This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: America Needs Community, Not Collectivism
Submitted by Giordano Bruno of Neithercorp Press
America Needs Community, Not Collectivism
Tyranny thrives by feeding on human necessity. It examines what
sustains us, what we hope for, what we desire, what we love, and uses
those needs as leverage against us. If you want safety, they will take
it away and barter it back to you at a steep price. If you want success
or respect, then you must bow to the existing arbitrary pecking order
and play the game nicely. If you want to raise a family, then you must
accept the state as a part-time parent. If you want kinship, then you
must settle for a thin veneer of empty pleasantries and insincere
associations. If you want independence, then you are simply labeled as a
threat and done away with altogether. Autocratic rulers are first and
foremost salesmen; they convince us that life itself has a “cost”, that
we are born indebted, and all bills must be made payable to the
establishment. First and foremost, we are sold on the idea that in all
of this, we are ultimately alone…
It is within these manipulated concepts of cost and isolation that we
discover the foundation of all totalitarian cultures: Collectivism.
Collectivism is not a space age invention or a product of the
abstract musings of Marxists, though many seem to think that their
version of a hive society is “new” and certainly better than anything
ever attempted in the past. No, collectivism is a psychological prison
derived from a beneficial instinct as old as humanity itself; the
instinct to connect with others, to share experiences and knowledge, to
build and create together. It is an instinct as essential to our
survival as breathing. Collectivism uses this instinct as a weapon. It
is a corrupted and poisoned harnessing of our intuitive nature. It is
an inadequate and cancerous substitute for something which normally
invigorates and supports healthy culture: true community.
In this age, our ideas of what constitutes “community” have been
tainted and confused with the propaganda of collectivists. Our
instincts tell us that the world we have been presented is hollow, while
our controlled environment tells us that the world is just as it should
be (or the best we’re going to get, anyway). How then, are we to tell
the difference between natural community, and destabilizing and
destructive collectivism? Let’s examine some of the root conflicts
between these two social systems, as well as the philosophical
shortcomings of collectivism itself…
Common Aspects Of Collectivism
Looking back at the single minded and highly dominating collectivist
experiments of the past, it is easy to see the common threads between
them. Certain methods are always present. Certain actions are always
taken. Certain beliefs are always adopted. Here are just a few…
The Blank Slate: In order for the state to
elevate itself in importance above the individual, it must first
promote the idea that the individual does not exist, that your
uniqueness or inherent character are only a byproduct of your
environment. There are many methods to propagating this mindset. Junk
science and establishment psychological theorists often treat the human
mind as a mere bundle of chemicals and synapses. Emotions are
pigeonholed as “hormonal reactions”. Conscience and even attachment a
result of “conditioning” (i.e. H.F. Harlow’s ridiculous rhesus monkey
experiments).
Existentialism attacks individualism from the philosophical end;
suggesting that all actions and reactions are random results of a purely
chaotic universe, while at the same time peddling moral relativism and
apathy. If all is based on environment and chance, and there is no
purpose or meaning to life, then why care about anything?
Religious organizations that choose to abuse their positions of trust
also feed collectivism by standing in the way of personal awareness, or
even making it taboo to value the individual over the collective
(though people tend to wrongly blame the concept of religion itself,
rather than the corrupt men who sometimes misuse it).
Each one of these tactics is a tool in the arsenal of collectivists
meant to degrade our social admiration for individual thought. Of
course, if one actually studies beyond mainstream sources for
information (as we have in numerous articles) on the many biological
mysteries of the human mind, the numerous inconsistencies of clinical
psychiatry, the irrational assumptions of existentialism, that person
would find that the blank slate assertion is filled with so many holes
it is laughable. However, as long as groups of men strive for power
over others, the attacks on individualism will continue. As desperate
as elitists have been through the years to build an environment devoid
of independent thought, they have met only with failure. Perhaps you
just can’t remove from all people those values which are inborn and
intuitive, no matter how monstrous the world is around us.
Centralization Instead Of Cooperation:
Cooperation in society is often spontaneous and dependent on a number of
underlying factors working together at the right place, and at the
right time. It takes a noble endeavor and even more noble leadership
indeed to inspire the masses to step onto the same path towards the same
direction. This is why legitimate large scale cooperation is so
venerated in the annals of history; such events are truly rare and
miraculous. Tyrants and elitists have no endeavors that rank as
“noble”. They serve only their own interests. So, instead of trying to
encourage cooperation they won’t receive, they centralize various
systems by coercion. If you can’t convince the public to abandon their
own paths for yours, then forcefully remove all paths until the people
have only one choice left.
Economic centralization is very indicative of this maneuver. While
we in the Liberty Movement see a whole spectrum of possible options for
markets and trade, many other people see only what is right in front of
them; the same crooked fiat money system controlled by the same gaggle
of fraudulent central bankers. A large portion of our populace has been
convinced that there is only one way to participate in the economy, and
thus they act collectively, and blindly.
Another obvious example is the false left/right political system.
While there are as many political views as there are people, most tend
to affiliate themselves with one of two; Republican or Democrat. Even
if you were to believe that the two major parties are honestly opposed,
you have still allowed the establishment to narrow your choices down to
two. Add the fact that both major parties actually support nearly the
same exact policies and goals, and now your choices have been narrowed
to one. Millions of people jump on this one bandwagon every four years,
thinking that they are cooperating voluntarily, when they have instead
been centralized, and collectivized.
Constant Fear, Constant Threats: Fear and
survival are powerful motivators. Without ample self awareness and
strength of character, these base instincts can overwhelm rationality
and conscience. Every collectivist feudalist system ever devised has
used a “common enemy” or an iron hand, to quell dissent in the citizenry
and to forcefully unify them not under the auspices of an honest cause,
but a terror so profound as to drive them to malleable despair.
When life and death hang in the balance everyday, and people have no
time to relax, they can in fact go literally mad. All logic flies out
the window, panic ensues, and the masses turn to whoever is ready to
offer them a way to sanity; “sanity” meaning “comfort”. After a period
of constant danger and distress, even fascism can feel comfortable for a
while. Collectivist systems are always clashing with the bubbling
tides of individual freedom. Because of this, they must continuously
qualify their usefulness. There must always be an imminent threat over
the horizon, otherwise, the strangling regulations of the state serve no
purpose.
Individualism Equated With “Selfishness”:
One of the inevitable conditions of collectivism is the demonization of
free thought. In a collective, every person becomes a cog in a great
machine. The majority begins to see itself not as a group of
individuals acting together, but as a single unit with a single purpose.
Any person who chooses to step outside of the box and point out a
different view becomes a danger to the whole. A machine cannot function
if all the parts are not working in harmony. Disagreement in a
collectivist system is not considered a civic duty; it is considered a
crime that places everyone else at risk. As a dissenter, you are not a
person, but a malfunction that must be dealt with.
It is easy to tell when your nation is turning towards collectivism;
you only have to gauge how often you are accused of “selfishness” every
time you question the needs of the state over the needs of the
individual. This argument arises incessantly in countries on the verge
of a despotic shift. Interestingly, it is selfishness that tends to
drive collectivists, not individualists. As we discussed earlier,
collectivists act out of base fear, and a personal desire to survive
regardless of the expense. They may disguise it as duty, or “universal
love”, but at bottom, they are driven by pure self-interested. They are
willing to sacrifice anything, including their own souls, to hang onto
what little they have. They are especially willing to sacrifice what
YOU have, to maintain THEIR standard of living, or to see their personal
world view enacted. Is there anything more self-centered than a man
prepared to destroy the livelihood and freedoms of others just to feel
temporarily secure?
Promises Of A Fantastic Future:
“Innovation” and “progress” are alluring dreams, dreams which can easily
be realized in a free society made up of intelligent individuals
thinking in ways which go against the norm. The more unique insights
present in a culture, the more likely it is to surpass itself and
succeed. Strangely though, it always seems to be collectivists who
throw around visions of high tech trains, floating cities, and
sustainability as benefits to relinquishing certain freedoms. The
insinuation is that if people set aside their individualism, their
society becomes stronger, and more productive, like worker bees who only
strive for one thing; the perfect hive.
Now, this has never been proven to be an advantage of collectivism.
One could say given the evidence that a society flourishes less and
contributes less the more centralized it becomes. Constructing
immaculate castles, pyramids, magnetic highways, or space stations on
the moon, does not necessarily make a culture great. It doesn’t even
make a culture interesting. What is far more interesting is a society
that seeks to enrich the lives of common men, rather than fabricating
edifices and launching technologies while using people up as fuel for
the collectivist fire. At any rate, I cannot think of a single extreme
centralized system that actually delivered on the grand promises it made
when in its initial stages of power. Whether this is because their
pledges were impossible to fulfill, or because they never intended to
fulfill them in the first place, is hard to say…
Common Aspects Of Community
Now that we have explored the intricacies of collectivism, let’s take
a look at what it is designed to destroy. What makes real community?
What are its benefits and its weaknesses? How does it begin? How does
it end? Why is it such a threat to collectivists? Here are a few
answers…
Real Purpose: Communities develop in light
of meaningful exchange. Their purpose is natural and common. Their
goals are not fixed, but evolve as the community progresses. The
beneficiaries are the citizenry, sometimes even those who do not
directly participate, rather than a select minority of elites. Because
the actions of communities are decentralized, and based on a sense of
honor and integrity instead of egomania, they tend to appear
direction-less, while at the same time making vast and concrete
achievements. Communities work best when purpose and destiny are self
determined.
Voluntary Participation: There is no need
to force people to participate in a system that operates on honesty,
conscience, and individual will. In fact, many people today long for a
system like this. When men and women apply their energies to something
they believe in, instead of something they are manipulated into
following, the results can be spectacular. Progress becomes second
nature, an afterthought, instead of an unhealthy obsession.
Legitimate Respect: The purpose of a true
community is not to keep tabs on the personal lives of its participants,
nor to mold their notions. The rights of the individual are respected
above all else. Again, the more varied the insights of a population,
the stronger it becomes. For a community to attempt to stifle the
viewpoints of its citizens would be to commit suicide. There is
strength in numbers, but even greater strength in variety.
Individualism takes effort, time, and dedication. A society made up of
people who have made this journey cannot help but esteem each other.
Flexibility Leads To Stability: A wise man
adopts that which works, and throws out that which fails. He does not
dismiss methods out of hand, nor does he hang onto methods that
disappoint simply because he cannot let go. He educates himself through
experience. Adaptability, flexibility, agility in thought and in
policy creates solid ground for a society to build. Communities survive
by being able to admit when a mistake has been made, and by being open
to new options. Rigid systems, like collectivist systems, cannot
function unless the people conform to the establishment, and its
deficiencies. Communities function best when the establishment conforms
to the people, and the truth.
Mutual Aid: Collectivist systems are
notorious for promoting the idea that “we are all one”, however, they
usually end up becoming the most anti-social and uncaring cultures to
grace the planet. You cannot centralize or enforce charity because then
it is no longer charity, but slavery. Citizens of communities, on the
other hand, actually seek to help each other, not because they expect
immediate returns, or because it’s “good for the state”, but because
they value an atmosphere of benevolence. The generosity of community
helps individuals detach from dependence on government, or bureaucracy.
The less dependence on centralized authority, the stronger and safer
everyone becomes.
Mutual Defense: While collectivism
sacrifices its participants for some undefined “greater good”,
communities defend one another, knowing that if the fate of one’s
neighbor is ignored, the fate of oneself may also be ignored by others.
No one is “expendable” in a community. EVERYONE is expendable in a
collective.
Building Community In A Modern World
The task of constructing meaningful community today is daunting, but
crucial. In an increasingly centralized and desensitized world, the
only recourse of the honorable is to decentralize, and to reintroduce
the model of independence once again. This starts with self sufficient
communities and solid principles. It starts with unabashed and
unwavering pride in the values of sovereignty and liberty. It starts
with a relentless pursuit of balance, and truth. It starts with an
incredible amount of hard work.
The trappings of collectivism sometimes seem insurmountable. The
mindless devotion of our friends and family to a system that harms them
can cause us to lose hope, and to lose focus. We must remember how
collectivism operates; by removing the power of choice from the
equation. If we return that power, then many people who we may have
once deemed “lost causes” might awaken as well. By exposing the masses
to another option, a better option, we undo years of lies, and lengths
of chain. If there was ever a perfect moment to begin this battle, now
is the time; while Americans are still searching for solutions, and not
too fearful to pursue them once they are found.
»
- 11862 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
+1
Not quite according to plan, if the Rafah crossing gets stormed!
Baby Boomer community 25 years ago - Collectively, WE can all work together and receive an incremental salary increase of 4% per year. WE can create 401k's and extremely nice pensions to aid OUR social security in retirement years. Job security is a given, and WE can even make 20% more a year in OUR house just by painting it. Retirement for US is at 65.
Generation X and Y present day (or count the past 10 years if you like), as still dictated by the boomers - YOU cannot have a pay raise per year because of the bad economy. YOU can contribute to a declining 401k, and pensions are just not for YOU. YOU shall contribute to social security, yet it will not be there for YOUR retirement. Job security is gone, and YOU will lose 20% of YOUR money by painting YOUR house. Retirement for you will be roughly...never.
And my generation is the "entitled" generation!
Do you feel victimized?
Only when there is name calling toward my generation!
This is pretty simplistic. Wages have been stagnant since the early 1970s, and during that same time income inequality has exploded.
95% get fucked; 5% do the fucking: that's called capitalism, boys and girls.
All people - young and old - are getting fleeced. Baby boomers are getting laid off and are having their homes stolen at the same time as young people can't get jobs no matter their level of education.
Basically, the parasitical banker-gangsters have buried the world in debt and stolen trillions during that same time.
On ZeroHedge, individuals stealing money from common people and governments, called 'business', equates to collectivism.
It's a real irony that sees increasing looting of the globe by individuals - which is called capitalism - as something other than it.
I suppose peeps gotta sleep.
We the people need to remember who the enemy is. It is not the other generation or the chinese pesant or the muslim or jew, or anyone else trying to make a living with an eye on retirement or profit.
The enemy are those who are using their intelligence or any means to ruthlessly subvert the law; moral, criminal and civil, for greed and power to further teir own ends regardless of damage done to anyone or anything.
They love nothing more than to see the exploited divided and confused.
We need to guard against this, or achieving freedom from the yoke is lost before the attempt to shake it even begins.
I second that! Let's face it though, our "leaders" are not Generation X'ers right now. Not only are they using intel......they are using buying power and leverage. Enough people with enough leverage can buy the market-place!
Thsi sounds good, but its big on politics and small on practicality. Just a lot of talking.
"While we in the Liberty Movement see..." Am I the only one who sees something scary about this sentence. I don't like hokey names. The Patriot Act. The Liberty Mov't. etc, etc.
The devil is always in the details. Those who won't discuss the details, and those who would impose something against your will, those are the scarry ones.
Things will change because they must; they always have over time. The present fractured fractal system is an unsustainable Ponzi scheme which will end badly. It will take a while, the wealthy in charge will do everything they can to make it last.
Communities will come together, not because it is a nice planned alternative, but because it will be the first instinctual survival mechanism that is easy to implement.
Science and technology will be used to further the communities efforts. Some might want to go back to simply living on their own, but most will find it too isolating, and too difficult to survive alone. Cooperation and the planned use of resources in a efficient manner along with tecnology and science will allow people to survive in communities. The best and most free will not rely on goverments, fiat money or startified politics of any kind, anything but the scientific method for making decisions just leads to greed and poverty.
spot on article. i am a member of a community.
AMERIKA
U.S.S.A. (Untied Socialist States of Amerika)
1. Where a handicap sticker is considered a badge of honor.
2. Where the only thing NOT super-sized is the work ethic.
3. Where they invented the term "Info-tainment".
4. Where freedom is sold cheaply for temporary comfort.
5. Where intentional ignorance is lauded as "patriotism".
6. Where mockery of our founding values is now widely encouraged.
7. Where political correctness is the opiate of the masses.
(and serves as a proxy for individual thought and morality)
8. Where an executive order to spy on our own citizens is called a "Patriot Act".
9. Where torture is used.
10. Where every classroom and business has a mandate to be structured around the members who contribute the least.
11. Where everyone is entitled to a comfortable 30+ yr retirement no matter how mediocre their contribution to society.
12. Where being labeled a "hero" requires no effort or action on your part--just misfortune.
13. Where we never question our allies' methods--even if they include the same politicide they claim to fight.
14. Where banks loot the nation's prosperity because the complexity of their schemes is beyond the attention spans and reasoning ability of the peasantry.
15. Where government corruption is not only expected but passively accepted because it requires less effort than resistance.
...
16. Where systemic failure is now all but guaranteed.
You made a typeo. 'Capitalist' is not spelled with an 'S'.
Interesting suggestion:
Perhaps our society is best described as some mutant-bastard-love-child of Capitalism and Socialism gone awry?
I can go along with that.
We haven't been a capitalist society for years. Add to that, we outlaw slavery in this country yet enter into NAFTA and deal with countries like China.
Capitalists ALWAYS depend on the government. Without government help (or taking over the government), they could never steal enough from the people to get the whole system of exploitation going.
Capitalists ALWAYS depend on A CORRUPT government. Without government help (or taking over the government), they could never steal enough from the people to get the whole system of exploitation going.
Yet you statist continuelly want new laws on the books. We already had glass-stegal on the books but your buddy Clinton had it repealed. (yes, with a gop congress)
Capitalists need to expand continuously, which always requires the help of 'law'.
False, capitalism only needs a solid customer base. We shipped ours (middle class)overseas with NAFTA.
I dunno. Ever read anything by Alexis de Tocqueville?
I think he saw both the good and evil inherent in a democratic capitalist society. We shouldn't necessarily blame the foundations of law the U.S.A. was founded under because they are in no way being adhered to by the criminals in Washington.
1. Where a handicap sticker is considered a badge of honor.
B R I L L A N T - and you made it #1.
Thanks!
Yes, I see it as a prominent example of our misplaced charity. Rather than encourage people to be civil, we reward any weakness and even encourage people to fake weakness so that they can strive to screw the system a little more than the next guy.
It's all about how much you are able to get away with, not what you contribute. Yes, we should have compassion, and some people genuinely need more help than others, but we have mandated privaledge for anyone with an excuse to do less.
Then the cheating bastards laugh at how they pulled one over on everyone else and rather than chastizing them, people either try to compete in the graft or turn an apathetic eye.
...it's basically the same mental disorder that has given us TBTF.
GO!! EGYPT!!
What the US needs to do is manufacture most of the products we buy and consume. Enough of these one-sided "Free Trade Agreements." We need more factories built in the US. We need people to decide to use their dwindling purchasing power to purchase goods produced in our country. The trade deficits we have been running for over a decade is unsustainable. Build factories and build them in the US now. I don't care where they are built (right to work States, or up north), but we need them.
People have forgotten what a country is and really have started to live very self-absorbed lives where they care for only themselves. If they can buy a product made in China cheaper than an American made product then "fuck the American worker." Someone is being overworked at their job in an economy where you lucky to have one "fuck them" too. We really do have to make sure other people have their fair shot at a middle class lifestyle (not through socialism) by bringing back the "norms" of the Greatest Generations' society before it was totally hijacked by the liberals. Buy American and support the United States. If your neighbor is wronged by his employer (and fuck you if you believe an employer can't wrong you) then something needs to be done.
I think organizing a boycott of multi-national corporations who outsource our jobs to third world countries so they can hoard vast amounts of cash in one of our nation's biggest economic downturns is a good start. The fact that some corporations (Microsoft, General Electric, etc.) are hoarding vast amounts of cash right now shows you what globalization has done to our country. They were and are still trying to change their target market from mainly the US to mainly developing nations. Money speaks to these assholes when our voices can't be heard. Tell them to hire Americans and cut the bullshit before it's too late. I forgot the rest of my rant so this is my post.
'Free Trade' agreements aren't one-sided.
They benefit capitalists wherever they go into effect.
Mexican capitalists and US capitalists got a bonanza when NAFTA gave them the legal right to steal land from Mexican peasants (thereby creating the FAKE immigration 'crisis' in the US).
You are using the word "capitalist" imprecisely here as it is not descriptive of the situation. The ones who are benefiting from state - dictated "free trade" agreements, are STATE capitalists. They survive and thrive through the criminal syndicate: "state".
There is nothing wrong with "capitalists"- someone who uses capital (wealth) to create more wealth. There is everything wrong with a criminal syndicate dictating what constitutes "free trade". The intelligent use of wealth is a wonderful thing that mutually benefits all those who choose to live by voluntary exchange.
Or to state is simply: state capitalists use their club the "state" to steal from others and force their will upon their victims. They are gangsters. "Capitalists" in a voluntary society live by creating wealth and improving the condition of their fellow humans. Please don't confuse the two.
All capitalists are state capitalists. From the Royal African Company, to the Mississippi Company, to JP Morgue and the bailed out banks, capitalism required state policy for its entire existence.
The state had to dispossess some people in order for others to amass capital. That capital was then used for 'progress' - slave trading, genocide, witch trials, etc.
Capitalism is about individual ownership over the means of production and distribution for profit. That's the system in which we're living, obviously, and efforts to obfuscate that fact are apologetics for a failed system that has the entire world on the verge of a revolutionary explosion.
Usually, in these cases, Capitalists resort to world wars.
Socialism always fails...
Capitalism always fails.
Here's the difference: all I need to do is open my eyes to see it ... right there on the television!
The subject of my post wasn't socialism. You're trying to defend the indefensible by changing the subject.
If you want to defend capitalism, defend the slave trade.
That's real history, not apologia.
If capitalism is not the best economic system then what is? I believe in Capitalism, because no other economic system is good enough to replace it. The failure you are seeing in our country is what is known as crony capitalism. I notice your screen name is "downwiththebanks." I believe bailing out some banks and allowing others to fail is crony capitalism.
We are mis-understanding each other. I am not a "Flat Tax" person. I believe in the right for some government entities whose function is not outlined as being the responsibility of states (only if they choose to regulate it) and only the states to exist. The EPA (when it does not overstep its boundaries) and OSHA being two of them.
Exactly, the sheeple come in here blaming capitalism for our failure when we are anything but. They keep crying for more government despite the tens of thousands of laws and regs we already have in the books. Government makes the rules and capatilism gets the blame, many of our politicians just love this game.
Capitalism has only been robbing, raping and pillaging the world for a few hundred years. The suggestion that a society is prima facie the best because slaves labor to produce iPads for pennies an hour reflects a pretty limited vision of 'advanced', does it not?
Affluent, well-educated, innovative societies have existed for millennia without relying on a fake god called the 'market'. Such a society produces self-centered, ignorant, psychopathic people as it's chief commodity.
Which explains our present world pretty well.
The people who make our I-Pads and other Apple products live mainly in a Communist country. They work for slave labor wages, because China is still developing and is still developing its own corporations. You will notice wages for China's workers are going up right now. It's not, because multi-nationals feel bad for Chinese workers, but because the market demands it. Our multi-nationals want access to China's consumer market and will do anything to have it.
What they will have in the end is going to be hilarious. China will steal their technology, give it to their own corporations, and kick them to the curb. The Chinese government is terrified of small revolts forming in their country and spreading to become larger and larger. You will notice that their government accumulated a lot of wealth from our multi-nationals during Bush's term as President. They have instituted a lot of "economic stimulus" during this downturn to calm the masses. In the end they may fail as well.
If the profits from those iPads go into the pockets of Apple's shareholders and NOT the workers themselves, it's not communism.
It's capitalism, because private wealth is being concentrated in private hands during a process of SOCIAL production.
What the place calls itself is immaterial - what's happening in Apple's sweatshops is capitalism.
I'm not arguing that what takes place in Apple's "sweatshops" is not capitalism. I'm telling you that the Communist country in which most of Apple's production facilities exist allows these "sweatshops" to exist.
The definition of communism you seem to use is the one I learned in college as a Poli Sci major. Real communism is what the former Soviet Union and modern day China look like. As someone else said in an earlier post the wealth of a "Communist" society always winds up in the hands of a very few (Cuba, China, Soviet Union, Venezuala) just like capitalism.
I should add just like Capitalism except people are even more poor than if they were in a capitalist country. People under Socialism or Communism can't wait to get to a capitalist country.
China decided long ago to reject anything approximating 'Communism'.
The Soviet Union was a backward country in 1917 ruled by an autocratic hooligan who had just killed millions of his own people. Following the revolution, 20 countries invaded the Soviet Union while fascism emerged throughout Europe - with capitalist money, I might add - to smash the emergent communist revolutions in Germany and all over Europe. The capitalist world unified after the Great War to make sure it didn't succeed, and they did.
The result was a goon like Stalin.
It's silly to talk about 'Socialism' in one country 'failing' when terrorism was used to keep it bottled up. The failure of socialist revolution to move beyond the USSR in any systematic way is evidence enough.
Despite an merciless and brutal embargo in Cuba, it's population is better educated and healthier than here on Uncle Sam's plantation.
China may be moving towards capitalism, but they are still communist. The Soviet Union after Stalin's death was still a communist country. A professor who was in an eastern european country (which was a satelite state in the Soviet Union) used to tell stories of how everyone in the Soviet Union was unmotivated. China has always been pretty private with the way they ran things, and they had to abandon communism. Could it be that absolute communism failed in China?
Seeing people on unemployment for two years and watching my employer add more and more tasks to my job for the same pay I was making three years ago, I could see where they are coming from. Why should I work my ass off so they could sit around on unemployment? I realize there are not enough jobs presently to support the entire US population that wants to work, but being one of the ones working certainly sucks when you know the unemployed are sitting around all day on my dime.
Why don't you get to the root of the problem and change your name to down with Congress. The are the law makers and therefore represent the true power in society. The bankers merely play by the rules they make. (Not in anyway saying they are innocent)
The bankers own Congress: see September 2008.
That's the point, yet people like you don't blame the government, you blame capitalism.
????
The banker-gangsters run the governments.
I'll take my grievances straight to the source, thank you very much. I see no point in appealing to fat, ignorant, bought-off puppets.
That is true, but the corrupt government makes the laws. Yet you continue to blame all our ills on capitalism.
They make the laws they're told (bribed) to make.
I don't have enough money to bribe them, so what's the point.
I'll work for a mass, collective suicide of banker-gangsters for the greater good of the world instead.
That's more likely to be realized than Congress listening to the plebs!
Tell you what, why don't you take yourself and all your fellow statists and freeloaders and move to Europe where you can enjoy the fruits of socialism.
Ha.
The fucking banker-gangster calls ME a freeloader.
You wouldn't know REAL labor if it kicked you in the face.
Nice straw man, find just one post where I have justified the actions of the bankers. For the record, I can't stand the Wall Street bankers and think a lot of them should be in jail. I do recognize that the real power is with those that make the laws, the fact that they have compromised them speaks more to human frailty rather than capitalism though.
I've worked hard all my life thank you very much.
My offer stands, if you think that socialism is so much better move to a country that practices it.
They make the laws they're told (bribed) to make.
This doen not make the system wrong it makes our ELECTED officials, (you know, the one you and I vote for) wrong.
My point, is these people are the lawmakers and therefore represent the most powerful class. Yet statists like yourself continue to think they are the answer to all of life's problems.
They system is built to be bought. That's what the slave-owners who wrote it up wanted, and that's what Chief Justice Roberts wants.
Like I said previously, we elected them and sat by watching ESPN and DWTS while we allowed them to wreck our country.
That is true, but the corrupt government makes the laws. Yet you continue to blame all our ills on capitalism.
@downwiththebanks post #916024
You seem to have ignored what I gave you and insist on clinging to your false generalization. A "capitalist" literally is someone you employees "capital" in a productive way to produce wealth.
"All capitalists are state capitalists." This is a false statement.
Have you ever owned a rake and used it to work in a garden to increase your yield of food from it? If you have then you, yourself were a "capitalist" then as you employed capital (wealth in the form of the tool: the rake) in an intelligent manner to create or increase your wealth. Can you please learn the definition of what "capital" is so that you can understand what the general term "capitalist" means? Once you have grasped that idea then go back and learn how what you did is not factually the same morally, logically, or ethically as those who employ the state to force their corporate will upon the other people.
Maybe you think that if I worked earlier to create or obtain the rake to use in a garden that I also tilled and cared for on land that could be traced back to a time when my great - great - great grandfather cleared from virgin condition all the rocks and barriers to that cultivation, that I am not entitled to reap what I and my fore-father have sown?
"The state had to dispossess some people in order for others to amass capital. That capital was then used for 'progress' - slave trading, genocide, witch trials, etc."
This statement, technically is not correct because when someone comes into possession of something through the criminal actions of the state it is not legitimate wealth (actual "capital"), it is criminal booty, which is subject to the principle of restitution and the rightful return of that which was stolen from the original rightful owner. Or do you assert that there is not such a thing as private rightful ownership, in which case it would be impossible for the "state" to dispossess anyone in the first place?!
"Capitalism is about individual ownership over the means of production and distribution for profit. That's the system in which we're living, obviously, and efforts to obfuscate that fact are apologetics for a failed system that has the entire world on the verge of a revolutionary explosion."
Capitalism is not the system we are living in. You do not "own" what you have to pay a rent (property tax) to use. You do not own what can be "taxed" (stolen) by a group of criminals who call themselves the "state". I make no apologies to a system that is based on cause and effect, understanding, stewardship, honest toil, and voluntary exchange that maximises happiness, well being, health, and maintenance of that condition for future generations; and NO that is NOT what we live under, we live under STATE tyranny. It is STATE tyranny that has failed mankind from the beginning of history and (hopefully) is about to end in a "revolutionary explosion".
What you are associating with the word "capitalist" is understood by me to be in fact the long history of crimes against humanity by those who choose to wield the criminal tool: "state". Please tell us, what do you expect to follow after the "revolutionary explosion" that you are foreseeing. If you think you can come up to me and take what is mine then I have news for you, your "revolution" will never be over until you come to realize that a person's body, their toil, and what they create with those things is theirs to use and you are not entitled to it! If you think everyone is entitled to what everyone else makes, then what would you concluded if I wanted to live exclusively off of what you and other people produced and I never choose to produce anything?
@Voluntary Exchange post #916288
Thanks for the thoughtful response: I'm going to try and keep this short as I can given how much more could be said. I'll begin by addressing the 'gardner as capitalist' theme:I have nothing against 'markets'. The existence of the market does not alone assume capitalism.
Virtually every social organization ever known to exist has markets of some sort or another. Your gardner is one example - a peasant in Ming China is another - of someone who makes use of a market, but doesn't depend upon one for survival.
Capitalism is a distinct historical period in which, far from being a peripheral part of one's existence, the 'market' comes to determine virtually every facet of our lives.
Evidence? Turn on CNN. The market rules everything. It's not some mythical little place where I take some pennies for some eggs and trade it for a horseshoe.
That's fairy-tale stuff.
This historically specific mode of production and distribution developed in a specific time period, espousing a specific ideology enacting an agenda by specific, historical means.
There is an obvious difference between a gardner using the tools at her disposal to obtain her own means of subsistence and an industrial farmer - say Cargill - that accumulates more and more and more, not for its own SUBSISTENCE, but simply because it has to get MORE.
Always MORE!
Two things matter to Cargill - growth and profit. The rest is propaganda.
The gardner, meanwhile, is just looking to feed herself.
The Cargills of today have 'won' one war against subsistence culture after another due to a ruthless and determined focus on expropriation and profit.
Yes, that involves killing. Who the fuck cares? So did 911.
Mass starvation? Famine Profiteering? Hells YEAH! Ordinary lives, baby.
The PRIMARY, first source of that accumulation (the nature of which is nakedly and studiously ignored by Adam Smith), was theft all over the globe.
Straight-up theft. And Smith is orgiastic about this theft, Capitalism's original sin that paved the way for so much more!
Once those 'investors' who, with STATE BACKING, started to commodify the world while putting whole civilizations to the sword in bloodlust for gold and spices, the whole system could REALLY get chugging!
Wage slavery, slave labor, encomienda: Capitalism's wet dream.
Then we get Funnymoney Finance and Stock Jobbing, 'Free' Markets and Joint-Stock Companies. Then Imperialism, with it's trading companies. Then comes the Military-Industrial Complex right down to the present - the rat bastard, corporate-banker-gangster cabal we're duty bound to suck down.
Ever since it REALLY took hold - around the French Revolution and Uncle Sam's Slaver Uprising - one basic question has come to the fore:
"Which side are you on?"
Sorry Down:
I don't think your are grasping that all the things you cite as problems, are not problems of the thoughtful and free application of true wealth: (one definition of the term "capitalism"), they are problems of aggressions and crimes by states and those who are willing to lie (deception), steal, and use force, and will usually use "government" to do it. You fail to grasp over and over again that it is those who claim the exclusive legal use of force (the "state") who make capable what you are talking about. In a free market of adjudication, every grievance that you choose to label as due to "capitalism" could be challenged and lead to a reconciliation and brought to an end. It is the state and its monopoly of "justice" that makes such a process of adjudication or arbitration impossible. And if you rely on any political system that claims a monopoly on legal adjudication, you will continue to have the same problems. The solution to your and our problems is not a challenge to the concept of intelligent application of wealth, it is the respect of honest wealth. It is the end of those actions which destroy it! There is a big elephant in the room in the context of all your grievances: the STATE. Do you at least see this elephant? State capitalism is actually a self contradictory concept because the idea of the state is the antithesis of the intelligent application and respect of wealth. The fact that criminals corrupt language by calling themselves "capitalist" is a form of deception: they don't want you to focus on the key to their power and control over other's lives, the "state". Naturally they would not want to call themselves "state capitalist" because they don't want you to focus on that elephant! If they were to use the language properly and honestly (which they would never do in public), they would call themselves state empowered criminals and would not even use the root "capital", for that which is obtained through crime is NOT wealth, and is NOT capital - it is CRIMINAL BOOTY. But they want to distinguish their crimes with a lie that conceals, for that is their nature, thus the use of a word that is innocent of evil intent or purpose: capitalist, and capitalism. And because of criminals misuse these words, and peoples general lack of awareness of the true circumstances that apply in how the words are being used, tend to corrupt the very ideas and understanding of wealth creation itself! This is a a hallmark of criminals, and to cite another example of the corruption of the understanding of the ideas of wealth creation: the state empowered crimes of the IMF/World bank which they choose to call "free market reforms", and "privatization"!
So when you hear the term "capitalist" or "capitalism" at lease try to figure out whether what they are doing involves use of some entity that claims a monopoly of legal force (state)? Remember the key to a criminal activity is to fool people into thinking they are not victims or thinking that the cause of their problems are anyone or anything other than the true criminals and their criminal conduct sustained by the state! Do not decide that wealth is the problem because a criminal wants to call themselves a "capitalist". You see that is what you literally do when you rant on the word "capitalist" without understanding the word and the context of that word in our current predicament. If you continue to do this you will be working to destroy wealth and well-being as an idea, which is something available to EVERYONE who chooses to live honestly if they can protect themselves from criminal behavior. Words are important and it is important for you to understand them if you are going to use them. The problem is the criminal and his criminal activity, which is concealed, empowered, and sustained by the state! It is the STATE "Capitalist" and STATE "Capitalism". Can you see this is not equivalent to the general term: "capitalist" and "capitalism"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A
Stop associating capitalism with minarchism. There's nothing in the world determining that only a "minarchist society" is a "true" capitalist society. Capitalism was born much time before the minarchist ideology.
Capitalism is not synonymous of minarchism. The fact a country doesn't follow the minarchist ideas doesn't means this country is not a capitalist one.
This is the absence of social organization. Of course Rothbard avoids the central question by ignoring how the labor process works in highly industrialized society.
Who controls the means of production, Murray?
I think you might gain some insights if you focused on how the state creates barriers to the competitive entry of others so that those who wield the state and also control the means of production are not forced into a more competitive bid for the labor of others as they compete with usually smaller, newer, and more efficient firms for the finite labor that is available to meet a higher level of demand that results from a more competitive and innovative market for a particular good at a lower price after technological innovation of the newer firms entries.
This is what we see for about 100 years when the state was usually not intrusive against market entries of new firms in most markets. When we were more "free" and less "statist".
No, free trade benefits capatilism whenever everone is playing by the same rules.
The US plays at large disadvantages which benefits the multi-nationals and is destroying the middle class. I think we both agree on that.
Absolutely. Little difference between them and plantation owners. It allows them to undercut the labor market and sends dollars to the executive level.
And governments serve the capitalists by making sure their respective interests are protected.
Same as it ever was ... just ask Queen Elizabeth!
You finally got it right, time for a moniker change.
Could you just please substitute "state capitalist" for your misapprehended term "capitalist"? I and everyone who own any private property that we use to improve are well being are strictly speaking "capitalists" and the governments certainly do not serve us or look out for our interests or protect them. The government steals from us and most people to support the interests of those powers it serves.
Unfortunately though our government has no intention of addressing or correcting this. Obamma just appointed Immelt as chair of the "President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness".
I doubt you could find anyone more responsible for destroying American jobs than Jeffy--short of his Sith Lord Jack Welch.
That's why I think people like you and me need to do it ourselves. If you (not you specifically) believe government intervention is wrong, then how about the freedoms guaranteed in this country's Constitution to set things right.
'Our' [slave-owner's] constitution speaks of the 'General Welfare' on multiple occasions.
How does that reconcile with your desire to shut down all public libraries and privatize canals?
Did I type that public libraries and canals need to be privatized? My bad, I couldn't read my own writing. (Yeah, it's called Sarcasm).
It thought you condemned government intervention.
Silly me.
In the case of setting up quotas (for numbers of Americans that multi-nationals need to employ) or mandates, I believe the multi-nationals should be allowed to hire whoever they want. It's our job as the consumers of goods to change their minds.
Thanks for this excellent article.
So many in the US are so steeped in divisive collectivism, they can't even hear a competing thought. Witness some of the comments here.
If there is an upside to this economic downturn, a lot of people are discovering (or rediscovering?) families and communities. They're also realizing that we have all been sold a bill of goods--all lies, meant to control and destroy us.
Unfortunately they are not re-discovering communities quickly enough.
Why has income inequality grown for the last 4 decades if we're 'collectivist'?
To make this argument, you MUST ignore economic reality. It's an absolute pre-requisite.
Income inequality is a result of many factors: the Fed/monetary policy/devaluation of the currency, a thoroughly corrupt banking system, a regressive taxation system that punishes producers (until you reach mega-wealth and can take advantage of all sorts of loopholes/storing wealth), gov't and CONgress, owned by the Big Corps who establishes laws and regs that limit competition and keep the little man down, an education system that teaches kids to be good little followers and punishes anyone who thinks outside the box. Centrally planned; all for the "greater good", LOL.
Personal example: I started a small business last year and have run into so many regulatory obstacles, requirements, laws (all of which require more $$, and few of which are necessary), taxes and fees (mostly just another means of extortion by the State), I am just about ready to give up. It's beyond frustrating.
@ Greensideup
Is there any way you can go underground and cease to "operate" in the the eye of the mafia (the state), and still provide for the needs of a body of trusted customers who choose to live by true voluntary exchange?
Funny you should mention that; I've been thinking about it. About one more ridiculous regulation/fee/tax might do it. All I want to do is make a fair living, feed and house my family and the State is doing its best to make that impossible.
By the way VE, THANK YOU so very much for taking the time to write so many excellent posts on this thread! It is people like you who woke me up a few years back, and caused a revolution in my thinking.
Because the earnings of the many have been stolen by the state and the state empowered "state capitalist" (the few). There's your growth in "income inequality", and such actions are very much "collectivist", they are collecting our "stuff"!
tribal organization is the sole reason any of us is here to type these words. Assigning your preferred bias set to the idea won't change a damn thing about it.
People living on top of each other requires adaptations, which have had mixed results.
It's my belief that humans are not ready to pull-off any sort of rubust, self-sustaining collective or hive or whatever label you use. Our empathy which allowed our ancestors to survive disaster after disaster, is being replaced deepening contempt and revulsion for other humans. Yea, the human population is ripe for a big mean reversion or collapse.
Summary:
America needs Coca Cola, not Pepsi Cola.
@Voluntary Exchange post #916288
Thanks for the thoughtful response: I'm going to try and keep this short as I can given how much more could be said.I'll begin by addressing the 'gardner as capitalist' theme:
I have nothing against 'markets'. The existence of the market does not alone assume capitalism.
Virtually every social organization ever known to exist has markets of some sort or another. Your gardner is one example - a peasant in Ming China is another - of someone who makes use of a market, but doesn't depend upon one for survival.
Capitalism is a distinct historical period in which, far from being a peripheral part of one's existence, the 'market' comes to determine virtually every facet of our lives.
Evidence? Turn on CNN. The market rules everything. It's not some mythical little place where I take some pennies for some eggs and trade it for a horseshoe.
That's fairy-tale stuff.
This historically specific mode of production and distribution developed in a specific time period, espousing a specific ideology enacting an agenda by specific, historical means.
There is an obvious difference between a gardner using the tools at her disposal to obtain her own means of subsistence and an industrial farmer - say Cargill - that accumulates more and more and more, not for its own SUBSISTENCE, but simply because it has to get MORE.
Always MORE!
Two things matter to Cargill - growth and profit. The rest is propaganda.
The gardner, meanwhile, is just looking to feed herself.
The Cargills of today have 'won' one war against subsistence culture after another due to a ruthless and determined focus on expropriation and profit.
Yes, that involves killing. Who the fuck cares? So did 911.
Mass starvation? Famine Profiteering? Hells YEAH! Ordinary lives, baby.
The PRIMARY, first source of that accumulation (the nature of which is nakedly and studiously ignored by Adam Smith), was theft all over the globe.
Straight-up theft. And Smith is orgiastic about this theft, Capitalism's original sin that paved the way for so much more!
Once those 'investors' who, with STATE BACKING, started to commodify the world while putting whole civilizations to the sword in bloodlust for gold and spices, the whole system could REALLY get chugging!
Wage slavery, slave labor, encomienda: Capitalism's wet dream.
Then we get Funnymoney Finance and Stock Jobbing, 'Free' Markets and Joint-Stock Companies. Then Imperialism, with it's trading companies. Then comes the Military-Industrial Complex right down to the present - the rat bastard, corporate-banker-gangster cabal we're duty bound to suck down.
Ever since it REALLY took hold - around the French Revolution and Uncle Sam's Slaver Uprising - one basic question has come to the fore:
"Which side are you on?"
Hi again:
Please see post #919680 above.
I am on the side of those who choose to live by voluntary exchange: honestly, diligently, and productively, with full responsible stewardship over all I "own" because, to not be a good steward of what you own it to destroy it (think the whole planet), and tends to harm others as well. I am on the side of those who renounce aggression and the initiation of force. I am on the side of those who do not live by lying, stealing, or by force, and thus refuse the legitimacy of all involuntary "taxation" and all monopolies of force or adjudication in a given geographical area - (all "governments").
This is a great article.
In today's political environment, collectivism is a sales pitch of those who wish to have power over you. This power is often used to benefit a small class of people to the detriment of the majority while the majority are told all along by this minority that the various actions are for the greater good.
I abhore collectivism. However, the majority of collectivists are merely dupes who believe the sales pitches of politicians.
Amazon Boobs, Ancient Gods and the End of Evil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQxqCw0B6Co
I have an appreciation for the post. I have a very hearty respect for individualism and creative spirit. The author has a very valid point. I am old enough to know we HAVE lost a great deal of our close knit social communities and sustained a serious assault on the nuclear family that was so crucial to providing solid ethics and morals to our children. Those that see this as communistic or a battle between generations are not seeing the entire picture or are too young to remember what it was like when community was a stronger focus in our society. Community is what kept the multi national corporations at bay at one time. We shopped local and we supported our own business people. Why? They were part of our community. The went to church with us, their children went to school with our children and we all worked together to support each others endeavors. You could walk into your bank and the manager knew who you were and he delt with you as a person, not a number for the corporation as it is now. Or because your credit score was 680 and above, as if this is actually a good thing? These sorts of communities are getting harder and harder to find and as sopish as this sounds, I was thinking of actually looking into joining an Omish community lately, not because I am religious or anything like that, but simply because they function as a TRUE community where everyone cares for each other. These people that we laugh at have a wonderful little economy, they are completely bondable and they truly look after each other. Do we need this in our world? Your dam right we do right about now. If we'd have had these sorts of community values for the past 25 years we wouldn't be in the situation we are now. I can assure you of that.
"Those that bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves. James Matthew Barrie. (the essence of community)
An excellent read on the unemployment picture and jobs. Stolen from naked capitalism. http://thecivillibertarian.blogspot.com/2011/01/absolute-best-piece-of-w...
There is genetics and epigenetics. The nature and nurture sides both have points.