I agree that being a Marxist worth anything--i.e., a practical revolutionary not just a Kathedersozialist--requires that we manifest appropriate virtues, including justice, in our personal lives, and that these virtues be broadly compatible with those of our comrades. Note that "compatible" doesn't mean "the same"; we just have to be able to get along in a way that fosters mutual respect and consideration and wins the respect of those whgom we seek to organize. I don't think that there's a specifically Marxist set of virtues, though--just the ordinary ones, tinted red by our choice of sides. The public schools question hits home for me, as I believe in the public svchools, but we just decided to send our daughter to a private first grade. Our local school, largely poor working class, is as far as we can tell a fine school to which we'd be happy to send her, but it's too poor to sustain a latchkey program. School starts at 9.15 and ends at 3.30, and there's no way we can manage the pickup and dropoff, not with a working Mom and a Dad in first year law school. Hannah was accepted at an "alternative" lottery school, public, which had a latchkey, but janis and I were deeply unimpressed by both the school and the latchkey, both on the bottom end of mediocre, minimally acceptabvle if tgere was nothing else, but no more than that. So we decided to keep herin private school for a year to see if an opening comes along at a better alternative school OR if after I finish One-L my schedule is more flexible and we can arrange flextime for Janis, so we can swing the neighborhood school. So, did we do wrong? I don't think so. N.B. we pay property taxes which support the public schools and vote for every levy. I don't think it is a failure of virtue to want the best for your kids. Caring about your own kids is a virtue--someone who regards everyone's kids as just as important to him or her as his or her own is either a fanatic or neglectful. _How_ yhou care about them matters--if by a "good" school for then you really mean "all white," you're indulging in closet or not so closet racism. But you also don't help the public schools, the anti-racist struggle, or your own kids by sending them to a crumby, much less a dangerous school, merely because it is public. Sometimes virtues lead to conflict--our values don't always point in the same direction. The virtue of being a good parent and that of being a good antiracicist and socialist may indicate different choices inb a matter of where you send your kids to school. It did for us, and though we made what we thought was the right choice, we feel the conflict and we'd rather send Hannah to a public school, other things being not even equal but adequate. Well, I thought I'd mention it. --Justin Schwartz On Fri, 19 May 1995, bill mitchell wrote: > Curtis offered much more than is here: > > [deletions] > > The book's fallacy lies in thinking that virtuous people will > >grow up to become a virtuous society. On the contrary, as > >Reinhold Niebuhr taught us, there is a "basic difference between > >the morality of individuals and the morality of collectives." > >Virtuous people grow up to hold news conferences putting > >corporate concerns ahead of the common good. > > > [deletions] > > > > I guess that the point of the above article as it relates to > >Bill Mitchell's post (see below) is that we as individuals have > >to do something MORE than simply practice personal virtues, or > >society isn't going to get any better. This something more > >surely involves actively promoting a good social democratic > >POLITICAL agenda as another PEN-ler pointed out in response to > >Mitchell's post. > > And of-course i agree. and did i not say that in the stream of > mails on this topic. > > but movements become corrupted unless the individuals have compatible > values. > > it also raises the general issue off whether being a marxist extends into > a personal code of conduct as well as the collective code of conduct and > organisation. personally i feel it does, but i know others definately don't > agree with me. > > we had this for example in the private/public school debate. progressives on > this list said "sure i believe in the public sector, but not for my kids". i > was and am implacably opposed to that view. how can your own children be > more important than all the rest of the kids? at what point does socialism > cease to work when the so-called progressives are willing to privatise gains > at the > obvious expense of the collective? > > there are many more examples and issues here. we can talk about it if people > like. tonight (late friday afternoon) i still have a mountain of things to do. > > kind regards > bill > ************************************************************************** > William F. Mitchell Telephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ > Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ > The University of Newcastle Fax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- > Callaghan NSW 2308 v > Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html > ************************************************************************** >
