<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2769" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial size=2>[I wish I knew how
to insert comments INTO an html mail message, but I
don't...]</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial size=2>Below, you say,
"Item 2 - If by left/right is meant community/individual focus then it will
never be transcended." Here's the problem with "left/right" from my
perspective (and that of many other people, although they may not be able to
identify why that particular dichotomy irks them so): The origin of left/right
was, as we all know, the accident of how proponents of the French Revolution and
those of the ancien regime sorted their seating out in the Estates
General. As a political reality of that particular point in time and
space, the description made sense and carried useful political meaning.
Unfortunately, from that day forward there has been a tension between two axes
of meaning: 1)Conservatism vs. Progressivism and 2) Individualism vs.
Collectivism. It is this tension that has caused me to utterly reject the
left/right dichotomy for over twenty years, which leads to an almost constant
misunderstanding of my own political views by people in the political mainstream
who accept the left/right concept as something with continuing meaning.
For instance, the mainstream "right" in America tends to be a mish-mash of
conservative and individualist elements that are deeply inconsistent on the
level of principles and, likelwise, the "left" in America has become
increasingly conservative in its collectivist approach to things like race
relations. Thus it is common for me to have people on the "left" think of
me as being on the "right" and visa versa.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial size=2>Natasha is, in my
opinion, exactly right in strongly rejecting this one-dimensional approach to
politics.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=961074412-03112005><FONT face=Arial
size=2>GB</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Dirk
Bruere<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:40 PM<BR><B>To:</B> ExI
chat list<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [extropy-chat] Futures
Politics<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 11/2/05, <B class=gmail_sendername>Natasha
Vita-More</B> <<A
href="mailto:natasha@natasha.cc">natasha@natasha.cc</A>> wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Since
I will be asked my political views this coming weekend in an interview with
a French film on the future, I have outlined my futures politics as 4
points:<BR><BR>1. Nonpartisan. I believe that no political party
today advocates solutions for the world's most immediate
issues.<BR><BR>2. Neither right nor left, but "forward." Drawing
a hard line between conservatives and liberals is ineffective and looking
ahead is the best position to take when addressing what the world needs to
focus on in the coming decades.<BR><BR>3. Futures Strategy.
Designing strategic analysis of issues that society faces and producing
alternative "futures" for society to review before voting. The Futures
Strategy would provide the means for people - anywhere and at anytime - to
learn about issues, possible options for dealing with and solving problems,
and to voice their own opinions through a time-efficient and cost-effective
P2P architecture. <BR><BR>4. Encouragement of critical thinking.
In order to understand issues society needs to be skilled at critical
thinking.<BR><BR>Thoughts?</BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>Item 1 is a non starter.<BR>As long as different people have
conflicting interests, or wish to solve a particular problem using different
methods, there will be partisan politics.<BR><BR>Item 2 - If by left/right is
meant community/individual focus then it will never be transcended.<BR>Item 3
- This only works if there is a true meritocracy - not democracy. OTOH people
can voice their opinions now, except nobody is obliged to listen.<BR>Item 4 -
A lot more than critical thinking is required. Educational standards in
general must rise
significantly.<BR><BR>Dirk<BR></DIV><BR></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>