RE: ply to Grant

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 04:34:17 GMT

  • Next message: Joe Dees: "Re: Why memeoids?"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA03495 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 18 Feb 2002 04:39:55 GMT
    Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:34:17 -0800
    Message-Id: <200202180434.g1I4YHP23539@mail9.bigmailbox.com>
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Content-Disposition: inline
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
    X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116)
    X-Originating-Ip: [65.80.163.167]
    From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: RE: ply to Grant
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)

    > "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com> memetics@mmu.ac.uk RE: ply to GrantDate: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:57:23 -0800
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >
    >> There's a difference between viewing social change critically, which
    >>is an essential requirement to properly evaluate change, and viewing it
    >>negatively (or positively for that matter). Besides, as a lecturer in
    >>media
    >>studies, for me to argue against social change involving technology would
    >>be
    >>a bit rich. Indeed, as my anti-media effects stance should indicate, I'm
    >>particularly pro-technologies that, IMHO, are socially progressive and not
    >>harmful as many people have thought (and still think) about all media
    >>forms.
    >>I, of couse, think the media collectively are a pretty good set of
    >>techologies.
    >>
    >> In many ways, I'd call myself a bit of a futurist looking forward to
    >>those changes, and this for me is the key, that are in the public interest.
    >>The facts though suggest that corporate control of key features of
    >>contemporary life, such as in transportation, involves the deliberate and
    >>continual denial of technologies (cleaner running cars for example) because
    >>such technologies would kill those corporations.
    >>
    >> In media too, the myth of the 'free marketplace of ideas' is widely
    >>demonstrable. Only today I've been reading bits of Richard McCord's 'The
    >>Chain Gang' about Gannett, the US's largest newspaper chain (over 90
    >>dailies
    >>across the US, and which also owns Newsquest in the UK, which controls 300
    >>local papers), and how the company aggressively attempted, sometimes
    >>successfully, to put rival papers out of business leaving communities with
    >>a
    >>'marketplace' of one paper.
    >>
    >> Of course capitalism is an ideology, and ideology is one for the
    >>memes in minds fraternity.
    >>
    >> Vincent
    >>
    >Memes are in competition with each other for survival. What makes them
    >survive is how useful they are to the people who use and propagate them.
    >They don't exist in a vacuum. They exist in the minds of people engageed in
    >living lives -- trying to survive in competition with each other. How
    >people spend their time is the key to how memes propagate and survive.
    >People who work and run companies are reading Sun Tze these days. He wrote
    >The Art of War.
    >
    They also never stopped reading Machiavelli's THE PRINCE.
    >
    > That is how most companies think of themselves (at least
    >the people who are leading them) at war with other companies in a zero-sum
    >game to win the whole market -- worldwide. This is what causes most of the
    >problems you talk about.
    >
    >Governments are competing for control of the land and companies are
    >competing for market share. But it doesn't have to be a zero-sum game.
    >Culture is not zero-sum. Cyberspace knows no boundaries. There is room for
    >infinite growth there. Unfortunately, the land we live on is finite. If
    >the population keeps expanding, there is no other game in town but the
    >zero-sum. And right now, we're on the edge of being too many for the land
    >we live on to support us.
    >
    >The question is who will live and who will die? Many people think the guy
    >with the most guns will win. Other people think it will be the people with
    >the best ideas. But as the population continues to grow, a lot of people
    >will have to die so the rest can survive. I don't see any way to save us
    >all. Two more doublings of the population will bring us all down. The
    >biosphere can barely tolerate the numbers it suffers under now.
    >
    >Grant
    >
    >_________________________________________________________________
    >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
    >
    >
    >===============================================================
    >This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    >Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    >For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    >see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
    http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
    Hundreds of choices. It's free!
    http://www.bigmailbox.com
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 18 2002 - 07:08:19 GMT