You know, while I may be stupid and thick and American (same thing, nowadays, I guess), I'm neither that stupid nor that thick (but being American may hamper our communication somewhat).
I read this as being your feeling that no one should feel obligated to participate in some sort of exchange relationship, that they should give of their talents as gifts as opposed to choosing to declare it some sort of cost for value received transaction (with the attendant feelings of being cheated or deprived thereof).
My original response was to try to explain that by being a part of society I believe one actually does incur an obligation to society, which obligation means sharing the work to which talent may not necessarily apply. I tried to make the point that this obligation would take place in any economic system, not just the evil capitalist ones.
At no point was I saying anything about you personally - in fact, I thought I made it very clear that only certain attitudes rather than some artificial status would engender such an opinion from me.
Having in my life been in a situation where there have been people (and this can't be you as I've never lived with you) who were perfectly happy to give and give and give - only what they gave wasn't what the community needed, so someone else had to provide that - has perhaps colored my opinion somewhat. It remains just that, an opinion, and I'm very sorry that you choose to take it as some personal attack.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-08-24 12:26 am (UTC)I read this as being your feeling that no one should feel obligated to participate in some sort of exchange relationship, that they should give of their talents as gifts as opposed to choosing to declare it some sort of cost for value received transaction (with the attendant feelings of being cheated or deprived thereof).
My original response was to try to explain that by being a part of society I believe one actually does incur an obligation to society, which obligation means sharing the work to which talent may not necessarily apply. I tried to make the point that this obligation would take place in any economic system, not just the evil capitalist ones.
At no point was I saying anything about you personally - in fact, I thought I made it very clear that only certain attitudes rather than some artificial status would engender such an opinion from me.
Having in my life been in a situation where there have been people (and this can't be you as I've never lived with you) who were perfectly happy to give and give and give - only what they gave wasn't what the community needed, so someone else had to provide that - has perhaps colored my opinion somewhat. It remains just that, an opinion, and I'm very sorry that you choose to take it as some personal attack.