From: zen@death.corp.sun.com (d)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Working with Women vs. Working with Men
Date: 29 Dec 92 10:15:48
Organization: savage hackers
Distribution: usa
	<ZEN.92Dec24110834@death.corp.sun.com>
	<1992Dec26.172204.27893@wam.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: death.corp.sun.com
In-reply-to: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu's message of Sat, 26 Dec 1992 17:22:04 GMT


  Well... I said I wouldn't flame back, so I'll just stick with what
little hyper-inflammatory stuff is left:

In article <1992Dec26.172204.27893@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
> In article <ZEN.92Dec24110834@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:
> >> 	 Buy American as if your job depended on it. 
> >  A true capitalist, I see.  Buy inferior products so that you'll hang
> >on to your way of life.  
>    Too bad you show such blatant ignorance.  The Japanese do not
>    practice capitalism, and by buying Japanese products, you
>    are subverting the capitalist system.

  You seem to advocate a modified form of capitalism which has decidedly
protectionalist taint to it.  That's not pure capitalism, which is
specifically what I was addressing, and which doesn't work (not that
your model does either, but that's beside the point.)  Out of curiosity,
since no country practices pure capitalism, do you include only products
that use american made machinery and computers to build things, only
all-american-only-soil built clothing and homes to clothe their workers
(or grade USA robots), all american food, all native born american
workers, all american raw materials to build with, etc. ad nauseaum, or
is it okay to use products that come from your approved list of
countries?  Or do you just live out in the woods, with your stone tools.
Why are you typing on a computer that has all those asian chips,
components, design, etc. in it, eh?  The fact of the matter is that you
just can't avoid staying modern and only buy all-american products -- I'll
bet you that you use japanese (to use one example, since you dislike
their so very un-american way of doing things so much) products all the
time -- to say "buy american" shows, in most cases, an ignorance of how
the american economy works, as well as some of the fundemental
principles that our country was built on.

> >That's fairly consistant with your other
> >quote/statement, that "equality is an illusion" -- the mark of a true
> >democrat.  I can see how well you practice what you preach...
>    Some people are born rich, some are born stupid, some are
>    born poor [...]
>    There can *be no equality* because part
>    of "equality" is EQUAL TREATMENT, and people who espouse 
>    equalist ideals tend to forget that last part.

  Ah... so rather than treating people equally, you treat them according
to merit.  While you could argue that that is a reasonable way to treat
people, that's not exactly according to the pure democratic principle,
is it?

> >  If you accept that that is the way the world works.  It seems that, as
> >you said in your post about communism, it works well for insects, as
> >well as (non-human) animals.  As culture progresses, though, I think it
> >ceases to function as a good model for our behavior.  Relying on it to
> >model your daily behavior is a sad thing.
>    That's nice, now try and provide an alternative.  What, can't?
>    Or are you one of those pathetic intellectual wanna-be's that
>    posts something like "socialism doesn't work, communism doesn't 
>    work, capitalism doesn't work" and can't imagine something
>    better, but says that it exists?

  I didn't say that darwinism (which was what I was referring to) didn't
work -- I said it wasn't a very good model for human behavior in our
world.  It's a theory for explaining biological changes in species over
time; it doesn't work when you try to apply it to explain an
individual's (let alone a culture's) behavior, or when you have a world
that has removed many of the biological restrictions that would have
killed off the sick and lame and weak.  We have too many artificial
factors in our world now to use that as any reliable model for
societies.

  As far as coming up with my own theory, a couple of things.  First, I
just said that two models you said didn't work, and they don't -- no
country practices either of them.  I didn't say that the world as it is
doesn't work -- it does, and in all countries, although you could argue
that it works better in some than others, depending on your criteria for
sucess.  I don't think anyone is going to come up with a theory that is
a model for human behavior that you could follow sucessfully under any
circumstance anymore than anyone will come up with a philosophical
statement of morality that explains how we could always act "right", or
come up with a grand unified theory of physics.  And I don't think if
anyone comes up with something like this they'll post it to
alt.feminsim.  So your question is fairly meaningless.

 -- d
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women,soc.men