[extropy-chat] Re: A view of what politics is

[Dirk Bruere]

On 10/16/05, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> ### Let's assume that it involves two farmers, peers in all respects. One
> has an apple, and intends to feed it to his hogs. The other desires the
> apple with all his soul, dreaming of the juicy, crisp, flavory crunch.
> Obviously, there is a conflict between their desires as to the preferred
> fate of the apple.
>
> Being honest people, and utterly respectful of each other, they would
> never threaten violence (unless threatened). After some friendly
> negotiations, where violence is not even a dark unsaid shadow, they exchange
> the apple for some corn. Both farmers, and the hogs, are better off.
>



Is this politics?
>

And if the farmer with the apple has all he needs, he feeds it to the hogs
and tells the other one to get lost.
Or, alternatively, he demands a price that is exhorbitant and either the
other farmer gives up resentfully, or pays that high price, resentfully.

Is this politics?
Is it politics when the man who desires the apple is a starving pauper with
nothing to trade?


Rafal
>
> PS. As you may realize, what I am driving at is to say that all politics
> is bad, and all "good politics", is in fact trade, or forbearance.
>

You are confusing the objective with the subjective.
Politics is objective. 'Good' and 'bad' are subjective (and often depend for
their definition on politics).

Dirk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20051016/4e3fd5af/attachment.html>