Easy everyone,
I come here, today, confused. Y'see I've just stepped out of the student bubble of living in Leeds student central, sitting around chatting theory, charity, and making a few changes and then I finish my degree and attempt to slip back into Derby life without caving in to the pressures of social conformity, blinkered consumption and the amoral routine of handling ones business.
So, I've been thinking quite alot about illegitimate authority and the process of decentralising power, the importance of the means reflecting the virtue of the ends they're attaining towards and the problems involved in attempting to escape systems of oppression and exploitation, whilst simultaneously attempting to maintain working social relationships - friendship, kinship, etc - with those who aren't necessarily motivated with regard to the plight of escaping, or changing the shape of such systems. This isn't a question of tolerance, I dont think, as I'm more than comfortable with disagreeing with others with regard to the differences of our opinion. This is more about the dilemma of actively supporting the hobbies and interests of those I care about, when their hobbies or interests may include attempting to make a little money in order to make ends meet.
In order to decentralise power do we make steady reforms so that we're steadily moving towards a more just society or do we wait until the climate of consciousness is ripe and rip shit up from the roots and start again? Do I support my independent trader in order to help readdress the concentration of power or do I do my all to be as self-sufficient as possible and thus withdraw my support from my independent trader? If someone I care about deeply is struggling to make ends meet, do I help them set up shop so that they can make themselves a few extra quid, feed their family and all the rest of it? Juicy ethical dilemmas, I'm currently feeling.
So, if we want to decentralise power from the hands of the state and into the hands of the people what do we do? What is possible, what is probable, what potential is there for change? Do we wait for a climate of revolution or do we attempt to make changes in the here and now, within the existing frameworks, with the hope that these structures of oppression shall make concessions, reform and shift shape, steadily becoming fairer and more legitimate until we reach a place we want to be? I think it would be a good idea to campaign for a more inclusive democracy, a deeper democracy that includes the electorate more regularly and on more decisions which affect their lives and their communities (all). This wouldn't be ideal but it would be more just than what we currently have.
The same question must be asked with regard to capitalism. Do we withdraw entirely from its logic or do we attempt to make it more ethical, working within the existing frameworks, attempting to transform it with the collective power we have as both producers and consumers? I think about this with regard to promoting ethical alternatives to the major capitalist centres of power, such as supporting small, local, independent, fairly traded, ethically produced goods. In doing so we're supporting capitalism but also encouraging more just alternatives which are founded on more humane principles than just capital accumulation. Something which is better to do than not do, obviously. Or is it?
Another point is that I've done my all to avoid selling my labour to the private sector and thus ironically find myself working for the state (Social Services), I also intend to become a teacher working for the state. A teacher of Sociology attempting to encourage the youth of the future to question the legitimacy of authority, the nature of the media, the motives of capital, the potential we all hold as social beings to flourish in cooperation with each other rather than competition. What dya reckon about that cheeky paradox? Working for the state, against the state?
So that's it really. I guess I'm starting to think that our political perspectives - Anarchist, Socialist, etc - provide us with a critique of existing problems plus the principles and ideals from which we can proceed, a benchmark to which we can hold up and compare our current position to our ideal position. What do you think?
I would imagine that some people really relate to how I'm feeling and that some people would be highly critical of how I'm feeling. I'm trying to find myself in this puzzling existence, aspiring to act with regard to my sense of what is right and wrong, whilst carefully treading that fine line between pragmatism and principle.
Please share your thoughts with me, point out the pitfalls with what I'm discussing and express anything else that's on your mind. Dont be nasty though, that aint the way to win people over to different ideas and is generally unnecessary.
Peace & Progress
Jonezy
I come here, today, confused. Y'see I've just stepped out of the student bubble of living in Leeds student central, sitting around chatting theory, charity, and making a few changes and then I finish my degree and attempt to slip back into Derby life without caving in to the pressures of social conformity, blinkered consumption and the amoral routine of handling ones business.
So, I've been thinking quite alot about illegitimate authority and the process of decentralising power, the importance of the means reflecting the virtue of the ends they're attaining towards and the problems involved in attempting to escape systems of oppression and exploitation, whilst simultaneously attempting to maintain working social relationships - friendship, kinship, etc - with those who aren't necessarily motivated with regard to the plight of escaping, or changing the shape of such systems. This isn't a question of tolerance, I dont think, as I'm more than comfortable with disagreeing with others with regard to the differences of our opinion. This is more about the dilemma of actively supporting the hobbies and interests of those I care about, when their hobbies or interests may include attempting to make a little money in order to make ends meet.
In order to decentralise power do we make steady reforms so that we're steadily moving towards a more just society or do we wait until the climate of consciousness is ripe and rip shit up from the roots and start again? Do I support my independent trader in order to help readdress the concentration of power or do I do my all to be as self-sufficient as possible and thus withdraw my support from my independent trader? If someone I care about deeply is struggling to make ends meet, do I help them set up shop so that they can make themselves a few extra quid, feed their family and all the rest of it? Juicy ethical dilemmas, I'm currently feeling.
So, if we want to decentralise power from the hands of the state and into the hands of the people what do we do? What is possible, what is probable, what potential is there for change? Do we wait for a climate of revolution or do we attempt to make changes in the here and now, within the existing frameworks, with the hope that these structures of oppression shall make concessions, reform and shift shape, steadily becoming fairer and more legitimate until we reach a place we want to be? I think it would be a good idea to campaign for a more inclusive democracy, a deeper democracy that includes the electorate more regularly and on more decisions which affect their lives and their communities (all). This wouldn't be ideal but it would be more just than what we currently have.
The same question must be asked with regard to capitalism. Do we withdraw entirely from its logic or do we attempt to make it more ethical, working within the existing frameworks, attempting to transform it with the collective power we have as both producers and consumers? I think about this with regard to promoting ethical alternatives to the major capitalist centres of power, such as supporting small, local, independent, fairly traded, ethically produced goods. In doing so we're supporting capitalism but also encouraging more just alternatives which are founded on more humane principles than just capital accumulation. Something which is better to do than not do, obviously. Or is it?
Another point is that I've done my all to avoid selling my labour to the private sector and thus ironically find myself working for the state (Social Services), I also intend to become a teacher working for the state. A teacher of Sociology attempting to encourage the youth of the future to question the legitimacy of authority, the nature of the media, the motives of capital, the potential we all hold as social beings to flourish in cooperation with each other rather than competition. What dya reckon about that cheeky paradox? Working for the state, against the state?
So that's it really. I guess I'm starting to think that our political perspectives - Anarchist, Socialist, etc - provide us with a critique of existing problems plus the principles and ideals from which we can proceed, a benchmark to which we can hold up and compare our current position to our ideal position. What do you think?
I would imagine that some people really relate to how I'm feeling and that some people would be highly critical of how I'm feeling. I'm trying to find myself in this puzzling existence, aspiring to act with regard to my sense of what is right and wrong, whilst carefully treading that fine line between pragmatism and principle.
Please share your thoughts with me, point out the pitfalls with what I'm discussing and express anything else that's on your mind. Dont be nasty though, that aint the way to win people over to different ideas and is generally unnecessary.
Peace & Progress
Jonezy
) but don't you think it's strange that nowadays we associate free trade with socially responsible ethical trading - rather than smuggling? Just a passing observation.
)
