Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
You two have exactly opposite assignments of meaning to "viability" and "likelihood". Which is amusing but not really a problem.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 04:33:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... different readings of viability. "Can it survive long enough to catch on", in my reading ... so viability is a categorical version of likelihood, likelihood effectively zero, the normal case, likelihood not effectively zero, where talking about how likely it is become relevant.

Sure, its possible to think about its long term viability, but violent, that is political, Revolution is not a long-term sustainable process, so the answer to that is, "its not", so I'm not worried about distinguishing between its viability at genesis and its viability long term.

If there is a New American Revolution, then when it burns itself out, that will again answer the long term viability question in the negative.

Green Star, In Morning
Soldier, take warning
That Green Star at Night
Will Guide True Love's Fight

Beyond Freedom and Despair
I can see a land so fair
If we move, we move far
Guiding only by our single Star

Green Star ...

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 06:37:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Most of what we talk about here on ET relates to the idea of viable (in the usual sense) new political and economic structures, in a post- neoliberal world.

This thread, and the article that is it's base, discusses the likelihood of popular dissension in the U.S. rising to the level of revolt.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Fri Feb 29th, 2008 at 05:44:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The "long-term viability" question seems to me a red herring which tends to be used as an argument against "alternative" social/political arrangements. No political system lasts forever. Was the Puritan revolution inviable because after Cromwell died the Monarchy was restored? Was the American revolution inviable because of the the Civil War? French revolution inviable because of the Terror, the Directory, the Empire or the subsequent restoration of the Monarchy? Was the Russian revolution inviable because of Stalin, or because of Gorbachev?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Mar 1st, 2008 at 08:00:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series