 
Sender: "Jon C. Slenk" 
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1992 18:59:37 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jon C. Slenk" 
Subject: Fwd: corporate communities
To: +dlist+/afs/andrew/usr/js9b/Public/camc.dl@andrew.cmu.edu
References: 
Message-ID: <722908777.1253.0@angst.andrew.cmu.edu>

---------- Forwarded message begins here ----------

Return-path: <@cmu.edu,@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu:wce@hogbbs>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Received: from po2.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail
          ID ;
          Fri, 27 Nov 1992 03:08:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cmu2.cs.cmu.edu by po2.andrew.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id  for js9b+; Fri, 27 Nov 92 03:08:23 EST
Received: by cmu2.cs.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id  for js9b+@andrew.cmu.edu; Fri, 27 Nov 92 03:08:20 EST
Received: via localmail; Fri, 27 Nov 1992 03:08:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from psuvax1.cs.psu.edu by cmu2.cs.cmu.edu (5.54/3.15) id  for angst+; Fri, 27 Nov 92 03:08:16 EST
Received: from hogbbs by psuvax1.cs.psu.edu with UUCP id <291797>; Fri, 27 Nov 1992 03:07:59 -0500
Received: by hogbbs.scol.pa.us (1.65/waf)
	via UUCP; Fri, 27 Nov 92 02:51:29 EST
	for angst+@cmu.edu
To: angst+@CMU.EDU
Subject: corporate communities
From: wce@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Bill Eichman)
Comments: Validated
Message-Id: 
Date: 	Fri, 27 Nov 1992 02:50:19 -0500
Organization: The Heart of Gold BBS, Lemont PA

From:	BLUECANARYINNAOUTLET 
Subject: Technoapartheid

I want to preface this with what I consider to be my most important
piece of advice regarding community-building, advice I have given many
times before.

No one strategy is sufficient for solving the thousands of complex
problems of our world, and of community-building. Each one of us must
evolve our own best ideas, and make our own best effort, towards the
type of life, lifestyle, and community that we hope to acheive.

I have made my own choices regarding approach and strategy, but I don't
expect anyone else to agree with my choices. Still, I have to do the
best i can to relaize my ideas. And so must each of us, in our own way.

Some of us will find that we are in basic agreement, and we'll be able
to work together. Others of us may find ourselves in essential
disagreement, which means we may not be able to work directly together,
However, each of our ideas and plans have to be tested, so that together
we all learn what works, and what doesn't, in any given situation.

>   And this is why, when we are thinking of these kinds of communities as
>an alternative to the horror of the global situation, I think we should
>not turn to the mechanisms that create the situation (and are accelerating
>it to its crisis) for sustenance-- the capitalism of multinational
>corporations, the global culture of greed.

And this is also why I happen to think exactly the opposite-- that is,
that we must use fire to fight fire, and steel to fight steel. We must
re-form the 'corporation' and put it to good use, rather than to harmful
and destructive use.

If we do not have corporate strength's, we will be crushed by the
superior force of the corporate society, no matter how high our morals,
or how pure our hearts.

I feel you're reacting in a knee-jerk way to a word, Jesse. I understand
how you feel, but I think you're wrong. However, I support completely
your right to feel that I'm wrong, and to make your own plans.And that
pretty much sums it up-- I'm going to be _extremely_ glad to see you
experiment with communities that don't use a corporate government, but
as for myself, that's what I want, and that's what I'm going to be
working for.

Don't confuse making a positive choice to use corporate structure for a
good purpose with the 'culture of greed'. That greed existed long before
anything like a corporation came into existence-- what we see now is the
tool of corporate structure having been given by default to the ruling
classes of the rich and greedy. I intend to try to reclaim it.

I very much want to hear you explain _specifically_ what you think is
wrong with the corporate tribe approach, as I've described it. I'm sure
the idea has many flaws, which can only be corrected if i have detailed
feedback. What, exactly, do you object too?

> It won't serve us ethically or
>pragmatically in the future.

Nor will failing to provide a viable alternative to the greed and
abusiveness of the industrial nation-states and their masters.
There have been hundreds of failed communities with high ideals-- the
ideals can only be manifest in the long term through communities that
are strong enough to survive and reproduce.

>mission(s) that we want these communities to have, we should not think in
>terms of mere short-term profit; if they must sell goods, services, or
>information to the outside world, let these be things that in some way
>contribute towards the forging of peace and stability, and towards the
>demolition of unjust institutions.  I know that's a lot to demand, but
>what else, in the end, will do?

What do you mean, if they _Must_ sell goods & services? If you want to
live in holy poverty, do so. No-ones stopping you. You can do it right
now, start it this very instant. Step off the wheel of life. It's an
easy and intelligent thing to do-- but it won't satisfy me....

I don't _have_ to sell goods and services-- I _want_ to, because I want
to be able to contribute more to the world than is possible in a state
of poverty.

I would never suggest that these 'corporate communities' should
concentrate _primarily_ on profit-- they should concentrate primarily on
providing the best possible lifestyle and standard of living (measured
by quality rather than quantity). Profit should be a means to this end.
I personally don't want to spend one second more working for profit than
I need to pay for my real goals, which revolve around research, art, and
expressing my creativity.

Well, this is actually a silly conversation-- just like the hippies who
'grew up' and became yuppies, 'happily' polluting and consuming, you too
will change your attitude over time. All I can hope for is you don't go
through the "pendulum change" of the hippies, and that instead you keep
your idealism and add an earthy pragmatism to your philosophy.

I'm in full agreement that we should place great importance on selling
products and services that contribute to peace and sustainability and
human understanding. I wouldn't support a community that was doing
anything else.

As I've said before, I suspect that _education_ is likely to be one of
the biggest 'products' produced by these communities. Wholesome food,
health services, and books, music, and art, both educational and
recreational, are also high on my list. When the communities I
personally am hoping for reach a stable level, I'd like to experiment
with such projects as marketing solar ovens, and instruction in their
use, to equatorial thirld world countries, plus water purifiers, and similar
'appropriate technology' projects. ( Especially marketed to the
caribbean, cause I want to move to the caribbean region when I'm older.)

Later, Bill


----------------------------------------------------
Jon Slenk           angst+@cmu.edu     EVERYTHING is
Carnegie Mellon     Pittsburgh PA      Disclaimed

 prev message 
 next message