[Peace-discuss] Change We Didn't Expect?

[John W.]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:21 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at advancenet.net>wrote:

>  I am inclined to agree with you: but if it does produce a radical change,
> it think it will be for the worst and toward (1) decreasing civil liberties,
> (2) increasing racism,  anti- immigration, and anti- welfare for the
> traditional poor, (3) increased violence and intolerance, (4) increased
> protectionism and isolationism, etc. and not toward progressive or socialist
> goals and objectives.
>

Which would all be signs or symptoms of humans NOT learning anything
positive from their mistakes....




> *From:* John W. [mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, May 04, 2009 5:06 PM
> *To:* LAURIE SOLOMON
> *Cc:* peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Change We Didn't Expect?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:08 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at advancenet.net>
> wrote:
>
> An interesting and telling article.  It appears that the current economic
> downturn is good because it has brought change to the way of American Middle
> and upper class white collar lives, they are now forced to take time to
> smell the roses.  Unfortunately, they always could have taken time to smell
> the roses; it is just now they have no choice.  But unlike the poor, who
> have always been forced to have time to smell the roses but could not afford
> to smell the roses because their spending time working at their  jobs and
> their income was survival and not discretionary, have not really experienced
> any change for the good – or any change at all.  They were out of work in
> the good times and they are out of work now.  If they did get work, it was
> low pay, dead end, and often part-time temporary work which forced them to
> use any down time searching for their next paycheck or way of surviving; and
> things are no different now.
>
> A key difference as I see it is that the poor are accustomed to that life
> style and have learned to adapt to it for better or worse; the downward
> mobile middle class and working class folks who are not accustomed to a life
> with no work or income available have not learned to adapt to it and how to
> survive without either quilt or remorse about the way things use to be and
> how they should continue to be, how they were deprived and now entitled to
> assistance and relief, etc.  They now feel the need to justify their current
> economic and social situation by telling us how it is a blessing that they
> now have time to take it easy, smell the roses, enjoy life – albeit on a
> more limited budget and scale than previously.  Ironically, despite the
> increasing number  unemployed, underemployed, homeless, and anxious people,
> most of those who have had to change their life style have had the resources
> and supports available to them to make the change in life style and even
> find some good in it.  This is and has not been the case for the poor, who
> never had those resources and supports available to them but somehow managed
> to survive despite that and are not given any free time to smell the roses
> due to the economic downturn.
>
> The real questions are:  When the conditions do not change and the
> resources and supports disappear, will the middle and working classes as
> well as the upper class executives and white collar workers be able to cope
> and adapt when they no longer have discretionary free time to smell the
> roses but have to engage in a daily hand to mouth existence?  Should such a
> time come about, will that produce any radical significant long lasting
> transformations and changes not only in life styles but in the very
> structure and operation of society?
>
>
> The answer to the latter question is "no".
>
>
>
>  *Florentin Collomp | Change We Didn't Expect? *
> http://www.truthout.org/050409E?n
> Writing for Le Figaro, Florentin Collomp considers "The New American Way of
> Life in the Obama Era," while Alain Dubuc writes for Quebec's La Presse:
> "Ever since this crisis started, people have often wondered whether it would
> change anything. Whether, beyond its obvious economic impact, the shock
> would be sufficient to provoke lasting transformations in our societies, to
> result in our learning from our own mistakes."
>
>
> And the answer to M. Dubec's implied question is an emphatic "no".
> Remember, you heard it here first.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090504/b64d5ef6/attachment.html