Some comments from Eric in this FB IPS forum post:
"The
people that are arguing most noisily against 'anti-capitalism' in this
thread (one of whom is absurdly 'anti-green' in arguing against 'anti-capitalism' on the basis that 'integral' should never be 'anti',
which is an anti-'anti' position!!) do not appear to be able to have
much grasp on the pragmatics necessary to think about real social change
(thus, their assertion of being 'holistic' is absurd), rather it is an
exercise in theoretical intellectual masturbation."
"No
one would object if there was a real snowball's chance in hell of
capitalism 'reforming' itself. The large mass of brainwashing and social
conditioning that is 'pro-capitalist' makes the likelihood of that
minimal. [...] Capitalism
is rooted in a pattern of culture that has existed for 1,000s of
years, and requires slavery of one form or another, peasantry of one
form or another, and a class of intellectuals that will bend over
backward until the end of time justifying such practices with the most
convoluted, shameful thinking imaginable."
"As
if that wasn't bad enough, Ken Wilber reveals an astonishing level of
incompetence in stating that democracy is 'bad for integral.'"
"So,
any 'real' integral (or whatever) alternative to capitalism 'as we know
it' has to have an alternative framework for establishing social
cooperation. P2P, Rifkin's work on the collaborative commons, and similar, appear to be the only real attempts at doing that. As far as I can tell, in that context, all the other 'integral' blab about 'capitalism pro and con' is incompetent drivel."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.