[Buddha-l] Re: Buddhist pacifism

[curt]

As an anarcho-communist I'm inclined to say that spontaneously and 
volutarily organized communities can exist in a way that not only 
doesn't tred on individuals - but that offer human beings the only real 
chance we have to fully realize our individuality. Such an organization 
is not based primarily on "agreement" but rather on "affinity". People 
who want to be together will figure a way to  make it work - or else 
they'll f*ck it up. But I do not believe that failure is inevitable in 
such a venture, and even if it is, anarchists are known for spouting 
phrases like "demand the impossible". After all, just because something 
has never happened before - why conclude that it is impossible? 
Agreement is always a bad way of starting anything, anyway.

- Curt

Benito Carral wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 12, 2005, Curt wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I  think  that  no philosophy can exist separate from
>>ethics  -  and  I  think  that  ethics  must  be both
>>personal and social.
>>    
>>
>
>   I  don't  know what you mean by "ethics must be both
>personal  and  social,"  but,  as  a neopragmatist, I'm
>inclined  to  ask,  "What could be the basis for social
>ethics? Is it possible that every individual in a group
>agree with such a basis?"
>
>   Best wishes,
>
>   Beni
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>buddha-l mailing list
>buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
>http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>
>
>  
>