Politics: is there a system or philosophy you generally like and why?
Posted 03 March 2017 - 04:08 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posted 03 March 2017 - 05:21 PM
NO, not capitalist markets
Status Quo, yes. Capitalist/Capitalism no.
What's being done as big biz, the kind the State props up, is no more capitalism than you and I are Centaurs
That is crony capitalism, or more correctly defined - Fascism.
You want to be offended by something? Be offended by facism. It thinks you exist to be fleeced. Oh, and die for them to keep making money. Neither of those foul things will be asked of you by a capitalist.
Again, definitions matter. Without good definitions we don't get to clarity.
A fascist is happy to get in a reach around with the State. A capitalist will always say "Hands Off"
- SteampunkScientist likes this
Posted 03 March 2017 - 05:34 PM
Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investment are determined by the owners of the factors of production in financial and capital markets, and prices and the distribution of goods are mainly determined by competition in the market.
Economists, political economists, and historians have adopted different perspectives in their analyses of capitalism and have recognized various forms of it in practice. These include laissez-faire or free market capitalism, welfare capitalism, and state capitalism. Different forms of capitalism feature varying degrees of free markets, public ownership, obstacles to free competition, and state-sanctioned social policies. The degree of competition in markets, the role of intervention and regulation, and the scope of state ownership vary across different models of capitalism; the extent to which different markets are free, as well as the rules defining private property, are matters of politics and policy. Most existing capitalist economies are mixed economies, which combine elements of free markets with state intervention, and in some cases economic planning.
Capitalism has existed under many forms of government, in many different times, places, and cultures. Following the decline of mercantilism, mixed capitalist systems became dominant in the Western world and continue to spread.
that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^from wikipedia
shows that there are many forms of capitalism. IMHO they are either Pure Form = Markets make all decisions
Mixed = Markets are fucked up and fucked over by State interference and game rigging to benefit Cronies
Does anyone think that what U.S. citizens are subjected to today resembles Pure Form? Or does Mixed/Fascist look like the water we swim in?
This is where we (anyone who identifies as a (pure) capitalist) draw the line. Pure or Mixed.
At least take the time to make the distinction.
Which I request with all the love in the universe.........................................of course.
Edited by pharmer, 03 March 2017 - 05:37 PM.
- Skywatcher, Juthro and SteampunkScientist like this
Posted 03 March 2017 - 06:28 PM
Of course it's Fascism. It's monopoly markets enabled by the power of capital influencing governance. Barter isn't tipping the scales of government. It might if it could, but everyone will get all they need of any commodity except any commodity which can serve in the form of capital. In a pure barter system, a salmon would be worth one salmon, or perhaps, two boards or six bricks. If one needs bricks or boards, and has a salmon, great, if he's leaving enough salmon to make bears and more salmon (which curiously, in the forests of Ecotopia, were part of the natural system which facilitated the making of boards).
Systematically render commodities into the value of some token of trade, and suddenly, there just won't be enough of any commodity to satisfy any run-of-the-mill "capitalist!" I can't think of anything else to call these collectors of token value, except, "capitalists." These guys and gals seem never to be satisfied with any amount of the tokens of wealth. One can only eat so much salmon, but who of them will get enough of the token value, whatever the token of choice happens to be at the moment?
Can we drop the pure-form ideological positioning for the moment? Can we agree that there might be capitalism, and so, there are capitalists, and the two are different things.
If we come to the Libertarian label, when I heard about this in my twenties, I thought, "Yeah, that would be me. Makes sense." And then, I started meeting self-identified Libertarians, and nearly to the one, each had a self image of having pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps, and achieved what they had by only their own merit, intelligence, diligence, and initiative. But these self images seemed, in every case, to ignore the fact that they did what they did within an infrastructure and an environment that was there prior to their success, facilitating their rise. And in every case I witnessed, these folks were all ideologically appalled at the idea that any infrastructure that wasn't facilitating their particular rise was to be eliminated, or privatized (and I believe none would have minded having said infrastructure sold to them on the cheap by the inept government whom they would insist they could do the better job than, and at a profit in their ideas of a free market).
All and all, something in my heart soon told me I was not of the stripe of the Libertarians I met, whose motto could have been: "I got mine, so fuck you, you get your own." This, while wishing they now controlled those infrastructures which they seem to overlook as that which had enabled them, in their times, to get such a solid grip on their own bootstraps. We could think of that infrastructure as the commons. What did the indigenous peoples think of it as? But, they had, for the most part, been worth more dead than alive.
So now, if I were to go for some "pure" system, it would be a flavor of anarchy which self-regulated and eschewed the token valuation of anything real in the shared environment. If it had one law, that would be R-E-S-P-E-C-T! Sock it to me, Sock it to me, Sock it to me, Sock it to me....
Edited by Alder Logs, 03 March 2017 - 09:22 PM.
Posted 03 March 2017 - 07:13 PM
I guess you ain't going to move off your position any more than I'm going to move off of mine.
So I'll wish you good luck in getting to your preferred higher ground.
Mine is right here, preferably with people not needing to tell me how to live or how to behave or how to spend what I've earned.
Not that I'm saying Alder the Elder is. Just sayin'
Although I wouldn't be lying if for one frickin' minute I'd really appreciate it if people could let one small tiny harmless definition into their very made up minds..........................
Edited by pharmer, 03 March 2017 - 07:15 PM.
Posted 03 March 2017 - 08:02 PM
In a pure barter system, a salmon would be worth one salmon, or perhaps, two boards or six bricks.
How does barter work when you scale it to airplanes, computers, cars, etc?
Posted 03 March 2017 - 08:23 PM
It works by coming to an agreement and making a contract. 50 million salmon for 5,000 pre made houses. Whatevuh.
........but there's something inherently evil in that I'm sure
Posted 03 March 2017 - 09:11 PM
Yes, I don't care for barter either, if it's about getting the better of our brothers and sisters that's the motive. If anyone remembers, I postulated at the git that no system will work, and that only a one-at-a-time realization that we, as humans, do not represent true human nature in any identified systematic formation. And face it, no definition is true. I have no allegiance to any dictionary, though I am all for trying to make these inadequate languages somewhat functional.
I don't need a fight over how things are said, so, I will not ask to take this out into the alley. I can let go of your love for terminology, if you can allow me my shortcomings in that department. At some level, We Are the World (or something like that):
popular [my] demand:
Posted 03 March 2017 - 10:33 PM
Ok, so without pharmer stepping in, I'm actually serious. Maybe barter is just one of many options as far as you're concerned. But, if it is the way you see forward, I'm actually curious as to how you scale it up to modern technological things such as the ones I asked about?
Posted 03 March 2017 - 11:54 PM
No, there is no system that's going to work. Not even the guillotines. It's going to have to be each one of us, being the change we want to see.
If it must come down to any system, what part of, "we're fucked," don't we understand?
I am finished with the systems, though I still waste my breath with my old habitual ideas of how we might tune up the ongoing attempt to have a system. It looks like folly is what's doin', so while I play this goofy part, I will probably continue to blow my mouth off. I am happy, however it turns out, even if we are part of the population reduction scheme the powers that think they are have in their shortsighted little minds. Because they might get my body, but they can't get much else. It's all a play; the maya, lilas. Enjoy the show. Pretty soon the curtain will come down, and I don't even have the ticket stub. I can't save the world, and I have retired from the job of believing I could. Something bigger than my ego will have to take care of it for me.
Edited by Alder Logs, 03 March 2017 - 11:55 PM.
- Sidestreet likes this
Posted 04 March 2017 - 12:27 AM
Seems to me that the freedom to do voluntary business amongst consenting adults in whatever fashion they choose would be a good place to start the conversation.
- Sidestreet and SteampunkScientist like this
Posted 04 March 2017 - 10:09 AM
I can't stop any of it. Caveat emptor will be the only law of the land, and P.T. Barnum's suckers will keep being born every minute, along with the two to take 'em. If the only progress can come from competition, if that's the fullest capacity attainable by my species, we've painted ourselves into one Hell of a corner. Because he who pays the piper will continue to be the military-industrial-security state-MSM complex, calling our tunes. When and how will our better angels acquire the scratch to out bid them?
Edited by Alder Logs, 04 March 2017 - 10:11 AM.
Posted 04 March 2017 - 10:52 AM
"Politics: is there a system or philosophy you generally like and why?"
I like a good argument. Ergo, I really enjoy politics. People running people for their own selfish ends never ceases to fascinate. I guess you could say that I like them all - systems/philosophies.
I see the game of Monopoly as it has been rigged.
Back in the day, my Dad sure was pissed when he had everything stitched-up for a crushing victory - all the big properties, all the hotels, all the railroads.........
And I would just lay my shit down, push back, and walk away. He threatened me once - "I'll never let you play Monopoly with me again." I just kept walking and smiled with gratitude. We kept that promise. I've never sat down to that vile game ever again and he never invited me to play.
Posted 04 March 2017 - 11:34 AM
By The Vultures
you'd better watch what your doin'
or you will bring us all to ruin
before too long
Your bottom liners
your clearcut loggers and heap leach miners
your engineers and designers
could get it all so wrong
Well, don't you buy into the gold and diamonds boy
that deal is with the devil
The path with heart will fill your deepest need
Now, did God make the mountains green and tall
for us to make 'em bare and level?
We must understand, we create our own greed
we all breath by the same grace
you'd better let down your game face
and get yourself real
Can you rise up
break free of your denying
and see all that is dying
beneath your wheel
Well, don't you love to play Monopoly?
you've got hotels all around the table
You're havin' so much fun that you just forget to see
That you've got hired guns to make us play your game
for just as long as we are able
When you've got it all will you finally set us free???
you'd best realize your power
will you bring our final hour
with the next dawn?
It is within you
to serve a higher calling
and stop that axe from falling
all our hope gone
Will you serve all life or mammon now
when the judgement is upon us?
In this final ticking of the eleventh hour
You're gonna push your camel through the needle's eye?
it seems you're bound to take it with you
When all the fruit you hoarded long ago went sour
it's not right to put us through this
You say someone else would do this
it's just our fate
It wont be easy
try to start sympathizing
And stop rationalizing
Stop your rationalizing
Before it's too late
© 1995 Alder Logs
Edited by Alder Logs, 04 March 2017 - 11:53 AM.
- Myc and SteampunkScientist like this
Posted 05 March 2017 - 11:54 AM
"I'll never let you play Monopoly with me again."
As you can see, I was thinking much the same way about that game twenty two years ago. There's an old joke line about it:
Monopoly is a game
where you use fake money
and real greed.
In the international game, power realized that when it holds power by way of holding lands and commodities, its position is weak, without gangs, armies, and navies. The masses would be as thieves in its eyes and it would come down to something akin to cat herding. The invention of the tokens of exchange changed all that. The national larders would still require protection, but for the trinkets of trade, the masses could be danced around as on marionettes' strings. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? Control the tokens of trade, and you had them all by their imagined balls.
How many successful businessmen have I met who have all told me the same thing? "Business is a game, and money is how you keep score." Dare I call these guys, "capitalists?" Okay, I will just call them, "businessmen." But I know this; while they are winning, they love their game. And for so many, the insatiable desire is to be the last guy sitting at the game board, with their hoard of loot and properties. But somehow the game became a bit more complex when those who dominate the board see there is wealth, in any form it may take, that might lay outside their game's reach. Part of that wealth is seen to be placed in the field of governance. If that perceived wealth can be acquired, then no possible squeeze can be out of reach, and even every dead-beat hippie can be pulled into the game's fray.
It seems the power of the tokens can do anything now. So, when power has gotten all the properties, and no one can legally quit the game, and power even says what the lowest paid wage will be, what can that be except slavery? Except, by way of forcing even the lowest of the low into some idea of a contract, whether voluntarily entered into or not, the idea that it's slavery can be denied, by definition.
He who has the tokens of exchange, makes the rules. What fucking fun! That last guy at the table might say, if anyone, or anything, threatens his position in the game, that he just wants to be left alone to do his doing. To him, anyone standing up from the table is not a victimless crime. He suffers.
But the root of all these evils is the love of money, and there are some who have desired it and have erred from the faith and have brought themselves many miseries.
~1 Timothy 6:10, Aramaic Bible, English translation
Edited by Alder Logs, 05 March 2017 - 02:49 PM.
- SteampunkScientist likes this
Posted 07 March 2017 - 04:00 PM
I've long suspected that there's really only one "system" of politics and/or economics, which is that it only works the way it is. And in this context, "it" is ultimately a highly-Chaotic system comprised of irrational individuals who like to believe that they are rational and whose actions are motivated by arguably-delusional conceptualizations of what their own interests actually consist of.
And all of the labels we like to apply to ourselves and others and argue about ad nauseum are merely manifestations of our cognitive dissonance regarding the fundamentally-inscrutable nature of politics and economics (which is either applied retroactively in order to explain what's already happened, or proactively in hopes of justifying whatever is about to happen).
- Sidestreet likes this
Posted 08 March 2017 - 08:25 AM
Well, this forum. It is a collection of odd-balls, of very different persuasions, very different outlooks, but with some core things that most of us adhere to. It works. It has some rules, it has various means of exchange. Sometimes when one of us gets out of hand, other members lovingly (but firmly) take a member aside.
Everyone is free to come and go as they wish. We have a general love for everyone else on the site. Sure, we squabbles from time to time, but they get resolved... or forgotten. We have deep concern for each other for the most part.
There are active participants, there are not as active members, there are lurker who just read the stuff, but are not active in posting at all. We even have enemies who "pose as members" as well as those who are just "investigating" we can be pretty sure of that.
Nevertheless this community works. I suspect that most on this forum, if we formed a community somewhere - a place we could come together and ye, when needed, be able to go off on our own when we wanted... well I suspect that community would thrive just as this electronic forum does.
And why would that be so? Because most of us have learned something that many "out there" have yet to learn I suspect: That we each have an ego made up of the combined experiences of our lives - and we have managed to examine that ego, and (hopefully) experience what it is like when the ego is "turned off". And suddenly we understand at a truly emphatic level "others". We suddenly can feel their hopes, dreams, sadness, happiness, desires, sins, regrets... as our own.
And when we realize that we share so much more with each other - then I suspect it becomes much harder to hate someone. And then working together for the benefit of all becomes second natures.
Or I could be full of shit.
- Myc, Skywatcher and Alder Logs like this
Posted 08 March 2017 - 11:29 AM
Joaquin Miller wrote the following in his partially autobiographical book which was inspired by his first experiences after setting out on his own, a young teenager, walking south from near Eugene, Oregon, where he experienced the natives near Mt. Shasta, both by working closely with some, and fighting against them with his fellow gold miners, in what was more or less an ethnic cleansing campaign. Such citizen actions accounted for the extinction of many California tribes. Later in life, after having attained some status as a writer and poet, a good friend of Mark Twain, thinking he might have some political persuasiveness, and believing the government in Sacramento could have any humanitarian feelings, he tried to establish a safe haven for the few surviving Indians in the far north of the state. Land, for Indians? Absurd!
Anyway, a long time ago I picked up this 1873 book in a thrift store and it touched me deeply, as I have had my own loving relationship to the Siskiyou Mountains. It is truly a magical place on this planet. Some lucky people got to live a natural existence there for a time in mostly small bands and tribes. Miller saw some of their last minutes, and it stayed with him the rest of his life. Later, the invading culture brought in hydraulic mining, a technical system of gold mining where high powered jets of water were used to wash away whole mountainsides, leaving these as spoil piles of boulders and rocks, sending the silts downstream, once the gold dust and nuggets were removed. Today the process has improved to a system of piling up gold bearing ores and soaking them with cyanide to leach out the gold.
The following passage gained much meaning for me when I had a business partnership fail. I was trying to establish a sustainable wood products company. My sole motivation was to create an alternative source of lumber other than clearcut logging, and my partner's apparent primary drive was to get money.
Unwritten History: Life Among the Modocs
by Joaquin Miller, 1873
pp. 256 - 57,
When the Modoc has led his last warrior to battle up yonder in his rocky fortress, fired his last shot, and the grass is growing in the last war-path of those people, then, and not till then, I may go up where the solemn trees with their dead branches stand around, making faces at something in the centre, pitch a tent there, and go down in the cañon with men, and picks and shovels, and bars of steel and iron.
At the same time, I am trying to bring myself up to the conviction of the truth, that a great deal of gold is rather to be avoided than sought after. Every day I look around, and see how many thousands there are who have gold and nothing else; I see the sin there is in it and the getting of it. The ten thousand temptations it brings a man, tied up in the bags along with it, and let out when it is let out, inseparable from it. I see that it is sinking my country, morally, every day; and yet with this steady drift of all things toward the one goal, this sailing of every ship in life for the one Golden Gate, barren as it is, forgetting the green isles of palm and the warm winds there; I say, with all this, it is hard to stand up tall and despise it.
Save money for the children? Bosh! Are you afraid to put them down on the track of life, to take a fair and even start with the rest? Do you want to start them ahead of nine-tenths of those who have to run the race of life? Do you think they have not the brains or backbone enough to make their way with the rest? How many of all the millions can start with a fortune?
No. Put them out on the track, well trained and strong, and let them run the race fairly and squarely with the humblest there, and if they win they win like men. Must have money to appear well! Fiddle-sticks! To buy a new coat and furniture, so as to receive your friends. My dear sir, friends never yet came to see a man's new coat or his nice house; never! If your friends want to see new coats, they can go to the clothing stores and see a thousand every day for nothing.
No, we do not hoard up money altogether for the children, or for friends to look upon, but we heap it up because we are selfish cowards! Because we have not nerve enough to stand on our own merit, or having so little merit and so much money, we prefer to trust the latter for a place in the eyes of the world. And then there is the low, contemptible fear that we will come to want, and so toil and toil and build a barricade of gold about us, and die at last in fear, pinched to death between twenty-dollar pieces, that the starved and hungry soul has crept between, with the last bit of young strong manhood that we were born with crushed utterly out of us.
From the introduction to the 1972 Orion Press edition, by A. H. Rosenus:
We are reminded by Miller's book that the men who lived in the woods were in the presence of a deity, and that the continent in its natural state once completely satisfied the red man. But to the white settlers -- even before they staked their claims -- it symbolized an agreement with evil: we will do no more evil after we have taken the land for ourselves, that will end our questing and murdering and our religious fanaticism for good. But they were subject to a tradition of change and watched while a succession of inventions inevitably replaced them and their equipment with better possessors. The victors never enjoyed the satisfaction known to the Indian.
Edited by Alder Logs, 08 March 2017 - 11:37 AM.
- Arathu and SteampunkScientist like this
Posted 10 March 2017 - 09:47 PM
Nice vid Alder, thanks.
"...as good as we want them to be..." What a great advertising line LOL.