Thanks Michel and Kevin,
perhaps I felt like finding out how to handle such kind of challenging situation,
not only one a one to one basis conversation as when hitch hiking,
but between larger frameworks of people finding overlapping fields of interest ( whether or not there is an agreement on the approach ).
How much depends on communication ?
What is it like "on some other side" ?
I realize that different approaches of some kind of political spectrum seem to use very similar approaches. How much is played on "fear" ? How much is played on "blaming" ? On victimizing ?
What happens where there is increased understanding ?
What happens when there is increased "empathy", or even when there is a potential for mutual respect ?
What happens when feelings on both sides are listened to ?
Or even in the case of not specifically trying reconciliation, how to use the game the other is playing in a way that goes in the direction of the , at first, potentially opposed approach ?
Is there a non-violent possible approach, even if the other party may not be intentionally developing a non-violent approach to communication ?
And how much does public image play on this ?
"The Yes Men" approach seems interesting...
yet did not fully go into depth in understanding its effects. Increased resistance ? Or greater communication ? More public awareness ?
And for whom ? Is it possible to talk to the audience of some , at first, apparently opposing approach ? Is it possible to use their discourse as to lead and open a multi-perspectival approach ?
So it was about checking if any of us has some experience in this ... ?
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Kevin Carson
<free.market.anticapitalist@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has any one of you experience in dialog between syndicalist and libertarian
> lobbies ?
> I noticed, in the documentary "Marx Reloaded" @ 5 min 29,
> that Eamonn Butler, one of the founders of the "Adam Smith Institute" think
> thank, based in London,
> to my understanding, seems to say that "Government" has control on money,
> while not noticing him mention that, as I understand it, it is the Central (
> private ) Bank that has control on the monetary monopoly.
The ASI, so far as I can tell, is a dead end. Among right-leaning
libertarian think tanks, it's one of the most dumbed down -- just
warmed over Reaganism/Thatcherism. They're much closer to a British
counterpart of Heritage or AEI than to Cato.
--
Kevin Carson
Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism
http://mutualist.blogspot.com
The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto
http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com
Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html