--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:08:59 -0400
To: •••@••.•••
From: Rosa Zubizarreta
Subject: Re: GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION: Harmonization in the microcosm
Richard, congratulations....this is absolutely
BRILLIANT...clear, well-articulated, VERY helpful tool for
outreach and educational purposes...
i am DELIGHTED to see your powerful analytical and
communication skills being applied so skillfully to this
subject, which we we both hold as one of the most crucial
areas of need for our well-being as a species... good meetings
can indeed change the world! :-)
with all best wishes,
Rosa
-------
Dear Rosa,
Thanks Rosa, I especially value your opinion on this material.
You've been my tutor on harmonization and I'm glad you find
the presentation effective.
best regards,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:40:44 +0530 (India Standard Time)
From: J Krishnayya
Subject: Re: GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION: Harmonization in the microcosm
To: •••@••.•••
dear "Cj"
What a marvellous introduction to "Harmonisation". Obviously
OB people and meeting "facilitators" have always known this,
but Richard Moore has presented it very limpidly. Thank you!
I am really looking forward to the next chapter!
Sincerely,
J G Krishnayya
Executive Director,
Systems Research Institute
•••@••.•••
•••@••.•••
------------------
Dear JG,
Thanks for your comments. Looking forward to your response to
the subsequent chapters.
cheers,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:31:40 -0700
To: •••@••.•••
From: Tom Atlee <•••@••.•••>
Subject: DF article in meditation mount journal
Your article on got reprinted in an online journal that has a
number of major new age politics people involved with it
(notably CII Assoicates Corrinne McLaughlin and Gordon
Davidson).
http://www.meditation.com/newsletter/columns.htm
---------------------------
Dear Tom,
Many thanks for republishing the harmonization material on
your co-intelligence list. I hope you remember next time to
include my email address and website! I like people to be
able to send me comments. The online journal is very nicely
put together. My sun sign is Virgo, and the journal says:
The Meditation Theme for Virgo is: What is our share of the
building of a new society? What is our task?
keep on truckin',
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: Tony O'Reilly
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION:
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:23:47 +0100
Hi Richard,
I loved the latest chapter ... it is inspiring.
Only a few chapters left!!! Go for it!
I think the book is parcelling up so much of your hard work of
the last decade. It's so enjoyable and almost moving to see
that.
I can't encourage you enough to rock on and get to THE END....
All the best from Cork,
Tony
-------
Tony,
Thanks for your ongoing encouragement!
warm regards,
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
From: Diana
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:46:21 EDT
Subject: Re: GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION: Harmonization as a cultural movement
To: •••@••.•••
Dear Richard,
It is encouraging to read your words today. Are you really in
Ireland? I write from a suburb of Chicago, IL.
For people in the United States, there is a legal step I think
is necessary to undo a terrible mistake which happened in
1886. If you are interested in reading, the book Unequal
Protection (the Theft of Human Rights) by Thom Hartmann (2002)
explains in excruciating detail how corporations illegally
were granted personhood and the protections of the US
Constitution's 14th Amendment (equal protection under the law
designed for former slaves). Artificial personhood granted to
corporations, which never die, has allowed them to procure
enormous wealth and power; to this point they own the US
political landscape.
If the US citizens would band together and sue, in a
class-action lawsuit, to declare personhood to natural living
persons as originally provided, expanding personhood also to
homosexual persons and women, in my view would be thrilling
for me personally to behold.
Regards,
Diana
---------
Dear Diana,
I know what you mean about corporate personhood. It's a pillar
of corporate power--and if we could knock down that pillar,
perhaps corporate power would come tumbling down with it.
However, there are three major problems with this line of
thinking. The first is that it confuses cause with effect.
Corporations already owned the political landscape in 1886,
and that is why Southern Pacific was able to get the Supreme
Court to endorse personhood--a Constitutional betrayal similar
to the Supreme Court giving the presidency to GW Bush. If we
want to uproot corporate power, we must look back much further
than 1886 in order to find the roots.
The second problem with the line of thinking is that it does
not make sense from a systems perspective. Our economic system
depends on corporate growth in order to operate, and the
system cannot be repaired by stifling growth. You cannot
expect a car to transport you if you refuse to put fuel in it.
If we want to get rid of automobile blight, then we need to
create a whole new context of transport. If we want to get rid
of the evils of our economic system, then we need to create a
whole new economics. Sabotaging capitalism does not help us
get there.
The third problem with the line of thinking is that it
underestimates the difficulty of the task. Because corporate
personhood sounds like a 'single issue', you are thinking that
it might be feasible for a popular movement (via lawsuit) to
successfully engage that issue. The fact is however, that the
regime would resist such an 'isolated' reform with the same
energy they would deploy against an assault on capitalism
itself. They understand the importance of that pillar as well
as we do.
Neoliberalism, and the Reagan Revolution, can be summed up in
the phrase, "No more reforms!". Indeed, part of the Orwellian
neoliberal project has been to redefine 'reform' to mean the
undoing of reforms. If we want to make any changes at all in
the system, then we can only do so by changing the system
entirely. There is no smaller useful objective that would be
any easier to achieve. As a matter of fact, there is no smaller
useful objective.
best regards,
rkm
http://cyberjournal.org
--------------------------------------------------------
Share: