Talk:Binary economics/Archive 1

message: This talk page is being archived to the history of the page. Past discussion can be viewed by using the history tab. 
In Futurist Alvin Toffler’s most recent book, Revolutionary Wealth, he makes an extremely important, but generally overlooked point.  Specifically, he observes the following: while the First-World countries/societies have demonstrated Promethean effectiveness at both important classes of scientific discovery and the technological innovations often associated with such discoveries, we have been vastly less effective at social and institutional innovation.
These recent, and completely baseless, vacuous and repressive calls for the deletion of Wikipedia content pertaining to the important subject of Binary economics might be quite appropriately taken as a case study for Toffler’s important observation.  To the extent that the resistance to the profound promise of Binary economics represented by these calls for the elimination of this content is predicated on a claim to paradigmatic uniqueness for Binary theory and its associated institutional prescriptions, the irony could scarcely be richer.  Why?  Because it is precisely the paradigmatic distinctness of Binary theory/economics so vehemently resented/resisted by opponents, which is effectively confirmed by the very fact that resistance often comes from both the political and/or academic Right and Left.
Though the reasons of each camp are different, both seem to find in Binary theory/economics grounds for feeling threatened, and feeling a need to try to repress attention finally being pervasively paid to this important subject; precisely the kind of global attention that the Wikipedia venue potentially affords.  To the extent that the divergence in political position and policy platforms of both “the Left” and “the Right” are predicated on selectively opposing economic visions – generally gravitating around conflicting views with respect to capital and labor - the irony of their mutual resistance to Binary theory/economics is compounded by the fact that the Binary position with respect to these divergences is merely that they are equally anachronistic and superfluous, because both are ultimately predicated on the very schism with respect to capital and labor that Binary theory effectively renders mute in both theoretical and institutional prescription; and, hence, the relevance of this case to the larger point about the ineffectiveness at social and institutional innovation of the Western societies made by the Tofflers.
It is more than a very sad state of affairs when a conceptual and institutional breakthrough of the importance of Binary theory/economics is subject to such forces; ultimately, it is a very disturbing state of affairs, and one that our society is paying a staggering cost in social, psychological and financial terms to be made to suffer.  One can only wonder how many more decades, or even centuries, the peoples of this world will be made to unnecessarily bear such suffering because of the repressive forces of such obfuscation and resistance.  One might hope that the beginning of the end of those forces might occur right here by denying the calls to eliminate the Wikipedia content on Binary Economics.          
ReinersMD 04:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1

message: Janos,
It is true that anybody wanting to write on binary economics should at least have read and understood Binary Economics - the new paradigm (1999). However, since 1999, binary economics has made, and is making, further development and to get properly up to date it is necessary to read The Modern Universal Paradigm (2007) – which is why I have offered a free copy to a person acting in good faith and capable of conveying the facts accurately (offer now ended).  Good faith, of course, really does require a willingness to read the key books particularly when it is being openly and consistently stated that a new paradigm is involved and new paradigms cannot be understood from within the old paradigm (Kuhn).  
Moreover, there is a binary development within Islam lead by Masudul Alam Choudhury.  A Google search on him and his extensive works will quickly establish that he is of the highest authority and explain why he is considered by many to be the leading Islamic economist.  I mention this because The Universal Paradigm and Islamic World-system is being published on 31st July, 2007 and anybody who is genuinely concerned with understanding what is happening has to read that book as well.
Rodney Shakespeare, 27th July, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
The new article is of high standard.  The full diagram is essential. David Soori   sooriuk at yahoo.com  31st July, 2007
David, Thankyou for your kind comment.  The situation with the previous article was beyond belief.  People who obviously knew nothing about the subject thought they were free to alter, delete and add and, furthermore, it soon became clear that most of them were bent on eliminating the article entirely because they did not like the statement that a new paradigm is involved.  I would not dream of opining on the content of an article about, say, insects in a Bavarian pine forest still less would I intervene in a matter of which I knew nothing AND it was being openly stated that the subject contains a new paradigm (which can only be understood in its own terms).  
I hope that all the statements in the new article are fair representations (or even actual quotes) of what is in the binary books, particularly the most recent ones.  Apart from issues of style and layout etc., we should now judge any proposed alterations essentially in the light of whether they are good faith attempts to represent the books and papers more clearly.  I would add that there are other publications which are not mentioned but the article must be kept down in size. 
===Copy of latest book===
In order to improve a situation in which people have little or no knowledge of any standard binary book (let alone an up-to-date one), I previously offered a free copy of the latest book – The Modern Universal Paradigm (Shakespeare) – to a person who has been acting in good faith and who can be relied on in future to convey the facts accurately.  Nobody has taken up the offer so it is now ended.
Rodney Shakespeare, 31st July, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
===Thankyou, Haemo===
Haemo, If there had been a separate page (plus the associated discussion) as Janos proposed, it would all have become very confusing.  So thankyou for taking the decision (i.e. that there should only be one article to discuss) which enables things to become straightforward.  
Following up your decision Janos has rightly distinguished between Discsussion comment which relates solely  to the old article and comment which relates to the new.  So Janos, too, has helped things along and I thank him as well. 
Rodney Shakespeare, 31st July, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
||||||||||||||
The previous article was defaced and slashed by several people who knew nothing about the subject and basically wanted to suppress it and, if they could not do that, to mutilate and distort it.  Personal attack striked out by MartinDK. Read WP:NPA As co-author of one of the key binary books I am hopeful that, apart from matters of style and lay-out, the focus from now on will be on ensuring that the text accurately reflects the most recent binary books.  Thankyou.
Canon Peter Challen. peterchallen at gmail.com
:No problem, but it's just standard guidelines around here.  --Haemo 11:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The latest books must be studied 

message: Haemo, If there had been a separate page (plus the associated discussion) as Janos proposed, it would all have become very confusing.  So thankyou for taking the decision (i.e. that there should only be one article to discuss) which enables things to become straightforward.  
Following up your decision Janos has rightly distinguished between Discsussion comment which relates solely  to the old article and comment which relates to the new.  So Janos, too, has helped things along and I thank him as well. 
Rodney Shakespeare, 31st July, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
||||||||||||||
The previous article was defaced and slashed by several people who knew nothing about the subject and basically wanted to suppress it and, if they could not do that, to mutilate and distort it.  Personal attack striked out by MartinDK. Read WP:NPA As co-author of one of the key binary books I am hopeful that, apart from matters of style and lay-out, the focus from now on will be on ensuring that the text accurately reflects the most recent binary books.  Thankyou.
Canon Peter Challen. peterchallen at gmail.com
:No problem, but it's just standard guidelines around here.  --Haemo 11:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Thankyou, Haemo

message: This new version is a vast improvement over the old one. Like I said on Janosabel's talk page I was just brainstorming when I responded to the questions he posed here. As for the gross personal attacks against me (including the one just above this post) I will not justify them with an answer nor will I waste anymore time on this trollfest. Please read WP:OWN and WP:NPA for further information. Janosabel is a good editor and I thank him for reading my response here and use whatever he could of what I had written. Great job. Since the article now fulfills all criterias for inclusion on Wikipedia I have no further interest in the article. Good luck with it. MartinDK 15:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The new version

message: This article seems to violate NPOV.  I made a couple changes but they were reverted, so rather than get into an edit war I think this is a better option.   Much of the article is presented as fact rather than the POV of the people who advocate/write about binary economics, including using contradictory terms like "economic democracy".  Some examples:
It states that traditional economics ignores capital and focuses only on labor, but the labor theory of value is archaic in economics, and I recall reading many articles from economists explaining the value of capital, interest, etc.  If it means something else, perhaps it should be clarified?
In the first paragraph, it says "In its economic aspect, binary economics states that it is a market economics whose markets work for everybody rather than just a few. Furthermore, it upholds private property but private property for everybody rather than just a few.".  I think you would be hard pressed to find an economist (or at least a proponent of traditional/market economics) who thinks only a small minority should be allowed to hold property, or that markets only work for a small minority.  And AFAIK those who don't generally advocate some form of socialism, rather than binary economics. 74.70.62.96 03:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: The diagram is essential as a visual way of explaining the main meaning of the text.  However if the diagram were to be made a little smaller (I suggest by 15%)the print would become smaller and clearer and the whole a little neater (I think ?Haemo has referred to this). 
Then, down the right-and side of the page there could be some of the above text (e.g. starting from Loans to Students). 
I do not have the technical expertise to reduce the diagram nor to put the text on the right-hand side.  So will an expert please do it?
Rodney Shakespeare, 2nd August, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
:Is this OK? Just change the pixel size in edit mode to vary the display size. Also, there is a good tutorial in wikipedia here.--Janosabel 10:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The diagram - 15% reduction

message: Binary economics is a discipline of economics expressing a new universal paradigm which challenges the fundamental assumptions of conventional economics.
I think it would be more accurate to describe it as a school rather than a discipline. Discipline implies that it somehow fits into (mainstream) economics when in fact it is a school like the Austrian School for example. Anyone object to changing discipline to school? MartinDK 02:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discipline or school? 

message: Janos has kindly solved the username/password problem but is very busy and cannot help further at the moment.  I tried putting up the photo of Mortimer Adler but failed.  Please note that the first file mentioned above (adler3.jpg) may be of a hawk or something (I joke not) and so the second file (adler4.jpg) should be used.  Also the Center for the Study of the Great Ideas was founded by Mortimer Adler and Max Weismann who has given copyright permission (Mortimer has passed on).
So, with this information, can a technical expert please do the necessary?  Thankyou.
NB. Once the Adler photo is posted I will, with luck, be in a position to approach the copyright holder (of photos of Louis Kelso and Patricia Kelso) who will wish to see how the Adler photo appears etc.
Rodney Shakespeare, 11th August, 2007, rodney.shakespeare1 at btopenworld.com
:The short answer to this request is to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. That page is pretty detailed and the process is not simple so I think someone like Haemo who is significantly more experienced here should be consulted to ensure that all the hard work put into getting these pictures licensed and uploaded is not lost because someone speedy deletes them as not having been released properly. As far as I understand the process should not take more than a few days if everything is done right. I'll ask Haemo to drop by here and help with this. MartinDK 14:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rodney — check out this image for an example of how to upload an image where you have been given permission to release it under the GFDL.  You will, of course, need to forward evidence of this permission to our OTRS department; you can do this as per the page above, but basically forward your email correspondance where they clearly give permission to license it to "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org". You can then upload the picture with the license you've been given permission to use, and put a note on the talk page saying that you're waiting for OTRS to confirm permission. --Haemo 16:35, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Help still needed