Re: OWNERSHIP: Jock's progressive economic ideas

[Jock Coats <jock.coats@oxfordshirecommunitylandtrusts.org.uk>]

In the eternal conflict between discretion and valour, a little voice tells me my dignity will be better maintained by taking no further part in this discussion.

I'm sure the work we both do in our respective ways on monetary and economic justice has much in common (which makes your tirade all the more galling) and would gain from cross fertilization of ideas the way you write below is not the sort of sharing I am going to get involved in.  If you wish to give me a dressing down for something you *think* I said (I made no "nasty snide remarks" for example - and your assumption that it was says more about you than about me) please do so off list and spare everyone else yet another round of exactly the atmosphere I was lamenting on this list (which I tried to do without naming of blaming *anyone* in particular).

Thanks,

Jock

On 13 Jul 2005, at 02:29, Rodney Shakespeare wrote:

Dear Jock,
You are obviously unaware of what started all this off, namely, a series of spiteful attacks by Ryan including serious libel against Michael Greaney.  Ryan has continued his attacks and demands the right to have his libels stay in the archives while he repeats the libels elsewhere (e.g. to his own elist) and then deletes any attempt to rebut them. 
 
You, presumably, like Alan Avans, think that is fair and so do not understand why I have tried to get (or be) a moderator.  Another big reason is stop all the irrelevance -- Ryan is the worst culprit, but you may not have noticed and so do do not understand that virtually all of Ryan's emails are irrelevant and he has destroyed the main purpose of this list with his continual, and often spiteful, irrelevance.  The lsit subject is capital ownership and not continual repetitions of A + B.  So please do  not try lecturing me when you, very late in the day, come across me trying to do something about the situation.
 
      I note that you could not be bothered to offer yourself as moderator while I did so.  For your information, I am away from my home on average about 60 hours per week, and now, on top of that, have work which takes me abroad (Wednesday mornings was my only free time, including week-ends, and now even Wednesday morning has gone).  In short, I work longer hours than you and at a guess earn less, thankyou., and if you knew what proportion of my income goes to others in various ways, you would be amazed.  So, in future try to avoid your nasty snide remarks about "Some of us have jobs to do."
 
        You have also failed to understand what I am saying about the endogenous (as defined) movement.  To put it bluntly, it is not being understood anywhere in the West (although there is a good chance of  it being the main issue in a 2006 conference in one of the USA's great universities).  To be frank, there is no evidence so far that anybody on this elist is interested.  Adn what is now becoming a major international movement can hardly bd described -- as you so sweetly put it -- a "pet project".
 
    But if you are interested, I will now tell you  where the key moves will next be made and where you can gain access -- there is much going on between now and December but you cannot get access but next open access is in December, in Dacca, at the Universal Paradigm conference where, believe you me, you have to integrate your ideas with those coming from some really hard intellectual tough-nuts.    Just putting ideas forth to Ownership is easy -- you want to try doing it on the international scene.  That will sort you out.  To take but one example, at one conference I had what was in effect a death threat if I should ever be perceived as advocating debt-free money (they would eat Ryan and  his version of  social creditf or breakfast) and, at a recent conference, there were guards at the conference plus a contraption against   car bombers and an armed guard at the hotel and I was closely escorted for every single part of the whole conference.  I hope you now understand the point I am making -- all the serious action is taking place away from this elist and similar.  I offered this elist the chance to find out more on condition that they did some basic reading and that there was an indication that people wanted the subject discussed.  But nobody, nobody so indicated becasue they are only interested in their own navels and not in the developments going on in the wider world.  And that is also true of the UK. 
 
BUT, if you want to, and you can do an Abstract within the next two weeks, I will try to forward  the Call for Papers (I will do my best, but all my Inbox content has been destroyed) and will make representation in the appropriate quarter for the late submission.  You can attend the conference even if not presenting a paper.  You will have to pay your own air fare to Dacca but you are on a salary because you said "Some of us have jobs" didn't you?.
 
Rodney Shakespeare.
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Jock Coats
To: ownership@cog.kent.edu
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: OWNERSHIP: Jock's progressive economic ideas

Well, well. I'm not sure I targeted anyone in particular. But this sort of riposte seems to be a pattern on here.

I'll tell you why. When I saw the phrase and read the first couple of posts, the discussion once again degenerated into a bitch fight. So I switched off.

I'm sorry, I've maybe missed an opportunity. But in my experience it helps to attract new listeners by maintaining some dignity. I do not "blame" you, or anyone else in particular. I cannot even remember the substance of the bitch fight or who may have been involved. Although watching the past few days I could make some fairly reasonable guesses I suspect. And I fear I am not ready to take economic lessons from someone who so quickly resorts, however provoked he may think he is or actually is, to intemperance.

An object lesson in how to lose potential friends and disciples. I shall now likely be much more suspicious of messages from folk like Peter Challen here in London by association. Is that what you want? Seems a very odd way to go about changing the world if you ask me.

As it happens I am working on a few things. But if you think I'm going to share them on this list to be the object of the sort of ire and rudeness I've witnessed recently you need to think again.

I admire people of conviction, don't get me wrong, but the arrogance to question why I haven't read up on your particular pet projects just because I just happen to lament the behaviour of some who are actively putting people off is astounding, and I am sure I share view this with many of the quieter lurkers on here. Some of us have jobs to do as well.

No wonder we all don't want to be more active participants and sharers on here!

On 13 Jul 2005, at 00:17, Rodney Shakespeare wrote:

Dear All,
    Jock Coates wrote that he joined Ownership in order to read and learn interesting things about progressive economic ideas.  Good.
 
    However, I would be fascinated to know why Jock did not avail himself of the offer to learn more about the endogenous (as defined) loan movement now making excellent progress in universities (with much more progress to come).  In short, the movement is about an interest-free money supply -- interest-free loans for public capital projects, wide private ownership, small/start-up businesses and green capital projects.  It goes much wider than the capital ownership as usually discussed on the Ownership elist and, among other things, creates a basic income and gives back control of an economy to the society it is within (as opposed to having the society being ripped off by outsiders).
 
    Yet Jock showed no overt interest in the biggest capital ownership movement to date,  even when he was advised on the easily accessible sources at present on the internet.  Why?
 
    And exactly what does Jock mean by "progressive economic ideas"?  Presumably, if he does not avail himself of opportunity given on this elist, he has some ideas of his own to put forward.  Let's see them.
 
Rodney Shakespeare.
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Jock Coats
To: ownership@cog.kent.edu
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: OWNERSHIP: Ownership Moderator

Can anyone please give us any good reason why any of us ought to stay around on this list, which most of us, I suspect, joined in order to read and learn interesting things about progressive economic ideas?

Or are there really only half a dozen of us on this list who do not stoop to this sort of thing.

This is CLASSIC "off-list" type stuff - moderator or no, common courtesy says take this to one side and don't disturb others with it. As are most of the rantings that have been flying around of late. It is wholly unedifying. I cannot imagine anyone "dabbling" in these progressive ideas coming along here and wanting to stick around more than five minutes.

Congratulations one and all who have made this a thoroughly nasty place to "hang out". I thought, and still perhaps dare to hope, that I had found a fantastic resource on all sorts of interesting issues, and a well stocked electronic library as well. To Dan & Co - the current troubles on this list are, I would think, diminishing the name of KSU and your great group. If it were me, I'd have found an alternative host for these squabbles ages ago and washed my hands.

We have 99% of the rest of the world to fight and win over on most of these issues and ideas. It seems to me at the moment like a bizarre rerun of Monty Python's "Judean Peoples' Front" scene.

Outraged of Oxford

Jock

PS - as an IT person in a university I can vouch for how much of a pain in the butt it is to get constant requests to tinker with something as out of the mainstream of our work as Majordomo mailing lists. The attitude here is, if you can't do it yourself, you can't do it. Unless it is causing problems for the rest of the university's IT infrastructure.

On 12 Jul 2005, at 23:29, Rodney Shakespeare wrote:

Dear Vice-Chair of The Party of Two (Alan Avans),
[...] 
    You and Ryan really  ripe ones, aren't you?  "Righteous anger" you wrote, you little prig.   Ha, Ha, ha. 
 
    Rodney Shakespeare

----- Original Message -----
From: Adavans@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:09 PM

Warning: This is a very angry post.  For those of you to whom my righteous anger is aimed let me recommend that as you read, please imagine the voice of God being directed toward you. Then imagine that you are sinners in the hands of an angry God. I've frikkin' had it with a couple of jerks around here. 
 [...]
Regards to those whom regards are due
The rest of you to whom any regard is not due (Rodney Shakespeare for example), don't let the door hit your fanny on the way out.
 
Alan Avans
Prairie Village KS  

--
J1e Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714 M: +44 7769 695767

--
J1e Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714 M: +44 7769 695767

--
J1e Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714 M: +44 7769 695767