Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i2QIfCm22102; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 13:41:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 13:41:12 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <000e01c41361$d681c200$6501a8c0@alclv.org> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Judy Rittenhouse" <jrittenhouse@alclv.org> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1210] Re: Readability Formulas X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 5735 Lines: 117 It's lovely to have Andres back in the conversation. When we didn't hear from him for awhile, some of us feared that he might have fallen to a censor. Judy Rittenhouse ----- Original Message ----- From: <AndresMuro@aol.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 5:09 PM Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1201] Re: Readability Formulas > Andrea: > > Whatever our reality is, if it unfairly priviledges one group over another, I think it is our responsibility to question it. Just because white males control our society, we should not just quietly watch. we need to make this consicous and bring this to the consciousness of others. This is what education is all aobut. When people become conscious, it is their choice what they do with that knowledge. However, just because something is the dominant value, we don't just accept it and ignore it. > > Regarding capitalism, it is just that, capitalism. This is an economic system where the means of production are in the hand of wealthy capitalists. The purpose of it is to make more wealth. There is nothing in the definition of capitalism that includes some teleological goals beyond accumulating more capital. In other words, there is nothing in the definition about the purpose being increasing quality of life of the majority. > > The rhetorical argument to justify capitalism is that through competition, the wealth would be redistributed and quality of life would improve. However, this argument came from the capitalists themselves to protect their own system. If you don't buy this, look at the histroy of the US. The means of production, and hence the wealth of this country has always been controlled by the top 5%, and there has never been a re-ditribution of wealth nor will there be. > > Structurally, capitalism needs of three classes. It needs capitalists, it needs a middle class to act as buffers and it needs a large working class to produce goods that they will never be able to afford themselves. The working class works under the illusion that they will be able to get to the top(desire, as Plato called it). > > Capitalism always acts for economic interests and sometimes uses the illusion of human rights to cover up for this. The two invasions of Iraq were orchestated to protect the interests of the corporations and the human rights stuff was used as a cover. In the last invasion, the motivation was to control the rise of the euro. The rise of the euro was being made possible by the fact that the two dominant euro denominated countries, Germany and France, were trading extensively with Iraq. Neither of these countries could care less about human rights, they wanted to pad their own economies. At the same time, the two countries that had the most to lose from this, ie, GB and the USA wanted to change this, and the rest is histroy. Ironically, it did not prevent the rise of the euro. > > The most clear example of the priviledging of economic interests is what happened with Al Qaida instead of Irak. The US never made the huge investment that they made in the Iraq war as in pursuing Al Qaida. While the existence of Al Qaida represents significant risk to human life, the economic interests of invading Irak were clearly above those of stopping Al Qaida. this is why the investment in the Iraq invasion was much greater. When advisors indicated to GW that Irak posed no risk he insisted that they find proof so that he could justify an invasion. > > So, capitalism is simply doing whatever it takes to increase the competitive edge of those that control the means of production. If in the process capitalists can claim that they are doing some good, they'll do it. Look at Philip Morris claiming that they are concern with people's health. > > Andres > > In a message dated 3/25/2004 9:20:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, AWilder106 writes: > > > > > Good morning, Andres! > > > > Call it hegemonic or not, what is, is--this is the reality that we live in, and I think it is reasonable to acknowledge that reality. White, maleness, and money are more valued in this society than any other cluster of attributes. This is not news. Also, white males who make money can cook delicious healthful meals for their families. > > Food preparation is not an exclusive category. I am encouraging a male friend of mine whose wife is becoming disabled (and she is the regular breadwinner) to learn how to cook, he is very resistant. This is an immigrant family from a "traditional" culture. One must adapt to changing reality. > > I think the message for anyone is to learn the attributes of different roles, so, for example, if you are caught without a cook in the home you know how to do it for yourself. Or a woman has the skills to go out and find a job. Gotta do it. First, though it is necessary to acknowledge the attributes..job, cooking..before they can be manipulated and c! > > hanged. Gotta get away from the gender role type casting. There are also some terrible female cooks out there. > > > > Now about capitalism--I think you are slamming corporate capitalism, not capitalism per se, at least I hope you are. Education is a form of capitalism = improving who you are, your life chances, if you will. Corporate capitalism moves from a concept to a legal entity--the invention of a corporation which > > protects the owners from being sued, if, heaven forfend, they should loose someone some money. Corporate capitalism is essentially a gambling pool. Enron is a particularly malignant example. I am simplifying, but anyone who invests any > > money is entering corporate capitalism and the gambling pool. > > > > > > Andrea > > > > > > > > go here: www.geocities.com/andresmuro/art.html > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:44 EST