[GJM] Wikipedia article on binary economics. URGENT HELP NEEDED

Mon Aug 20 09:17:50 MDT 2007

Dear Radu,

It is very nice of you to write about this out in the open of GJM Discussion rather than in the claustrophobic confines of a Discussion list on Wikipedia.  I also take this opportunity to thank you for splendidly constructive Wikipedia editing (recent and  past).

This email will be long not least because the issues are very difficult to explain  in an email but I start by saying that you have raised a matter of considerable importance at a time when many odd things -- positive and negative -- are happening.  Perhaps the two biggest positive ones are a rising awareness of the paradigm issue and the development of binary economics as it interacts with others and sees things from their point of view rather than the traditional binary one.

The cesj article -- Binary Economics in a Nutshell -- is a good one expressing the traditional binary point of view but there has been of late been a lot of development in relation to Islam, for example, and understandings are changing, more conclusions being drawn and starting points altered.  To take but two examples:
a)  If binary economics is to be of appeal to Muslims across the world (and Hindus and anybody else) it has to be seen to address what matters to them  rather than what matters to well-intentioned 'Western'  binary economists.  So,  in the case of Muslims,  it becomes important to start presentations and argument from riba and thus on the centrality of an interest-free loan supply (and present 'Islamic Banking' is not genuinely interest-free )and it also becomes important to emphasise the control over national destiny.  Believe it or not, questions of capital distribution and binary property right (traditional binary concerns) are very much lower down the list of priorities.

Perhaps above all is awareness of paradigm with 'paradigm' being defined here as not just a view of reality but also an awareness of how the whole of a society, culture and heritage can relate to each other.  If you make the 'free market' assumption of economic, cultural and spiritual superiority (The End of History -- Francis Fukyama) you will not be listened to -- or rather, you will be listened to politely and then ignored.  You may make market assumptions and many other assumptions but the mistake of assuming ineffable cultural superiority is a big one.  And if there's a big world financial collapse the mistake will be a disastrous one.

b)   Distinctiveness, newness, a comprehensive newness and the chance to break free from Western 'domination' and do things in their own way are of much higher relevance.  Binary economics is one such way but the trouble is that, unless it really does come from within Islam etc and be shown to come from within, it will not appeal.  Indeed, I will be blunt -- any, any perception at all that binary economics is being imposed (no matter how unfair that perception is) immediately wrecks any chance of acceptance.  You can explain the benefits of wide capital ownership, of capital incomes etc until the cows come home but if your audience does not, deep down, believe that you understand their deepest feelings, you have lost the argument and lost any chance of being accepted..  You will be listened to politely, of course -- oh yes, they will be polite -- but nothing will happen.  People soon pick up the 'vibes' in these matters.

Now two books -- by me, The Modern Universal Paradigm (go to www.binaryeconomics.net) and The Universal Paradigm and Islamic World-system; Economics, Ethics, Society and Science by Masud Choudhury  and I really do address these issues so that there is a way in which people around the world  can come to work out the key things  in their heritage (of any faith, any sort) and then find out how to combine these things with their modern desires and achieve a modern solution which is their solution and not perceived as somebody else's..  Both books have the words "Universal Paradigm" in their title and that is not chance -- it was deliberately done .

Anyway this email is already long enough so I now come straight to the matter you raise.  I think that the present Wikipedia article on binary economics reflects the shift towards a universal paradigm view rather than the traditional binary one.  There's not the slightest doubt that the article has infuriated supporters of the status quo who are outraged that anybody should say that there can be a new paradigm and a new economics (and,you may remember, the original article added a new ethics and a new society -- these things so angered them that we have had to moderate the opening sentence of the present article).  I am confident -- and this was confirmed by my experience at a Harvard conference -- that what really strikes at the heart of paradigm perceptions is the question of whether interest/riba is necessary and that is one of the key reason why the present article gives prominence to the central bank supply of interest-free loans.

It is actually good news that opponents are  outraged because it means that the essential message is striking home although it would be nice if more GJM people saw the significance of the fight and entered  what will, in the long run, be the winning side. (You  do it by going to the Wiki page on binary economcis, then Discussion, then Edit This Page and then, in the editing section, write at the bottom.  You then press Preview and then press Save.)

So I think the present Wiki article really does challenge paradigmatic perceptions (and so may not be immediately easy to understand) but it should stay because it is patently designed to be of appeal to all cultures and societies in a universal paradigm way.

At the same time, you have made an excellent point about the cesj article and so I am suggesting to cesj that there be a seperate Wiki page on cesj of which the Nutshell article would be a substantial part.  In this way, we get the traditional view of binary economics, and the universal paradigm view at the same time. Better still, both websites will support each other and you -- a Wiki expert -- know the importance of that.

Rodney Shakespeare

From: <radu at adrisgroup.com>
To: <discussion at globaljusticemovement.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 6:26 AM
Subject: Re: [GJM] Wikipedia article on binary economics. URGENT HELP NEEDED

> 
> Dear Rodney,
> I entered a comment on Wikipedia in support of Binary economics article. Still I
> think the Wikipedia article tries to cover to much and makes it harder for a new
> reader to grasp the basic concept. I made reference in my comment to the link
> http://www.cesj.org/binaryeconomics/be-inanutshell.htm which I think is a better
> introduction to Binary economics. Also, I would reconsider the way, the role of a
> Central Bank is incorporated in the article, because it seems to confuse readers
> about what Binary economics is.
> 
> Sincerely yours,
> Radu Seserman
> 
> "Be the change you want to see in the world." M. Gandhi
> "Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow." A. Einstein
> 
> Rodney Shakespeare <rodney.shakespeare1 at btinternet.com> wrote:
> 
>    Dear All,
>     
>    Once again, they are trying to destroy the Wikipedia article on binary
> economics which is very clear and spells out that binary ecnomics is a new
> paradigm which in very fundamental ways, is different from conventional
> economics.  The cunning trick, this time, is to say the present article must be
> merged with other articles.  Well, please read the article on binary economics
> and say it stands alone. There should be no merging because binary economics is a
> full, comprehensive economics, based on its own foundations.  It is independent.
>     
>    The suppressors also think that, even although they have not read any books
> about the subject, they know about it.  Another trick is to allege that binary
> economics is not notable. They have not even heard that there are, for example,
> 11,000 ESOPs  (Employee Share Ownership Plans) in the USA and many more in other
> parts of the world.  Please tell them.
>     
>    It would also be very helpful it you could write to say that  binary
> economics is central to the work of the global justice movement.
>     
>     
>    To help, please go to the Wiki page on binary economics and you will see this
> banner at the top. 
>     
>    It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into
> Participatory economics. (Discuss)
>     
>    Click on "Discuss"   (do NOT clickon 'Participatory economics').  This 
> brings you to the page headed "Participatory economics". 
>     
>     Click on "Edit this Discussion" and then go right to the bottom  of the
> editing section.  As you write, keep taking a copy so that if anything goes
> wrong, you can quickly put it back again.
>     
>     
>    HOWEVER, it is possible that by the time you receive this email, the
> discussion will have been moved back to where it should be -- you go to the
> Wikipedia binary economics page, click on Discussion, then on Edit This Page. 
> You write your  omment at the bottom of the page, then press Preview then press Save.
>     
>    Thankyou.
>     
>     
>    Rodney Shakespeare.
>     
>     
>     
>    _______________________________________________
>    Discussion mailing list
>    Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
>   
> http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
> http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20070820/e648655f/attachment.html 