Thread by @swardley

X : Are you in favour of capitalism?
Me : That's like asking me whether I'm in favour of Agile? Capitalism is a tool which has an appropriate context. So yes, I'm in favour in its appropriate context. The dogma of using a tool as a "one size fits all" is extremism.

X : So, you're anti-capitalist?
Me : Do you not understand context? I'm in favour of using capitalism in appropriate contexts and using other systems when it is not appropriate. The capitalism vs anti-capitalism debate is as full of religious zealots as agile vs six sigma debate.

... all of these one size fits all dogmas - "our methods is best and works everywhere" - are just examples of extremism peddled by people often with self interest. They do not look to the benefit of the system as a whole.

X : But you're a socialist?
Me : My balance is more towards the "ethics of care" (the We, community, our duty to others) versus the "ethics of choices" (Me, individualism, transactions). It's not exclusive, it's a balance but I tend to lean more to the We than Me.

X : How can you be a socialist and agree with capitalism then?
Me : Very easily, like nearly all socialists. Capitalism is a tool with appropriate contexts, we should use it where appropriate. Socialism is about the society, the balance between Me versus We. There's no conflict.

... the only conflict is the minds of those that see capitalism as a one size fits all, as a dogma, a matter of faith, who see it as "society" rather than a tool of society, who cannot see it as a tool with appropriate contexts ... those are extremists. Same with the communists.

X : So, you don't agree with communism?
Me : Central planning according to needs are a tool, which in itself can have appropriate contexts. The problems occur when people take it as dogma, as a one size fits all, as a replacement for society ... see also capitalists.

... look, I understand the capitalist vs communist debate much like agile vs six sigma or outsource vs in-source or disruption is predictable vs non-predictable. The answer is both sides are right and wrong, the problem is the lack of context and situational awareness ...

i.e each of these tools have appropriate contexts. If we (as a society) ever get around to having that "We" vs "Me" discussion we will find that most of the answers are contextual as values (i.e. beliefs) evolve. In the meantime I'm used to being shouted at by both sides ...

... I get called a communist by capitalists and a capitalist by communists. This is the problem with dogma, it robs people of their ability to think which is intentional because extremists always have people with power and dogma is always about protecting power.

This is one of the reasons why I made mapping open. Technology was just the entry point but as @CatSwetel noted it's about democratising the space, the epistemological justice league ... i.e. giving people the ability to think about context and not get caught in these dogmas.

X : Capitalism isn't extremism.
Me : As a one size fits all dogma, mindless of context ... it absolutely is. No different from communism and other extremist positions. Of course, if you're part of that belief system / religion / cult then you won't see it as such.

... which is why it is so important in education to give balance, to avoid these dogmas, to present alternatives. Of course, the extremists always see education as a mechanism of indoctrination of "the truth" rather than learning and expanding possibilities ...

... so always keep an eye on your education system especially when powerful groups start demanding what can be taught.

X : So you're Pro Matt Hancock, Pro Corbyn, Pro Brexit, Pro Freedom of Movement, Pro Capitalism, Pro Communism?
Me : It won't make sense if you don't look at the context. They are either tools or representations of values that have appropriate contexts ....

... think of it like football. You've got two groups arguing a dogma that all players should be "Central Defenders" versus "Strikers" and I'm simply pointing out that you need both to play on different parts of the pitch and we need to change the balance as the game evolves ...

... of course, my language doesn't make sense to people who can't see the pitch or even understand that there is a pitch. They instead see opposites - it's all "central defenders" or all "strikers" - where none exist.

See capitalism vs communism, agile vs six sigma, Me vs We.

X : What if your map of the pitch is wrong?
Me : All maps are imperfect and as models they are also wrong. However, at least we're now talking about the pitch as imperfect as that representation might be. We can now improve our understanding of context with a better map.

X : Education? Isn't this what Cummings was referring to.
Me : Dominic was spot on regarding the Odyssean Education. The problem for Dominic was a) he is not as smart as he thinks he is b) his arrogance didn't help c) he also lacked context and slid into simple solutions ...

... however, there was a lot of good ideas in the Odyssean education paper / post. Not all of it, there were some parts that seemed a bit unhinged from practical realities but it was good overall. You'd be daft to simply dismiss it.