Only 10 More Days (23 posts)
10.
Wed, Jan 27, 1999 - 11:01 PM/EST
JimP
First, let me say to Gayle that I hope and pray the family crisis is a short lived one, and that you will be back soon.
Eireann writes in thread 12 that the public discourse she is speaking about is one that “doesn’t need to get its start in contentious places, nor does it need controversy, violence, or other negative influences to sustain itself.” In another thread, Gayle has said something to the effect that our competive side, my team can beat your team, is a part of the current culture. (I can’t find the post right now, but that was what I remember. Gayle, help me here).
I agree with both these views, and particularly find it interesting that both were from our female members. But, that’s beside my point. In the spirit of those comments, I want to outline my thoughts about moving to a better place. I’ll write in an outline form, hoping that we can all expand the outline, and within the outline flesh out each element. I see four very broad phases to this project.
A. First, Be Aware Of Our Strengths
1. Our Constitution
2. The System We Have Works
3. Our Diversity
a. People
b. Geography
c. Politics
4. Economic
a. Manufacturing
b. Agriculture
c. Intrepreneural
5. Education
B. Second - Maintain a stable Perspective
1. Long Term Solutions
a. 20-25 years
b.
2. Positive Trends
a. Internet
b. Personal Responsibility
c. Spiritual resurgence
d. Global organizations
3. Negative Trends
a. Global organizations
b. Extremism
c. Concentration of economic resources
d. Isolation of cultures
C. Third - Develop Long Range Goals
1. Education
2. Economic stability for all people
3. Health Care
4. Environmental protection
D. Fourth - Short Range Actions
1. Campaign Finance Reform
a. Federal
b. Local
2. Activism
11. hmm. food for thought.
Thu, Jan 28, 1999 - 10:44 AM/EST
eireann
the outline looks good, jim - it's a great idea. i'm going to print it out so i can look at it a little better and come back with comments later.
great idea, though. i look forward to hearing everyone else's thoughts about it.
-eireann
12. Analysis?
Thu, Jan 28, 1999 - 12:09 PM/EST
McRostie
Jim, I wrote a post to this thread on the 27th that somehow didn't get posted. Needless to say, it was brilliant so I'll attempt to duplicate it.
I admire your ability to break problems apart for analysis. There are times when that is the only way to deal with them since they are so hugh. At least that is true with finite problems.
In this case, however, you question being the cosmic one of what we can do to make this into the kind of world we want it to be, I think that the particular approach doesn't provide the answer to the cosmic question. It deals with particular problems, the resolution of which may be entirely contrary to the resolution of other particular problems. ... education and government control for istance.
I spent years in college and afterwards, analysing the "cosmic problem" and finally concluded that all I accomplished was a state of utter confusion. Entirely too many problems ended up presenting me only with the horns of a dilemmas, not a solution. Nothing turned out to be easy, or in the cosmic sense, resolvable. So, in desperation, I tried another tack.
In my usual over-simplified fashion, I'm going to suggest that the only approach to resolution of the cosmic problem of the condition of the world is for each of us to live our lives, consistently, in a manner which reflects those things in which we believe.
When we do this, if the people we encounter see our example as acceptable, we have some hope that others will follow our lead. On the other hand, if they see it otherwise, they will go their own ways. Since, contrary to many, I firmly believe the world is "good" I'm optomistic.
I have no doubt Jim, that you live your life in the way I've suggested, and I'm sure you have experienced the dilemma problem. so please don't take what iI say as being critical. I'm only trying to point out what, in my experience has been a "failed" way of over-intellectualizing the problems of the world.
I suppose there is the possibility I'm simply not smart enough. Rats!
Regards, McRostie
13.
Thu, Jan 28, 1999 - 12:52 PM/EST
JimP
I agree that these are cosmic problems. I agree that "the only approach to resolution of the cosmic problem of the condition of the world is for each of us to live our lives, consistently, in a manner which reflects those things in which we believe."
However, I also believe that there are methods that we can use to help us understand better both ourselves and the nature of the world in which we live.
I believe that eireanne's approach is one of those. It helps remove some of the cosmic proportions and allows each individual to see a little more clearly how he or she fits into the specific, local, personal world.
I believe that the non-competitive approach would assist us to function better in the cosmic world. And, therefore, having a picture of what each of us as individuals can do provides a clearer, closer to common, personal frame of reference for individual action.
I apologize for another soapbox.
Regards,
Jim
14. Thinking About the Future
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 - 4:00 AM/EST
Tyler
Just as a quick blurb (due to my ever decreasing amount of time): I would recommend that everyone who is following this thread go to:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.07/longboom.html
and read this article entitled "The Long Boom: A History of the Future, 1980 - 2020" It is probably one of the most amazing pieces of so called political, economic, and social forecasting I have ever seen. It basically describes the 40-year period from 1980-2020 as if it had already happened, and provides an amazingly optimistic view of how the future of the US and the world might turn out. It's long, but well worth the read.
-Tyler
15. Cosmic problem?
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 - 10:47 AM/EST
McRostie
Jim, I agree that there are methods which we can use to learn about ouselves and how we fit into the world. I'll simply say that, at least on one level, those aren't cosmic questions but rather are the finite type which lend themselves to intellectual analysis.
As I go back and review your breakdown of areas for discussion, I see that they seem to fall into the "finite" areas of life, not necessarilly into the cosmic areas of how we can make our lives better or more like we would like them to be. Treating them in that way, I'll take the first three and comment.
OUR CONSTITUTION. To me it is the best attempt yet made by men to come up with a framework for ordering the collective actiities of society. The fact that it has withstood challenge with so few eceptions speaks volumes. In another post I suggested that we ask those opposed to government, how would you amend the Constitution. At the moment, I'm not sure I would propose any with the possible exception of some variation of the ERA.
THE SYSTEM WE HAVE WORKS. The last paragraph, I think, expresses my ideas on this subject.
OUR DIVERSITY. This, I believe has proved to be one of our greatest strengths. It has prevented us from falling into the trap of insular thinking, socially, politically, theologically or in any other way. As a result, we have not become an Iran or Afghanistan and still remain a place which can accept all who come, at least if we can get over the idea that the "immigrants come and steal our jobs".
Regards, McRostie
16. Fantastic Article!!
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 - 10:52 AM/EST
JimP
Thanks, Tyler.
I printed the article, read it slowly, am still thinking about it, and will be for a while. BTW, my printing it illustrates a point - I am of an age that precedes the baby-boom. Reading from paper is, for me, much more effective than from a screen.
I have to say that I think this article is more optimistic than I am, but I sincerely hope and pray that they are closer to being right than me.
I urge all of us to read the article. It does an excellent job of pulling in most of the factors that will affect us over the next 20-25 years. Whether we agree with their scenario or not is irrelevant, at least to me. It is important that we are open to their ideas.
Regards, Jim
17. tyler's article
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 - 11:06 AM/EST
eireann
okay, good enough for me. i'll go read it. but jim, i'm very much of the post-baby-boom generation and i still don't like reading off a computer. it gives me a headache. so you don't need to attribute it to an "age" thing. :)
i'll be back with comments later.
-eireann
18. More on Long Boom Article
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 - 3:28 PM/EST
JimP
Printed, I have 12 pages of very well thought out material. I hope they're right in their prophecies.
Quoting a few lines from their summary:
"In a nutshell, the key formula for the coming age is this: Open, good. Closed, bad. Tattoo it on your forehead. Apply it to technology standards, to business strategies, to philosophies of life. It's the winning concept for individuals, for nations, for the global community in the years ahead."
"The United States, as first among equals, needs to live this concept in the coming decades. One of the first great tasks will be integrating its former communist adversaries China and Russia into the world community, in much the same way that it once did Japan and Germany. This will be the main geopolitical challenge of the next dozen years. We'll know if we made it by 2010."
"The vast array of problems to solve and the sheer magnitude of the changes that need to take place are enough to make any global organization give up, any nation back down, any reasonable person curl up in a ball. That's where Americans have one final contribution to make: optimism, that maddening can-do attitude that often drives foreigners insane. Americans don't understand
limits. They have boundless confidence in their ability to solve problems."
These quotes fairly well sum up the reason I thought we need this thread. They also reinforce the thoughts expressed in thread 38, Effect Impeachment... . I have learned so much from you folk. Once again, thanks.
Sincerely,
Jim
19. Long Boom? Maybe, I hope so.
Mon, Feb 1, 1999 - 10:58 AM/EST
McRostie
I'll add my comments to those of Jim and eireann. The article is a long read, screen or print, but a worthwhile one. It is, as Jim says, perhaps more optomistic than I but I do agree with many of the things predicted.
I was struck by the material Jim quoted and how familiar it sounded to some of the things we have been saying. Now I'll use a few minutes to make comments on three more of Jim's catagories listed earlier, Politics, Economic and Long Term Solutions.
POLITICS. There is nothing wrong with politics of politicians that a little broader view of the world couldn't cure. We live in an age of messy politics which has been created by the "special interest" excesses of those with too insular a view. The age of "If you don't vote against gun control," or "if you don't vote in favor of abortion control: you'll never get reelected" has got to end.
ECONOMIC. The world has, withing the past thirty years or so, embarked on an adventure the like of which it has never experienced. I'm sorry I won't live to experience it. The advances in technology which we are just really beginning to enjoy have the capacity to change the world and human society to a degree never before seen. We have at our fingertips, the ability to ameliorate, if not destroy, famine; the ability to control disease and its inroads on the quality of life; the ability to have a peaceful world. I'll suggest only that these things will not come to pass unless if we find some other way to reward human endeavor than the profit motive. Unless we somehow replace the idea of "I've got mine and it isn't yours" with an idea less reliant on the concept of "mine", I'm afraid we'll take much longer to reach the possible goals than we should. This isn't to be construed as an argument against competition. Only as one that says we should change the goad to something more akin to a laurel wreath.
LONG TERM SOLUSIONS. I guess I sounded off as to what I believe the long-term solutions may be in the last paragraph. Ergo, fini.
Regards, McRostie
20. Interesting typo(?)
Mon, Feb 1, 1999 - 12:56 PM/EST
JimP
Goad or goal? Either word fits here. We need another method (goad) to move the economics from purely competition to a new way of looking at it. And we need new goals, other than the pure profit motive.
21. Typo? Fraid so.
Mon, Feb 1, 1999 - 3:29 PM/EST
McRostie
I wish I were that subtle. Goad was at the very minimum an equally appropriate word ... maybe even better.
Regards, McRostie
21. Do We Want to Continue for Another Session?
Mon, Feb 1, 1999 - 11:57 PM/EST
Tyler
From reading some of the reports about the other groups, the option to continue past our four week timeline is open to us. Is this an option we want to take advantage of? Or do we want to part ways and call it quits? A third option I can think of would be to ask "the management" to allow some new members to join this group, thus giving us some "new blood" to talk with. Any thoughts on the future of this group? (We only have 3 days left!!)
-Tyler
(BTW, glad you guys liked the WIRED article as much as I did.)
22. Continue?
Tue, Feb 2, 1999 - 10:11 AM/EST
McRostie
I sense there may be a reason why the founders of this idea limit the life of a group to twenty days. We seem to be running out of gas, or time, or inclination, or whatever.
For my part, I have found some of the paticipants to be very challenging, stimulating, worth-while people with whom to exchange ideas. I would vote to continue.
Regards, McRostie
