File spoon-archives/bhaskar.archive/bhaskar_2003/bhaskar.0309, message 23

Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:04:14 -0500
Subject: Re: BHA: Re: Re: FWD: Job Opportunity: Agent-Publicist-Fundraiser 

Jamie Morgan wrote:
> surely a free person in a society of peace love and harmony? I'm not
> endorsing RB's position merely the commitment

Peace, love and harmony cannot, in and of themselves, be goals of
action. They are mere (and I think I want to keep that word, mere)
attributes of social relations achieved through struggle for other
goals. "Other goals" here is deliberately vague, since there would be
legitimate debate over what are, under given historical conditions, the
particular goals of struggle.

Hence positing peace, love and harmony as direct goals is to deflect
attention from the activities that might contribute to peace, love and
harmony. One might even put it as a verbal wordplay: To be for peace,
love and harmony is to be against peace, love and harmony.


     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005