[GJM] New Topic: Justice is Mercy - Mercy is Justice

[Richard D. Foley]

From:  Richard D. Foley <rerailer at earthlink.net>

Ref:  Working with Banks and Corporations to Achieve a High Degree of  
Global Justice & Steve Consilvio @ www.behappyandfree.com

Request:
(1)    That this shifted to a new topic - suggest "Justice is Mercy & 
Mercy is Justice"
(2)   Invitation to Consilvio to participate in COG by Norm Kurland

Dear All:

I thank all responsible for bringing Steve Consilvio into participation 
and contribution of his ideas.  I find him to be extraordinarily 
refreshing, uniquely refreshing, and a genuinely new synthesis.  I thank 
God for this gift.

His ideas are deserving of analysis and deep consideration.  I have 
visited his web site and read a portion of his writings.  I will read 
all of them and study them.  On completion, I shall post my comments.  
However, I strongly recommend to all participants that they make a 
similar effort.

I do understand that my suggested topic title may cause slippage in the 
cogs of some mental machinery, so I will add the following as 
lubrication:  Mercy is  receiving that which we don't deserve - Grace is 
not receiving that which we do deserve - Justice is has more than two faces.

I urge all to take the link to www.behappyandfree.com

Respectfully,

Richard D. Foley
Chairman, The Ownership Union®

Steve Consilvio wrote:

>
> On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:39 PM, 
> discussion-request at globaljusticemovement.net 
> <mailto:discussion-request at globaljusticemovement.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear Steve Consilvio,
>>
>>
>>                Thank you for your critique. I will
>>
>> try, and explain in listed form how TFE counters your
>>
>> basic comments.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Yes, the ideas of TFE appear to be contradictory.
>>
>> They only make sense when you see the whole picture. 
>>
>>
>>
>
> Perhaps they are actually contradictory? Doublethink is pretty common. 
> I have had to work hard to root it out of my thinking, and inevitably 
> it still exists somewhere, but I am pretty sure that your "whole 
> picture" is not as unique as you think it is.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. It is unlikely that a high moral stance for
>>
>> interest free monetary reform will work as an actual
>>
>> campaign because:-
>>
>>
>>
>> i) The present capitalist system is too powerful
>>
>> especially in connection with banks.
>>
>
> I do not know of a single incidence in history where reform of 
> anything occurred because of the intellectual merits of the new idea. 
> Change is preceded by the weight of a self-created crisis. If true, 
> your reform is as doomed to failure as my reform at a time of 
> complacency. However, at a time of crisis my ideas may actually 
> improve things, rather than simply reconstruct the same house of cards.
>
> I think a valid parallel is the Bill of Rights which was created by 
> the efforts of wise people of colonial times after the stupid people 
> were finally done killing each other and reconsolidating power. My 
> "Contract for Mutual Responsibility" does in the economic sphere what 
> the Bill of Rights does in the political sphere. Iw rote it a few 
> years ago, and my ideas have evolved since then, but the basic 
> framework is still valid. A system of competition is doomed to 
> failure, what we need is a system of cooperation.
>
>>
>>
>> ii) It is unlikely that enough public susport could be
>>
>> mustered to achieve real change especially in the rich
>>
>> countries like Britain, and USA. However, in Latin
>>
>> America (eg. Hugo Chavez)there has been a big swing to
>>
>> the left. The reason in part is due to the huge amount
>>
>> poverty. This gives people a greater incentive to
>>
>> achieve change via "revolutionary" means......
>>
>
> Chavez is a moron, like Washington is a moron. His lust for power 
> comes first. He creates demons so he can claim to protect people, and 
> uses fear as his calling card.
>
> I don't think you actually have a theory of poverty and wealth, only a 
> belief that the rich have somehow done something that is "unfair." In 
> fact, the system is rigged this way. Somebody has to win and somebody 
> has to lose when the economy is structured as a competition. The same 
> is true of politics. Elections are actually destroying democracy 
> because they are based on competition and not on finding solutions to 
> problems. Now we see elections (counting votes) as the problem, and 
> this was after making sure everybody could vote, which has similarly 
> yielded no practical effect. Why? Because an economic problem needs an 
> economic solution. You cannot solve what is essentially a mathematical 
> problem with a popularity contest.
>
>>
>>
>> iii)The pace of financial (ie TFE) change could be
>>
>> alot easier, and QUICKER if we work with banks, and
>>
>> corporations for a sustainable future. By legally
>>
>> "bribing" the latter safe,cleaner, and environmentally
>>
>> friendly products, and services could be mass produced
>>
>> with mainly renewable resources. Profits could be
>>
>> hugely subsidized with new unearned money from the
>>
>> Central Banks of the rich world. Likewise the wages of
>>
>> Third World workers could also be heavily subsidized
>>
>> along with other relevant matters.
>>
>>
>
> Of course we need to work with banks, the question is what do we 
> expect the banks, borrowers and depositors to do? Everybody needs to 
> change their expectations and their behavior, not just the banks. The 
> banks are just a middleman, and are essentially a franchise of the 
> Federal Reserve. They have a lot less power than you realize.
>
>>
>> iv)A moral campaign for monetary reform would take too
>>
>> long, and probably require much funding to have any
>>
>> affect. Most important of all the world, and humanity
>>
>> may NOT have enough time. So, moral issues such as
>>
>> fairer distribution, utopian socialism, et al MUST be
>>
>> put on the backburner for the time being. What matters
>>
>> is NOW, and the present corrupt system, and how best
>>
>> to modify it into something better.
>>
>
> Funding is not an issue at all, it is behaviors and expectations that 
> need to change. The marketplace theory that runs the world is false. A 
> government decree isn't going to change what people believe, just as I 
> couldn't pass a law telling you what to believe. Before laws can 
> change beliefs must change; this is true for any law.
>
> The system actually isn't corrupt. It works perfectly at amplifying 
> errors. Just because a system is flawed does not mean it is corrupt. 
> Just as you are sincere in your belief (though I think you are 
> mistaken,) others are equally sincere in their mistakes. And that is 
> without introducing the elements of fear and pride, which dramatically 
> alter people's views of reality.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 3) TFE can be seen as a "TRANSITIONAL" system. It is
>>
>> not the be-all, and end-all of economics. When in
>>
>> place NGOs concerned with advanced, and fairer
>>
>> social,economic, and political thinking would be
>>
>> better funded as never before. Thus, they would have a
>>
>> more powerful influence on public opinion.If they can
>>
>> convince the masses, and governments to change from a
>>
>> "...predatory-prey system.." then that is all fine,
>>
>> and good.
>>
>
> A transitional approach is a good idea, but "bribing" people is what 
> is going on now. That is not transitional at all, nor does it require 
> any change in thinking or behavior. What differs, I think, is simply 
> who pays the bribe, and if the funds are given with expectations 
> rather than taken outright. Either way, it reinforces the love of 
> money and does nothing to expose the absurdity of money as a commodity.
>
> 501c3's and NGO's are destroying the world, not helping it. Their 
> privileges and hoards of wealth are created by taxing the poor. If you 
> ever needed a perfect example of hypocrisy and doublethink, then look 
> no further. The fact that you champion their fiction is a sign that 
> you don't "get it."
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 4) You are right in saying that money is just an
>>
>> "...intellectual agreement..." but it carries great
>>
>> legal authority. In the future, I believe it will no
>>
>> longer be necessary, and neither will profits. You may
>>
>> like to read the ideas of Jacque Fresco concerned with
>>
>> a Resource Based Economy.
>>
>>
>> However, the problem is trying to get from stage A to
>>
>> stage B. To try, and introduce advanced
>>
>> economic/social thinking (involving fairer wealth
>>
>> distribution, and total universal cooperation as
>>
>> opposed to cut-throat competition) for a possible
>>
>> PRACTICAL REALITY NOW is clearly absurd by most people
>>
>> standards. We need something that acts as a "bridge"
>>
>> to the future. 
>>
>
> You didn't answer my points about using the wealth of the "reformers" 
> (unions, etc.) The banks are not holding their own money, it is the 
> money of depositors. Depositors can change their expectations of banks 
> without bribing them. In fact, you have it backwards. The bank has to 
> bribe depositors by paying them interest on their deposits. The Stock 
> Market is even worse, since owning stocks is the same as making a loan 
> to a corporation, but a corporation can never get free of its debt to 
> stockholders. Corporations are a victim, too, which is why they try to 
> shift the mathematical burden to employees, vendors and customers. 
> (All three of which, bizarrely, own stocks in corporations.) It is 
> imperative to recognize that we are victims of ourselves.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 5) It must be forever remembered that in the evolving
>>
>> TFE paradigm people will have greater chances of
>>
>> lifting themselves out of "poverty." This could
>>
>> notably come about with an increase in business
>>
>> grants, and ofcourse interest free loans. 
>>
>
> You forget the nature of the ladder. The rich fall and the poor rise 
> perpetually, as long as you perform the actions that the system 
> demands. The cost shifting and profit-taking never ends, unless you 
> challenge the fundamental assumptions of the system, which you are not 
> doing.
>
> Peace,
> Steve
> www.behappyandfree.com
>
> A quick read of the Contract for Mutual Responsibility is here (It is 
> my old front page) :  
> http://www.behappyandfree.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=77&Itemid=40 
> <http://www.behappyandfree.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=77&Itemid=40>
> If made King tomorrow, I would probably alter these ideas slightly, 
> but there is nothing there that is particularly alien to any voter. 
> They are actually small changes, but the impact would be huge over 
> time, just as the Bill of Rights has proven to be.
>
> Again, it is not a system of justice that is needed but a system of 
> mercy. Of course, the mirror is a treacherous place, and everybody is 
> unwilling to admit they they have believed a lie their whole life. 
> Yet, that is exactly what is required. Chains do not hold us; we hold 
> onto the chains.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discussion mailing list
>Discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
>http://globaljusticemovement.net/mailman/listinfo/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20070223/3b45745b/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rerailer.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 377 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20070223/3b45745b/attachment-0001.vcf