Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!laura
From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Whither Are We Drifting? (Liking Working for McDonalds)
Message-ID: <4033@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Jul-84 05:09:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.4033
Posted: Fri Jul  6 05:09:32 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Jul-84 05:09:32 EDT
References: <1005@ihuxq.UUCP> <88700003@hpfclk.UUCP>, <2294@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 73

I used to work at Baskin Robbins. Of course I liked to -- or at least I
liked making the money enough to keep working there. I also wanted to
do other things, but I was not deluded into thinking that I did not
have to earn my right to do them. And at that point in time I had not
earned them. So I kept working there until I knew enough to get a job
as a computer saleman. Which was much better than Baskin Robbins, but
still not good enough -- so I went through more than 5 different types
of jobs before I ended up with ``Unix System Programmer'' which I 
have right now.

It is ludicrous, however, to think that I could or should have been
Unix System programmer while I was the same person that was ice cream
scooper. I simply wasn't qualified for the job. 

And the world is full of ``ice cream scooper'' types instead of
``system programmer'' types. And the system programmers make more money.
Now, either you believe that you should get paid for something other than
your worth, or you think that the unix system programmers are worth as
much as the ice cream scoopers or you accept that there will be disparities.

If you think that the unix system programmers are worth as much as the
ice cream scoopers then I have no idea how you expect people to strive to
improve themselves. If you accept that the more worthy should be making
more money than the less worthy, but don't like the disparities, then you
need some way of making the ice cream scoopers more worthy.

Unfortunately, you can't do that for somebody else. You may want to improve
your life, but if your neighbour does not want to then there is little that
you can do. And a lot of people want their life improved BY SOMEBODY ELSE,
but don't want to do any of that improving themselves. 

At that point, there is nothing that anybody can do. No movement of
social change is going to help the basic problem of people who want the
undeserved. It may be that better education of the young might help, but
I have no great hopes for that. BUT AS LONG AS PEOPLE GO AROUND PROMISING
THAT THEY WILL RESCUE OTHER PEOPLE LITTLE IS LIKELY TO HAPPEN. It is hard
work to work your way up from ice cream scooper to systems programmer. It
is a lot easier to take the programmer's salary away from him and give it
to 40 ice cream scoopers. and 1 programmer has one vote and 40 scoopers have
40...

When you look at a lot of political movements you find that many of them
have one charismatic leader and a lot of ``cannon fodder''. These are
people who take up space but don't really do much else. And the reason that
a lot of them join the movement is because they believe the slogans of the
leaders (historically ``make the rich pay!'' has been very popular) which
often promise them unearned wealth, or convince them that in some way they
have already earned the wealth that they desire.

So you get a large turnout, and get recognised as ``a bona-fide political
movement'' and frequently cause a revoltion. This, of course, influences
what other people will *call* a ``political movement''. Is the L5 society
a political movement? Do you need an economic platform to be a political
movement?  is Punk rock a political movement?

I was talking to a Marxist I know the other day, and he brought up
``how come there aren't any technical people involved in political
movements?'' As time wore on, I got him to admit that ``If it isn't
Marxst then it isn't a political movement''. So, his question was
``how come there aren't very many technical people who are also
Marxists?'' which is rather different from the way he phrased it the
first time. It also presumes its own answer: since anybody who is
not a Marxist is, by this definition `a decadent bourgeoisie' then
techies are  all decadent bourgeoisie. 

it is a little difficult to do anything with this argument.  ``But I
*LIKE* being a decadent bourgeoisie!'' just doesn't seem to cut it.

so: what are you willing to accept as a political movement? are you
willing to accept total apathy towards politics as a political movement?

Laura Creighton
utzoo!laura