of Luigi Corvaglia
Abstract: mindfucking
- When I use a word, - said Humpty Dunty in a tone of pride, - it means exactly what I want it to mean, neither more nor less .- The problem is, - said Alice - if you can make words mean so many different .- The problem is, - said Humpty Dunty, - who is the master ... .
Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass
The words, unlike the numbers, we can give the sense that we want. You do not need with people who have had the misfortune to be called psychotic to realize this. Consider the label "pre-emptive war." One of the best strategies for reprogramming and thought reform used by those who wish to coercive persuasion (in American slang, mindfucking) is just a redefinition of language. This redefinition, as superbly highlighted by Orwell, is a way to redefine reality itself. In 1984, a totalitarianism that is covered by the "psicoreato, the inventors of" Newspeak " aim to "simplify the possibilities of thought." There are certainly forms "benign" language of deception. Greenland, a "green earth", is an expanse of ice, the Pacific Ocean is very little common ground, the Cape of Good Hope is indeed a place that leaves little hope to the navigator. Tipping has connotations here, if you will, of course - and therefore venial - truffaldini.La kindness that is enough to test our expectation that we are in a green land, in a placid sea, or relaxing in a race along the coast 'experience in the field to invalidate the previous idea. If we survive on our map it is easy to note that the Cape of Good Hope is a place recommended only to the enemies. And 'what Popper called "falsifiability". Our knowledge goes precisely in this way. The sharpness of our vision of the area increases continuously updating our "maps" due to invalidations. It follows that the real engine of knowledge is the error. E 'error that informs us about the non-validity of our "cognitive map" and requires us to review it. Stated differently, ie a character in The Name of the Rose U. Eco, "doubt is the enemy of all faith, so the doubt, not certainty, the thrust of each research, each survey. The important thing is that the ideas are at least potentially invalidated. Otherwise it becomes malignant, and in some cases, leads to real cognitive metastases. It 's the case for religious beliefs and policies. Included anarchism.
oxymorons oxymorons true and false
Kevin Carson, individualistic American setting out his political vision, a sort of mutualism mold Proudhon, the "free market anti-capitalist." At first sight, especially at a European steeped in Marxism, the definition may seem an oxymoron. How to say "Cape of Good Hope Negative." But no. Why has oxymoron is necessary that the two parts of the definition of conflict in conceptual terms. Which arises only if the terms "free market" and "capitalism" we connotations and would not let others. We have said, words like Humpty Dunty, we can give the meaning we want. The problem here, though, is that a nail indelibly labels Timber where the concepts are crucified is the hammer of ideologies. And ideologies are not likely to change even on the basis of evidence that could invalidate. Ideologies are certain, do not you argue, do not admit of doubt. That is, on the basis of the above, do not allow the growth of conoscenza.Galileo knew he could prove what was said, if only the priests had wanted to look into his telescope. But it would not. Thus, the overwhelming mass of critics of the economic system, free markets and capitalism would be virtually synonymous. The reason is that they see each other private property - that the "theft" Proudhon, the 'original ownership " Rousseau - as a basis for effettualizzazione. If you reject the property - ugly, dirty, bad - from refuse are its consequences. Think of a capitalist market, then, is a "psicoreato. Of which, probably, is guilty even Proudhon, that the exchange was an apologist. Second, however, the partisans of free hard and pure (best example of "anarcho-capitalist" followers of Murray Rothbard), said anti-capitalist and collectivist is to be one. Therefore, people like Carson - or writing - are to be covered in the list of parasites for reasons of aptitude and logical arguments dignità .Esistono many acts to dismantle these simplistic conceptions, if parties were willing to increase their knowledge, improve their cognitive map. But, in general, these gentlemen, never touched by the shadow of a doubt, are revealed as various incarnations of the priests who refused to look into Galileo's telescope. If we look they would see that the label "free market" describes the concept of autopoiesis, free discussion and experimentation, social and economic, which is dear to libertarians of every "obedience." Capitalism, by contrast, is a term designating a historic structure of a system of exploitation through sclerotic state intervention in the economy, ie, no more as autopoietic system and cybernetics. Ultimately, capitalism is the opposite of free markets. He said in a Korzbinsky abused aphorism: the map is not the territory and the name is not the thing designated. Are the concepts alive kicking once in harnessed labels morte.Un historical example will make clearer the distinction.
Ode to Greece (the story will absolve me)
With the revolution of 1821 Greece was freed of Turkish rule that lasted for nearly four centuries. Extremely interesting to read a description of what happened during the "power vacuum" succedutosi the expulsion of the Ottomans. Land management, in fact, until then in the hands of representatives of the Ottoman Empire, once hunted the noble Turkish families who held the lands from which the native working in conditions of semi-slavery, had become res nullius.Se in Oklahoma were organized the competition for the land during the ride to the West, Greece, in the province dell'Elide, the problem of land distribution was solved by dividing it into lots, by the same people, and, as a procedure for the award, organized themselves riding the cavalli.La thing worked like this: every family expressed a knight, and finished the race, the winner was chosen portion most congenial to him. The runner chose another lot, and so on, until all the arable land had not been divise.Le widows and orphans, that they also might have a source of livelihood, should not wait for the end of the race, as communities which had established precedenza.In lands assigned in this way, a way autopoietic, without intervention and without having any exogenous frictions, life took a its steady pace, and laborers, for the first time in centuries, became "owners" of land that they cultivated. The surplus production in a few years was made possible thanks to the fertility of the land made possible the beginning of trade with other regions and foreign countries. The quiet life proceeded. The administration of the community entrusted to meetings of representatives of non-professionals (heads of families, seniors, etc.). And, sorry to the fans that of Hobbes, despite the total absence of police, acts of mutual aggression quite limited. But the day came. The central government in Athens, finally gave a structure, enacted the first laws, and formed a national army. power, in other words, coagulated in the form of domination. "State" is the term for "whoever has the monopoly of force over a given territory." The definition of Walter Benjamin. One of the first laws passed related to the nationalization of land. How very democratic. In fact, during the glorious war in Spain, even the anarchists took part in the government that issued the decree of collectivization of workers' self-government of Catalonia. "In the name of the greek people, all land became property of the Hellenic Army neoformatosi stato.Il first task was to forcibly expropriate the land to the peasants who had worked in the meantime. In the name of the people, ovviamente.Quelle own lands, then, were sold by the government, and ended up largely in the hands of large landowners of which the government itself was an expression and enactment. Any farmer could buy back their land, but taxes in the meantime the government had imposed made it impossible to make money directly from the cultivation of small properties. For this reason, they had to return immediately to make rivendersele laborers. But now the owners no longer spoke turkish, greek speaking. On this basis, was born the modern greek state, liberal, democratic and capitalist (until the brackets of the military regime). This Greek history, as the fables of Aesop fellow, a moral. This story teaches. Does not teach us certain that the optimum is the agricultural and pastoral arcadia, the "good wildness" Rousseau's romanticism, or similar radical-chic living room. E ', in fact, a story about a social organization that is more "community" that "society" in the sense of Tonnies, with all faults related to this. The fact remains that the events of anarchy Greek offer many insights. For example, it seems that the 'ontogeny "of the greek summarize, so to speak, the" phylogeny "of statehood history. In other words, represents the reply to the consumption of the modern work of conquest of territory that generated the leviathan. Not, therefore, that evolution Darwinian evolution by the wild horde perfectly evolved primordial state that would occur as a result of a 'universal agreement is unlikely, that is the thing that Rothbard ironically called' the immaculate conception of the state. " What, however, more importantly for the purposes of our discussion is that the division of the "means of production" and wealth did not come through violence (the "political means" mentioned Hoppenheimer), but under a mutual agreement ( the "economic means"). This agreement may, without shame, to define the market, but it is extremely difficult to define capitalism. Not in the sense of "vulgar" termine.Con of this, it insists, is not to say at all is desirable that a return to more simplified forms of society and therefore less subject to trading systems to the "capitalist exploitation". No, the preferences are individual and that society does not organize on the basis of these. Only the moralism that characterizes those who refuse to use the telescopes can look daring to ask a missionary to announce this or that penalty. Of this group are often part the classical anarchists, socialist tradition, which, however, pose as alternatives to the market logic primitive market situations, buying and selling of equity and solidarity, self-productions. These in fact are the full expression of free trade, that is, a system based on individual incentives. The "market" does not have a morality or even of its own (im) morality imposed exogenously, but is an expression of the values \u200b\u200bof individual participants in the system. These markets, only smaller and less profitable. Minor use ", he argues, minor sin. A municipality in which the rules are in force gratuity is well within the logic of a "market" inteso.No similarly, with this speech you want to call particular attention on the center of the issue, the state, namely that the first act that the just been formed has done was take the land to the peasants who cultivated and wealthy patrons to grant landowners, who by their own means had allowed the formation of the government elite. And the taxes imposed by central government for their sustenance, they did so they do not prove more profitable for smallholders to maintain their limited possessions. This has laid the foundation for an economy, one that has produced Onassis, who, as "backward" compared to most of the remainder of the West, can be said of a capitalistic, even if you have difficulty in defining " free market. " Put that way, mind you, are anti-capitalists, the so-called anarcho-capitalists. In short, the historical fact perfectly well known criterion that follows David Friedman uses to describe what market and what is not. E 'market any situation in which resources are used on the basis of shared rules - any rules, including the race with the horses - and each non-market situation where the problem is solved by force. The latter, says Friedman, is so unattractive that "is only used by small children and large nations." Appunto.La question on which this story invites us to reflect, ultimately, is: favors even more the privilege and freedom to build illegal trading - has always been accused of being the breeding ground of "robber capitalism" - or the economic regulation under the tutelage of impersonal organizations - Whether a state (liberal-democratic or socialist widespread private property to "state capitalism") or even a government modeled on the "Committee of the Militia" English -, theoretical guarantees the "rights" of all "citizens"? Everyone is free, of course, to think as he wishes, but those who believe that the first condition is desirable and the second pursues a destructive "free market anti-capitalist." Thank you looked through the telescope.
Conclusion: The reality is not true
"We have a rule. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today." "But sometimes there has to be the day of 'jam today'," Alice objected. "No, no, impossible," said the Queen. "The jam is scheduled every other day and today, you know, it is not every other day, I see you."
Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
Alice at the mad tea says, "is certainly not my language but I do not understand." In fact, a poor mental organization, in addition to making labels, "meaning" of little use in defining the meaning, also means that the logic of syllogisms is developed on the basis that as premises and conclusions as silly and questionable judgments. Judgments made on the basis of "constructs" the poor, say George Kelly, founder of the "cognitive constructivism". And generate mindfucking poor judgments. Self-mindfucking. As already mentioned, had warned us Korzbinsky. Not enough, there has Gregory Bateson recalled. The map is not the territory. Every living thing, to know the reality, the builds. Sailors in the vast sea, travelers in Wonderland, we trace maps with the sole purpose of creating a space for orientation and predict events. There are no maps more real than others. However, there are maps better than others. There are maps more complex, richer, holding up better to the invalidations and manage to have more predictive power. That if we continue the metaphor, we do not lose too easily. Now, the constructs are binary. Beauty and ugliness, capitalism and socialism, free markets and planning, socialism, individualism, rationality and transcendence, and so on. A simple construct system will have problems in front of the invalidations. For a man convinced of the existence of surplus value, the idea that it is more "socialist" the market is informed that the state would not meet, especially if the structure is simply "communism-capitalism." If one does not fall is that the other. Unacceptable. It 's a "cognitive dissonance" (Festinger). As Bandler & Grinder say those who find themselves in this impasse, "the difficulty lies not in whether they make the wrong choice, but do not have enough choices: they have a picture of the world focus with wealth." The Innuits (Eskimos) have of about two hundred words for snow in its various manifestations, which escape those who do not have this element as a single environment. Map dell'innuit is no longer true, is more suited to navigate in its environment. Edward Konkin III, known to be the founder of the anarcho-capitalist current known as the "agora", describes three types of entrepreneur: 1: the entrepreneur (good), who take risks, innovate, and real power producer, progressive, 2) the capitalist state (neutral), relatively little innovative, 3) the State capital (bad) as "the greatest evil of the political realm." We're not very far from the thoughts of the "socialist" Carson. Well, that's not the wealth of Konkin dictionary Innuits under snow, but it is already far more than the basic construct of an entrepreneur - always bad "left" always good "right" - generally used. The simplification of thought, remember, was the end of Newspeak orwelliana.La very notion of "ownership" may comprise much more than used by the tribes that make totem or taboo. For example, Bud Spangler stands in good company among "property in the sense of privilege and property was unfair in the sense of the occurrence of an ethical phenomenon supported by a broad consensus," adding that the property acquired through free trade and supported by the consensus of the participants "would be defensible broadly as one might defend the" possession "in a system of property usufruct", concluding that "This theory of property, (...) currently provides the foundation for a revolutionary redistribution property, by a plutocracy allied with the state, to the workers. " Preserving inadequate constructs, in short, is possible only through avoidance ("there I look into the telescope"), immunization ("is a deformation of the lens) or hostility (" I'll give the telescope in the head). Grow in complexity, however, expected to be available exploration, the tendency to risk their own constructs, disabled, by creating new, more articulate, more understanding, more purpose, to make subsequent invalidation of the rarer and less traumatic. It means, in short, constantly create ourselves and the world at the cost of painful readjustments (the "Arrangement" of Piaget). It is not easy, of course, but it's the least we can ask who is defining "libertarian." Otherwise, he said Korbinzsky - "There are two ways to pass easily through life: to believe everything or to doubt everything. Both save us from thinking. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment