Re: [WDDM] Re: Giorgio

[Giorgio Menon <giorgio.menon(at)pd.infn.it>]

Antonio Rossin wrote:

> Dear S'ace,
>
> please make your last position clearer.
>
> If you agreed with me, who wants "the authority" to be questioned
> in principle from  family communication patterning on, you cannot
> agree with most of the arguments of Giorgio, who wants the same
> authority -- that is the upper terminal of any "top-down" hierarchic
> communication relationship -- to be never questioned, in principle.
>
> Bests,
>
> antonio


Who "wants the same authority -- that is the upper terminal of any
"top-down" hierarchic communication relationship -- to be never
questioned"?
You have completely failed to understand my message. Since we're both
Italian i can translate it into our mother tongue, to avoid further
misunderstandings.

Giorgio


> At 10:29 +0100 15-11-2006, S'ace orange wrote:
>
> > *thanks giorgio,*
> > *i agree most of your arguments ...*
> >
> > *let us/me dismiss the quest.*
> >
> > *s'ace*
> >
> > /*"we inform presence, remember authentic self, formulate practise,
> > express us"*/
> > /*& struggle on&offwards breathing d'emos*/
> >
> > *----- Original Message -----*
> > *From: Giorgio Menon*
> > *To: <wddm@world-wide-democracy.net>*
> > *Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 5:38 PM*
> > *Subject: Re: [WDDM] ReQuest for Defining "a bottom-up origin"*
> > *
> > *
> > *> S'ace orange wrote:
> > > > *dear members,*
> > > > *a profound comment of our fellow contributor antonio*
> > > > *calls for a reply or even more a collaborative process with the
> > > > outcome of a definition*
> > > > *for what **"a bottom-up origin" actually is ...*
> > > > **
> > >
> > > Bottom-up or top-down is a way to declare a society divided into casts,
> > > where uppers casts rule, while lower casts work and generate the
> > > nation's GDP.
> > > So no matter how bottom-up a decision is made, sooner or later the
> > > top-down hierarchy will chage it to make it work for their own
> > purposes.
> > > We should talk about their purposes then. I'm not an expert but i think
> > > the US constitution is a good enough example to show how the best
> > > intentions can become the worst nightmare in a stratified society. This
> > > latter lacks the mechanism that guarantees equal opportunities: elites
> > > will never leave any room to significant social shifts.
> > > Yet this is partly true: people are in charge of the destiny of the
> > > society and culture they belong to. So anytime is the right time to
> > > change, if this is what is sought. History shows that the right moment
> > > lasts just seconds, alas, swollowed as it is by the self referential
> > > mechanisms of social stratification. No matter if democrats or
> > > republicans, if tories or laburists: top casts MUST be functional
> > to the
> > > system which is essentially exploitation of the workers and huge
> > > benefits for the upper casts. Yes, there may be slight differences in
> > > the treatment of social inequalities but these must remain such, or the
> > > whole society collapses.
> > > So either top-down or bottom-up, we're talking about minimal
> > differences
> > > in the general footprint.
> > > Besides history has shown that top-down decisions have been an
> > excellent
> > > solution at times: see the successful decisions to protect the Japanese
> > > environment by top-down command.
> > >
> > > Bottom line: bottom-up guarantees just nothing; there's a plethora of
> > > other factors to consider.
> > >
> > > Just my 2c, of course
> > >
> > > Giorgio