Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:55:09 -0500
From: dan combs <dcombs-AT-bloomington.in.us>
Subject: Evolution or Revolution?




You know, I've been on this list now for 10 years (I keep rubbing that 
point in on you newbies).  One of the first discussions I joined in on, 
except for one about the Indy 500, was about Revolution versus Evolution 
for social change.   I was a lifestyle person back then--and didn't know 
until then I had earned a label--and went with Evolution.  It just seemed 
that changing the way I lived would have more impact on those around me 
than any other realistic course.   My thought was the less I relied on The 
Consumer Consumption Engine the better off I would be.

I'm older now and still think our social order has it all worng and I guess 
I'm still an Evolutionist-type unless I think about it.   I've was most 
likely deluded to think that not participating in Conspicuous Consumption 
was a real alternative:  The small things I've denied myself have probably 
been more than offset by the Bigger Footprint Trinkets and Baubles.

So as I approach my later years I really have no philosophy to guide 
me.   I rail and bark at the Bigger Footprint but I participate just the 
same and  I am seemingly more content now just to mollify the effects of 
what it is I do instead of not participating.

So is Evolution even possible?   This thing we resist is very good at 
co-opting our desires and lets us participate just a little until we are 
addicted.    Does anyone know?   If it requires a Revolution I'm afeared we 
have lost as the world seems all about grabbing the Brass Ring.

Are we just whizzing in the wind?


carp