I meant to read more of the comments but time is a constraint. I think there is a small but perhaps important error in the concept of the state. You have defined in some ways what narratives are attempting to do, create equality. But I don’t understand if that is the States occupation, what about the ideals of the origins of the state? The Declaration of Independence and Constitution? I’ll leave it here for now for lack of time. I believe the States occupation should be to uphold those values within those documents.
It is a very fine thing to attempt. It would be excellent if Steiner's ideas could permeate our culture a bit more. Unfortunately Steiner is widely ignored, possibly due to people being allergic to what they see as "mysticism".
Message recieved by email from Michael Wood, reposted here with permission:
Excellent and challenging piece Michael.
May I throw a spanner in the works? It seems to me that the problem democracies face is actually the fact that socialism is undemocratic. If one looks at the Webb's Socialist Commonwealth and Atlee's 1945 manifesto based on it, it is obvious that it excludes, like communism, any other philosophy or policy. Cooperation is only possible between those who share an ideology, but differ on means. Democratic parties that believe in a free market economy can cooperate. In truth they cannot cooperate with Socialists of any stripe and I believe that attempting to do so has led us into the worst of all worlds. Indeed was it not the Liberal Party's replacement by Labour that killed off the Civic baby before it was born?
Atlee failed because he would not (or could not) impose a one party state which was the condition needed to create the Socialist commonwealth. The Labour party is a socialist party that is from time to time taken over by a 'centrist' Blair, Starmer e.g., in order to make it electable (or is their own ambition that drives them) Whatever the reason the compromises made by both sides are, I contend unworkable and we finish up in a neither fish nor fowl world.
I am not in favour of banning things, but socialism should have been banned in the last century following the Webb's manifesto because it clearly challenged and sought to replace democracy. The communist experiment in the USSR and latterly China is surely proof enough that it does not work. Reform and the SDP seem happily to work together in certain areas, because they share a common free enterprise based democratic belief. It's a belief that Labour espouses only when it's leaders are hungry for their turn at the Whitehall trough. I don't think it's anyway to ruin a country.
I know that the great and supposedly good wax lyrical about compromise and negotiation. My experience in business was that negotiations were a waste of time unless there was a desire on both sides for a resolution of equal benefit. Sadly politics is not at present grown up, but rather a Punch and Judy parody of bombasts who would, I think, struggle to sell hot dogs at a soccer game.
The Elephant in the Room part one in World View was so good I wanted to share it with all...so I am glad to be a new reader of your work and thank you for such carefully considered and important ideas. P. Foot (retired Waldorf teacher)
I meant to read more of the comments but time is a constraint. I think there is a small but perhaps important error in the concept of the state. You have defined in some ways what narratives are attempting to do, create equality. But I don’t understand if that is the States occupation, what about the ideals of the origins of the state? The Declaration of Independence and Constitution? I’ll leave it here for now for lack of time. I believe the States occupation should be to uphold those values within those documents.
It is a very fine thing to attempt. It would be excellent if Steiner's ideas could permeate our culture a bit more. Unfortunately Steiner is widely ignored, possibly due to people being allergic to what they see as "mysticism".
Interesting. Reminded me of Rudolf Steiner’s threefold social order thinking
Message recieved by email from Michael Wood, reposted here with permission:
Excellent and challenging piece Michael.
May I throw a spanner in the works? It seems to me that the problem democracies face is actually the fact that socialism is undemocratic. If one looks at the Webb's Socialist Commonwealth and Atlee's 1945 manifesto based on it, it is obvious that it excludes, like communism, any other philosophy or policy. Cooperation is only possible between those who share an ideology, but differ on means. Democratic parties that believe in a free market economy can cooperate. In truth they cannot cooperate with Socialists of any stripe and I believe that attempting to do so has led us into the worst of all worlds. Indeed was it not the Liberal Party's replacement by Labour that killed off the Civic baby before it was born?
Atlee failed because he would not (or could not) impose a one party state which was the condition needed to create the Socialist commonwealth. The Labour party is a socialist party that is from time to time taken over by a 'centrist' Blair, Starmer e.g., in order to make it electable (or is their own ambition that drives them) Whatever the reason the compromises made by both sides are, I contend unworkable and we finish up in a neither fish nor fowl world.
I am not in favour of banning things, but socialism should have been banned in the last century following the Webb's manifesto because it clearly challenged and sought to replace democracy. The communist experiment in the USSR and latterly China is surely proof enough that it does not work. Reform and the SDP seem happily to work together in certain areas, because they share a common free enterprise based democratic belief. It's a belief that Labour espouses only when it's leaders are hungry for their turn at the Whitehall trough. I don't think it's anyway to ruin a country.
I know that the great and supposedly good wax lyrical about compromise and negotiation. My experience in business was that negotiations were a waste of time unless there was a desire on both sides for a resolution of equal benefit. Sadly politics is not at present grown up, but rather a Punch and Judy parody of bombasts who would, I think, struggle to sell hot dogs at a soccer game.
With best wishes,
Michael
Hah, I meant Womb of course!!
The Elephant in the Room part one in World View was so good I wanted to share it with all...so I am glad to be a new reader of your work and thank you for such carefully considered and important ideas. P. Foot (retired Waldorf teacher)