This one is kind of fun. We take a historical figure, place a controversial title or descriptive word, that has existed about him for a long period of time and explore the meanings.
It’s a pretty posting. However, my knowledge of Indian culture is not strong enough to know if the interpretations are correct. But it has the kind of analysis that suggests sincerity.
I would like some feed back. I have to figure out about India. I think there is something important here.
James Pilant
To use or not to use nuclear power? This article focuses on Malaysia but the issues are the same everywhere on our planet.
Costs, safety, and most important, trust, are the primary elements. That trust is on the list might surprise you. But I can’t help but feel the soothing hand of corporate PR every time I read some right-wing blog’s assurances that the amount of radiation is inconsequential and the constant, continuous claims that the technology is better now. Didn’t they say that after Chernobyl? Didn’t they say that after Three Mile Island, etc? It’s one of the classics, reassuringly pointless.
I am tired of PR. If the nuclear industry had ever been in anyway honest over the last fifty years I would feel differently but there is no trust here and without trust there can be no agreement.
This posting is an intelligent analysis and I enjoyed it.
James Pilant
Thinking allowed! Wow, I’d like to see more of this.
This essay is entirely correct. We are in the middle of a new age and those that wave the flag while endlessly repeating the failed answers of a disastrous last fifty years are simply out of touch. We are going to have to change and pretense doesn’t cut it.
It’s time to go to the next step. What are the paradigms? Let’s state what the basic principles are going to look like from the worm’s eye view.
As a member of the intelligentsia, I get the new paradigm thing. Around here, paradigms come and go like falling leaves.
Whether I understand them or not is not that important. How can they be stated in a way that is persuasive to a new generation? How can they be stated in such a way that those clinging to the nonsense of the past will realize they have to move on?
Read the essay. I’m sure we will see more from this blog.
James Pilant
via Zielona Grzybnia
Business Ethics is a subject deeply concerned with a variety of moral approaches to problems. Often dogmatic simple solutions are not effective all the time. The United States is said to be one of the countries in which the free market is enshrined as a “successful” doctrine. Successful it may well be in some contexts but one size does not fit all and there are problems resistant to the free market.
Last year, nearly 50 million American had trouble getting enough to eat. The Washington Post then says that one in four children in America is part of this group. That’s right, the richest nation on earth, richer beyond the ambition of countless empires of history can’t feed its population. This nation has 269 billionaires. Yet, 1/6 of the population has problems getting enough to eat. More than 35 million Americans get food stamps. More than thirty million children get government subsidized school lunches.
We can do better than this. We have a responsibility to make sure every American gets enough to eat. Yes, that includes the homeless and the “unworthy.” It might be said that if we encourage people to succeed in the free market they will solve their hunger problems through hard work and ambition. It has long been an ambition of mine to see new born babes fight their way into important corporate positions. I want to see eight and nine year olds compete with adults in a difficult job market. That will make them tough.
Well, don’t worry about them, the free market cures all. We just have to give it time.
If human dignity is not to have enough to eat.
So how should one respond to issues such as severe poverty, hunger, and healthcare? I would suggest that it comes down to education, education, and more education. An individual must educate him or herself first and then educate others. Ayn Rand’s philosophy holds that historical trends are the inescapable product of philosophy. Fighting for the victory of ideas can defeat widely held ideologies that threaten liberty, private property rights, economic and individual freedom. From the BLOG, Free Market Physician
If we educate people, they won’t be hungry. (Damn those children. They just won’t get a college education until they get older. Apparently they lack ambition.)
All of us are the inheritors of this freeing of the market and the resulting technological revolution. The automobiles people drive, the televisions they watch, the movies they see, the cell phones they answer, the planes they fly, and — exemplified by Microsoft — the computers they use, all owe their development and availability to the free market. At a more basic level, we can best see the operation of the free market in the availability of an amazing variety of cheap foods for the poor and lower middle class. An American supermarket is a cornucopia of agricultural wealth, with choices of fruits, vegetables, meats, cereals, breads, wines, and so on from many areas of the United States and countries of the world. Similarly, department and hardware stores shelve, hang, and display a wide variety of goods. To see the results of freedom, you need only shop in any of democracy’s stores. On The Incredible Utopia That is the Free Market, R.J. Rummel
There isn’t any hunger. We live in Utopia. Isn’t it wonderful?
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 