Re: [ProgSoc] old mobile phone

[jedd <jedd@nospam.progsoc.org>]

On Monday 02 December 2002 12:47, alister air wrote:
 ] phrase "It's better to give than to receive".  The reasons for its
 ] existance are of interest, though - does it have a genetic basis or a
 ] social one?  Mandating travel without providing the means of travel is a
 ] curious social policy.

 I wouldn't mandate an impossibility.  HECS payback seems to
 work (although everyone has their own favourite workarounds).
 It seems to me that a year travelling the world would improve
 the quality of your average 21-year old more than three years
 doing a Bachelor of Applied Sandwich Making (or similar,
 say any course relating to Info Tech).

 Doesn't social (basis) rely upon a genetic one, just it's slightly
 indirected?  Seems to me that genuine altruism is a rare beasty,
 but that it doesn't matter why people do nice things.  Thinking
 about it too much is like finding out how secondary rainbows
 work, and why the colours are reversed.  (A little magic is a
 nice thing, I think, IOW.)

 ] >  http://www.crikey.com.au/columnists/2002/11/29/20021129ossie.html
 ] 
 ] Leaving aside the suggestion that former Kennett-era Liberal Stephen Mayne
 ] is in any way a relevant and coherent source of information,

 It's a posting of a letter arguably penned by Bin Laden, and
 published in the UK's Guardian newspaper .. which probably
 *does* have a degree of relevance and cohesion.

 It's an interesting read, even if it suffers the usual flaws
 (trying reductionism in reverse is never a sensible thing,
 and suggesting a two party system is a democracy belies
 the guy's western education).

 ] I'm more concerned about being abducted by ASIO than being the victim of a
 ] terrorist attack.  I'm just glad I will rarely have to worry about Bob
 ] Carr's rabid Pig Minister and his ability to trample through our lives.

 While I don't think they're the arbiter of civilian security, the
 Japanese government has never warned its citizens away from
 Australia over any ASIO-related concerns, as far as I know.

 ] Radish?  I'd rather starve.

 The corn's for me.  The radishes are for the lambs, who'll
 then be for me .. later.  It's better than our Y2K emergency
 plans, which included a water-cooler sized container of .. 
 water, and a four-month plan to fatten up the goldfish for
 barbecuing.  Luckily for them we forgot to fill up the
 gas tank.  And they're probably a bit too tough by now.

 ] >  By almost any definition, Australia is third-world.
 ] 
 ] Care to present one?  I'm happy to agree that parts of the country (and
 ] elements of our population) are of third world standards - mainly because
 ] no-one's developed a standard lower than third world.  However, most of
 ] our population is relatively well off.

 Perhaps that could be our contribution to the world -- a fourth
 world definition.  Perhaps that's what George Snr was referring
 to when he uttered the memorable new world order spiel.

 The entirely non-recalcitrant (who can forget the arsehole of
 the world comment) Paul Keating spent a lot of time convincing
 everyone else that we were part of Asia, so maybe there's a look-in
 by that component of the definition.

 Since our Communist Party is alive and kicking and well tolerated,
 but not ruling, maybe we can squeeze into the category by the 
 ostensibly original definition.

 Contemporary definition would tend to put every country that's
 developing into the category of Third World .. and I'd like to
 think that we're developing (but does it mean that countries like
 the USA that are clearly not developing, are somehow exempt
 from this categorization?).

 Even a casual examination of our status in the World Scene,
 or a quick run through of our primary exports and imports,
 would suggest we're a long way from the 'top' (if you see
 First World status as being at the top).  Personally I like
 the idea of near-zero growth.  But I also like the idea of
 those GM'd plants that grow tomatos above-ground, and
 potatos underneath.

 ] Interesting theory, and not without merit.  Food and the means to produce
 ] it might also help, as might stopping trade.  Specifically, the arms
 ] trade, which moves more money around the globe (largely from third world
 ] countries to first world countries) than any other trade good.

 PJ O'Rourke came up with an arguably even more interesting
 theory, based on his observation that there'd never been a famine
 in any country that had a free press and a reasonably sensible
 record of government elections.  (or words)

 Famines have little, if anything, to do with a lack of food.

 Stopping the arms trade won't happen, no matter how many
 cantankerous, incoherent, and excessively hirsute knobheads
 wander around and bother members of the public at rallies
 every twelve months.

 Undeniably, almost everyone that's not getting any money
 from the arms trade would say it's a good idea (to stop it),
 but this is one of those needs-a-government-to-stop-it issues
 I was talking about.  And since the half-dozen governments
 involved in the majority of the trade are definitely in the
 category of getting benefit from it .. they're unlikely to side
 with the hippies on this one.

 ] After their corn and radish crops leave them feeling undernourished?

 Apparently you can make a type of flour from certain species
 of acacia.  Plus there's plenty of wallabies around at the moment.

 ] necessary or even a barrier to competition) or by accident (which tends to
 ] be resolved as capitalism tends towards its natural state - monopoly).

 Capitalism works, but only while the dumb people continue to be
 poor .. would that be an accurate assessment then?

 Like most political systems, it'd work better (for the majority) if
 the majority were a bit more thoughtful.  Since that ain't gonna
 happen anytime soon, I think pretty much every system of
 government, short of a benevolent dictator (pick me pick me!)
 is doomed to escalating entropy.

 But this still doesn't mean that I think watching poor people
 is good for either the watcher or the watchee.

 Jedd.


-
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au.
If you are having trouble, ask owner-progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au for help.