Hmmm...sure this published been copied from the good ol' "Socialist Worker"? That's where it belongs.

What complete tripe. It seems that now the supposed 'middle class' are to blamed for everything wrong in the world, from the industrial revolution to racism. I think she's been reading Marx and looking to update it a bit.

In another thread Foxy questioned the linking of "Ignorant", & "Academic". Well Foxy, I'm afraid I can not agree with you on that. Infact I find they fit together naturally.

Now we have Chris showing that we can link another couple, that being idiot, & ratbag.

I don't know what she thinks has been responsible for the rapid growth of China's industry, if it was not the conversion of their industry, [but not their politics], to a capitalist system.

Chris, I'll bet all those Chinese who now go to bed, with a full belly don't agree with you either.

Of course, those with a bee in their bonnet are not renowned for clear thinking. In Chris's case the noise of all thoss bees must be quite deafenimg, causing her to live in her own little world.

I have to disagree.

The trouble is is that we have been relentlessly propagandized into presuming and acting that we are ALL independent centers of absolute self-fulfillment and that the purpose of life is acquiring and owning as much as possible.

The person with the biggest castle filled up with the all of the biggest and most expensive latest hi-tech toys wins!

The return to localism is the only real alternative to the current system which IS unsustainable.

One of the best essays written on the topic was The Idea of a Local Economy by Wendell Berry. The widely read essay was written in response to Sept 11 and Globalization altogether.

Plus this essay from my usual source:

http://www.dabase.org/coopcomm.htm

Also:

http://blessedunrest.com this reference was highly recommended by the author of the reference above.

The other alternative is a return to xenophobic nativism as promoted by One Nation here in Oz or the ludicrous "tea-party" movement in the USA. And all of the other fear and loathing based right-wing movements that are a feature of the world altogether in 2010.

Capitalism - as opposed to what? A society in which private ownership of the tools and means of production - your labour, tools, machines, computers, farms, and workshops - is illegaly?

Globalisation - as opposed to what? A society in which the movement of people and goods across borders is illegal? Why only ban movement across national borders? Why not across state, municipal and shire borders too?

But if private property and movements across borders are not to be illegalised, then how are you going to acheive a society that does not have the perceived defects of capitalism and globalisation, given that, if people are free to choose, they do choose to privately own the fruits of their labour, their tools and means of production, and to buy and sell goods and services across borders?

In the society you have in mind, who is to make the decisions on what to produce, and how? How are these decision-makers to be held accountable to the preferences of the mass of the consumers - the workers? How are they going to know the wishes of the consumers, or the relative scarcity of resources as they change from day to day? What personal incentive will they have not to waste resources?

Either you are knowingly proposing a society that would be far more grossly abusive to people and the environment than capitalism and globalisation, or you are really are as vap-headed and blindly arrogant as you appear to be.

Peter You are too smart to let you get away with such shortsighted politicking.
Argument by extremes is a manipulation technique not valid argument.
Try again

Chris James has me stumped. Her opinions are just too addled for logical response.