[ExI] Philanthropy

[natasha at natasha.cc]

Quoting Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Natasha Vita-More   
> <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
>>
>> Samantha wrote:
>>
>> On 07/01/2011 01:29 PM, natasha at natasha.cc wrote:
>>> Kelly, why don't you look beyond political borders?  Who gives a
>>
>> "Sometimes we need to talk about these things because it is obvious people
>> still have a difficult time thinking about politics and economics in a sane
>> way or even having a fruitful discussion with others on these
>> topics.   Granted the old labels are pretty useless.  However the
>> underlying issues are very much alive."
>>
>> Agreed and thus my email.  It's time to take a Buckminster Fuller approach
>> and start talking strategic insights that defuse borders that propagate
>> dogmatic and restrictive thinking.  Take postmodernism for example:  while
>> it has value for feminists, its rigidity is problematic. Take objectivists
>> for example: while the theory has value for discerning issues of existence,
>> its lack of objectivity is problematic.  Take democracy for example: while
>> the political perspective has value for the inclusive of all voices
>> regardless of race, color, etc., its lack of logic is problematic. Take
>> conservatism for example: while the ideological view has value for
>> historical traditions, its lack of futurology is problematic. Take art for
>> example: while the field has value for creatives, its lack of insight about
>> the future is highly and unequivocally problematic.
>>
>> I have been saying this for 15 years on this list: if we want to be
>> future-oriented about socio-political issues, then we need a new strategy.
>
> The biggest problem America faces is that we don't have any REAL
> choices. You can choose Republicrat A or Republicrat B. So I agree
> that belief systems do need to be finer grained. But isms give you a
> bit of a head start on what someone MOSTLY believes, and you can go
> from there. Every system has some downsides, absolutely. It's just
> that universal slavery never seemed all that appealing to me.

We have very real choices, one of which is social networking.

Recently a jury determined that a woman was not guilty even though  
substantial evidence indicated that she commited a murder or  
intentionally covered up an accidental death, thereby contributing to  
a serious legal offense worthy of jail time. Shocked by the outcome  
and within minutes of the verdict, a social networking project exposed  
a Petition to create a new law, which has obtained over 400,000  
signatures so far.  It is this type of passion that outspeaks left or  
right.

Natasha