Max Sawicky writes, >Self-interest pervades all human behavior ..., so I don't see how >you can imagine a movement which leaders or people in authority did >not seek to exploit for some narrow purpose. The real question is >how the process can work to yield constructive reform. Well, here's an unexamined and bourgeois (read neoclassical economics) assumption about human nature. History shows literally countless examples of altruistic and selfless behavior, by mothers, fathers, children, siblings, other relatives, neighbors, friends, and strangers. Saying that these examples just reflect the self-interest (i.e. preferences) of those particular individuals reduces "self-interest" to a meaningless tautology: everything people do, whatever it is, is self-interested by assumption. This means, of course, that self-interest explains absolutely nothing and can in no way assist us in understanding the motivations of individuals or groups. On the other hand, if by "self-interest" you mean people always put themselves and their own immediate concerns first, before the needs, concerns and well-being of others, then your statement is demonstrably false. I'm aware that you didn't say "self-interest "rules" all human behavior," you just said "pervades." But this is equally meaningless, as in any case it provides us with no ability to understand, explain, or predict. Max, could you be just a *little* more theoretically self-conscious, please? Blair _________________________________________________ Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] "They say that it's never too late, but you know you don't get any younger. Well I better learn how to starve the emptiness and feed the hunger. -- Indigo Girls _________________________________________________