: That isnt supported by studies of businesses and 'self made millionaires', including your own Times 1000. Even in post fuedal Britain over 700 of the millionaires are those who started with the average resource levels. Big business is suffering from overstretching and tightening margins (i think you even pointed this out). Small holder 'capitalists' are all around you, still and new 'big' businesses are still emerging.Indeed, but they are no longer the earth shattering social-recreating force they once were, its just a rotation of personel. Also, a lot of those new millionaires are in developing technologies, or communications, etc. (More than a few pop stars in that list). For most, the sensible advancement is through the dominant established firms- the ones that have the most impact in the market.
The stagnancy can be seen in the rediculous over-valuation of internet firms atm, on teh stock markets- when that comes crashing down there'll be hell to pay, specifically as reports of a serious decline in profits for the blue chip firms over the last few years are filtering through, we could be in for a rough time of it...
: The socialisation of humans does not mean the social control of some humans by other humans. This is the crux of the matter.
Indeed, and I don't advocate such, you may have noticed me using the word 'co-operative' a few times du temp au temps...
: It is not an impossibility, nor does it conflict with many humans as society. The 'totality' exists because individuals are its construction. The specific nature of man is that man is an independant being (not in biological symbiosis with others) and that no man can know the mind of another.
But you're not indepednant, you don't stop at your body, other's water and air passes through you, you are in virus to virus contact with the people around you, perhaps even in our modern world, with me, your body is not a limit, and likewise, neither is your mind. You get your values from the world around you, you know yourself through your relations to others, ONLY.
: To lay claim to others on such a precarious lack of knowledge and interdependance seems a most dangerous route. To express interaction via a free association of choice reflects the above more accuratley. You see, I dont support what I support in the hope of having a load of money, but because I think its the best way for humans to exist as humans.
But I don't think free association can ocur with private property, and with economic competition.
