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 19:59:15 -0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Why my messages are appearing empty? In-Reply-To: 52ec1ac0f0465_85daf1282c48840@a4-winter15.mail Message-ID: <52ec1cb3bd584_641424b083c697a0@a4-winter8.mail> From lchcmike@gmail.com Fri Jan 31 14:54:12 2014 From: lchcmike@gmail.com (mike cole) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 14:54:12 -0800 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Vasiliuk "The Psychology of Experiencing" 1992 Russian version - how to buy? In-Reply-To: <52ec1ac0f0465_85daf1282c48840@a4-winter15.mail> References: <52ec1ac0f0465_85daf1282c48840@a4-winter15.mail> Message-ID: I only have English edition, Achilles. Did oyu want the Russian version? mike On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Achilles Delari Junior wrote: > > From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 31 15:47:18 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 10:47:18 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Why my messages are appearing empty? In-Reply-To: <52ec1cb3bd584_641424b083c697a0@a4-winter8.mail> References: <52ec1cb3bd584_641424b083c697a0@a4-winter8.mail> Message-ID: <52EC3606.2030305@mira.net> Messages aooear blank usually because you have not eliminated formatting, just as bold type or images from the message. Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Achilles Delari Junior wrote: > From achilles@delari.net Fri Jan 31 19:08:25 2014 From: achilles@delari.net (Achilles Delari Junior) Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 01:08:25 -0200 Subject: [Xmca-l] Vasiliuk Russian book from 1992 [message without html code] Message-ID: <52ec6529e4ee2_41f24b083c6982f@a4-winter8.mail> [without formatting] Greetings for all, I am working translating for personal use, the Chapter V of Vasiliuk's "The Psychology of Experience". And I want to compare with Russian version in the more difficult points. But my Russian version is from 1984, and there was 2 other Russian editions at 1988 and 1992. My English version (from 1992 too) have not the same contends that 1984's Russian edition - there is no chapter V in it. At internet, it is very hard to find Russian book-shores, with international ways for payment. Please, somebody knows some way? Thank you. This is not only for me, there are people working together that do not read Russian nor English. And they all have human beings for care in their psycho-therapeutic practices. Vasiliuk is very important for us with his "four psychotecnic units". But, sometimes, there are little mistakes in English - as translate "smisl" by "meaning" not by "sense", and so on... I saw this in the earlier chapters, do you understand? Smisl and znachenie is not the same in Russian psychology... Thank you very much. Best wishes. Achilles. ? From ablunden@mira.net Fri Jan 31 20:07:22 2014 From: ablunden@mira.net (Andy Blunden) Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 15:07:22 +1100 Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Why my messages are appearing empty? In-Reply-To: <52EC3606.2030305@mira.net> References: <52ec1cb3bd584_641424b083c697a0@a4-winter8.mail> <52EC3606.2030305@mira.net> Message-ID: <52EC72FA.1090406@mira.net> What I meant was: Messages appear blank usually because you have not eliminated formatting, such as bold type or images from the message. Not only do these errors illustrate my appalling lack of mindfulness, and the ability of my fingers to hit the key next door without my eyes noticing, but I am intrigued by how I type "sounds-likes" such as "just" for "such" - the mind is a curious thing! Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Andy Blunden* http://home.mira.net/~andy/ Andy Blunden wrote: > Messages aooear blank usually because you have not eliminated > formatting, just as bold type or images from the message. > Andy > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Andy Blunden* > http://home.mira.net/~andy/ > > > Achilles Delari Junior wrote: >> > > >