a reply to: greencmp
Past socialist systems were thoroughly PATRIARCHAL. Hence, the abuse of power that occurred - and rightfully feared - happened mostly because of the
self-regulation difficulties that males have when it comes to power.
Many studies indicate that woman in power are
a) less prone to abuse it
b) are more conscientious, and considerate of the effect their actions have on others
c) encourage better relations in the organization
Thus, as the world moves forward, more and more females will take on positions of authority in corporations, governments and other important
People can fret and complain and say what they will, fact is, I trust the inter-subjective proclivities (estrogen, prolactin, oxytocin, which are so
active and operative in the mind of mothers) of female consciousness over the insecure aggressiveness of males ANY DAY. And the only thing that could
prevent someone from not seeing that is.....dissociation.
Notice, also, that I frame my thinking in the most objective thing there is: the biochemistry of the lived body.
Neurochemistry is fact. Testosterone is idiotic in the context we live in today (made sense in the eat or be-eaten days of a large band hunter
So, I can imagine that you would agree with me that it is a VERY good thing that forward and progressive governments - such as in Sweden and now the
EU - are mandating that females make up at least 40% of corporate executives. I imagine something like that will someday (hopefully sooner than later)
be passed in the U.S.
The effects will build up. It's not something that can be predicted perfectly, but we have good reason to believe that woman will be far less
volatile - and far more empathic and mindful - in positions of power than testosterone distracted men are. Thus, how we understand 'socialism',
SHOULD change when we understand humanity not as MALE rulers, but as the 51% majority females represent; and no doubt, their approach to governance
will allow males to relax their aggressiveness and feel more ok with expressing feelings of concern and empathy without feeling like their 'wimps'.
To return to my main theme: dissociation and the need to teach young adults how the human mind is organized to avoid the consciousness of negative
It sort of works like this:
Affect is the technical term for 'feelings in the body', such as in the musculature and the viscera. This is where testosterone works and where
males experience its effects.
Feeling, is the psychological interpretation of affects. Since the affects provide the fodder, the mind follows whatever is there.
Emotion is the longer term idea of what we feel. It represents a stable emotional pattern, such as 'aggressiveness'.
This is how testosterone affects males and makes relating with other people such a needless game of machiavellian power-politics.
Females, conversely, left to themselves, are far more docile. Without the influence of high quanitites of testosterone flowing through their veins,
the affects they interpret as feelings lead more to cooperative relatedness than to a 'dominate-submit' mode that testosterone tends to educe.
Anywhoooooooooooo..Just mull over this.
It's my mission in life to make sure that, at least in my neck of the woods (University of Toronto) scientifically valid theories of mental
organization will taught in Ontario elementary and highschools.