This Just In: Greed Is Not Good
So, um, prolly you've heard by now that we're having this little problem with the economy, eh?
Yeah, as a matter of fact, it's starting to look like more than just a little problem. It's starting to look like 1932 again. And, who knows beyond that? What is there to say that 1932 is the baseline? Just because the Great Depression is the worst scenario we've yet to experience, that sure doesn't mean that it is the worst we could experience. With astonishing amounts of governmental and personal debt sloshing around the world in a hugely globalized economy, who's to say that we aren't now headed for the Even Greater Depression?
Oh, and, let's also not forget that even that isn't necessarily the end of it. Last time the global economy imploded this bad, it got one helluva lot worse before it got better. The only thing that could ever have made the 1930s look good was the 1940s. There's no reason to necessarily believe that that part can't happen again as well. If we're stupid enough to repeat the mistakes of the Gilded Age, surely belligerent, nationalist, chauvinist Americans (and Chinese, and Frenchmen, and Russians) are also stupid enough to launch another world war or two in order to chase down scarce resources like oil or gold. Or food. Or water.
Leaving aside for the moment any threats of world war, the only good news I see in our current economic crisis s that at least we're eighty years down the road from when Franklin Roosevelt broke the psychological barrier previously preventing brainwashed Americans from owning a government that actually helped them, as opposed to allowing themselves to be owned by a government of oligarchs who were helping themselves. This time, if people are hungry because there's no money, and cold because heating oil costs so much, and weathered because they've been tossed out of their homes, and frightened because they've got no job and no healthcare coverage - if we arrive at that state, watch what's left of the psychological barriers crumble like George Bush's job approval ratings or John McCain's lofty principles about running a high-minded campaign. Watch desperate Americans embrace socialism as if they were the lost children of Chairman Mao waking up from a long nightmare of capitalist errancy.
What we're witnessing now is the complete and utter repudiation of Reaganism-Bushism, of course, but it runs even deeper than that. Not just the hyper-kleptocratic version of the American economic system is being left in shreds, but even its more moderate baseline version - the Eisenhower model of nice, gray-suited capitalism - is now also on the chopping block. Even that form of capitalism - quaintly tame by today's standards of astonishing rapaciousness - was never sustainable, and part of what we've been seeing this last decade is all the ruses by which we had greedily squeezed out more than our fair share of the pie now angrily biting back. The wars, the environmental rape, the exploitation of nice little brown people all around the world (and, after all, isn't that why Jesus made them?), the borrowing against our children's future, the tax avoidance free-riding, the credit card economy, the exporting of jobs to explode profits, the gluttony of 300 pound Americans and their SUVs and the giant screens on which they watch ‘reality TV' (a nice euphemism for humiliating degradation) - these are all screaming out to us simultaneously today, in an excruciating cacophonous harmony from Hell, that THIS MUST END NOW.
And, boy, did we ever have it coming. I just want to go on record and say to any historians from the 26th century who might be reading this: "Yes, it does say ‘American' on my birth certificate, but I want you to know I wasn't part of this! I did my best and kept shouting out about our national stupidities. And I always voted for the Green Party!"
Yeah, it's true, I'm afraid. We're going down in history as the stupidist and the shortest-lived of empires (even the Belgians did better than this, plus, they make great beer). And well we should be so considered, too. Do they have Darwin Awards for countries, like they do for individuals, who find uniquely imbecilic (though highly entertaining) ways to remove their DNA from the collective gene pool (you know, like getting really stoned and then playing your electric guitar in the swimming pool)? They should! And who could possibly trump America, we who gluttonously slurp up oil in order to live like global pigs, sending the proceeds to fund terrorists with ideologies from the 13th century and weapons from the 21st to attack us? We who chant "Drill, baby, drill!" when the giant planet-wrecking asteroid of global warming is headed right for us. (Even the real dinosaurs come off looking better than our human imitations of them, since they at least had the excuse of actually having pea-sized brains to explain why they behaved as though they had pea-sized brains.) We whose government's insatiable spending sprees on high priority items, like wars that diminish our national security and corporate welfare for oil companies or giant agri-corporations, we fund by allowing China, our rising rival for global power, to own our debt, and therefore to own us.
And what's that old line about the first time being tragedy and the second folly? The most astonishing thing about the economic nightmare we're now entering is how little we learned from having already gone through this before. We're not even talking about ancient or foreign history here, people. You don't have to force Americans to go watch some History Channel documentary on Charlemagne to figure this one out. It wasn't that long ago that we went through exactly the same process, ourselves, right here in gool ol' ‘Muricah. Christ, there are people still alive today who experienced it first hand. You'd think, having found out in the 1930s precisely what happens when you let monstrously greedy people who have their hands on the levers of the global economy go on unregulated bacchanals of decadent self-aggrandizement, that we'd want to avoid that sort of thing in the future, eh? Perhaps we'd even vow "Never again", just like we did after the Holocaust. (But then, given the mass murderous Soviet and Chinese purges which came after Auschwitz and Treblinka, along with the genocides of Cambodia, Rwanda and now Darfur (not to mention Vietnam or Iraq), maybe that wouldn't be such a great promise to make...)
And even if the American people couldn't make the connection between present circumstances and past analogues, am I the only knucklehead who finds the whole deregulation mania something of an odd idea just at a conceptual level? How is it that the same people who always jump up and down in passionate support of tough crime laws, loads of jails and busy state killing machines, don't seem to apply the same logic to nice, white-collar crimes? I mean, if you need a law to deter people from committing murder, why don't you need regulations to prevent them from committing greed? And, wouldn't it make a lot of sense to have these laws, especially in places where the capacity exists for such tremendous harm to be done? A murder takes a life and wrecks a couple of families. That's horrible, and should be prevented wherever possible, and punished where not. But would it be too much to ask that we also have laws and punishments and regulations to help prevent white-collar crimes that can wreck an entire global economic system, bringing wholesale grief to hundreds of millions of people, and no doubt producing boatloads of deaths in their wake, all in the name of satiating the greed of already fantastically wealthy people? Indeed, we have the first of these victims on the scoreboard already. This week a Los Angeles man who lost all his money in the stock market shot his wife, three sons and his mother-in-law before then killing himself. Get ready for more of the same, and most of them won't be suicides, I can tell you. They'll be homicides. Murder by greed.
And even if America's so-called justice system can't bring itself to punish Wall Street thieves for serial homicide in this case, would it be too much to ask for a little government regulation to prevent a handful of kleptocrats from crashing an entire global economic order and spreading death, destruction and misery across the planet, just so that they could milk the last remaining pennies from the golden goose, its bloodied carcass lying twisted and prostrate across the trading room floor, nothing but lead spilling out of its slashed belly? Ah, but that would not be capitalism, eh, Mr. Graham? That would be fettering innovation, right, Mr. Greenspan? That would limit Holy Growth, no, Mr. McCain? And we can't have that.
I don't really understand the perverse psychology of people like these Wall Street masters of the universe, whose desire for additional wealth seems incapable of being satiated. Personally, I don't think I'd know what to do even with the mere pittance of a million bucks, so it's really hard for me to figure it out when I see them feeling so hyper-compelled in pursuit of throwing tens of millions more on top of their existing piles of hundreds of millions. I mean, you can only sail on one yacht at a time, right? You can only live in one mansion at a time, right? You can only sleep with one gorgeous call girl at a time, right? Oh, um, okay - well, never mind that last part. But you catch my drift here, no?
In truth, when I look around this fine country that calls itself my home, I have to conclude that it's actually me who is the anomaly. I'm not sure what genetic quirk or what massive failure of the educational machine produced a freak like me, but - apart from not wanting to go into debt, and from owning a handful of very modest toys like a computer or guitar - I really don't give a shit about money. Go figure, eh? You know, my car, bought used, is ten years old. I think. I don't really remember for sure what model year it is, though I'm pretty sure I could tell you how many cylinders it has if I stopped to ponder the question long enough. This strange absence of an unending greed for Money! and Things! seems to leave me way out in the bizarro fringe outcast category within what passes for a culture for those 300 million inhabitants in the middle of the North American continent. Just ‘cause I don't constantly seek cash, or measure myself by the size of my wallet, I'm like six standard deviations from the norm in the disaster affectionately known as America.
And just how disastrous is our national disaster? Leave it to Sarah "The Embarrassment" Palin to answer best. She illustrated the other night in her ‘debate' with Joe Biden how deep the country has sunk these last decades into the miasma of a culture of petty selfishness, and an ethos of pathetic greed. She reminded us that in Middle America, where she and "Todd" (hey, you scary monster, I am not on a first-name basis with your First Dude husband, and I don't ever want to be) purport to live, paying taxes is not patriotic. Biden's response should have been to ask whether all the Americans who've paid all the billions in tax increases in every war America has ever fought prior to this one were unpatriotic, or just suckers. He should have asked who she expected would pay for the body armor to protect her son in Iraq (as if they're gonna let that kid anywhere near any real danger), for our roads, our schools, our post offices, our Army and Navy, our Social Security benefits or our police officers. For that matter, he might also have asked who would pay for Air Force One, who would pay for the tens of millions of public campaign funds now being spent by the McCain-Palin campaign, or who would pay for the army of bank regulators we'll need to clean up the economic mess her ideological soul-mates have left us.
Still, I can't help thinking that millions of Americans sat at home watching this, enthusiastically nodding their head in support of her lunacy. Let's face it, after a generation or two of Reaganism-Bushism permeating the culture, no politician can even talk about raising taxes in America anymore without risking career suicide. It has become the new third rail of American politics. And that says so much about us. Because, not only do we want all the benefits of government, but polling data clearly shows that we actually even want the government to do a lot more than it is already doing. And yet, at the same time, selfish, narcissistic Americans have been well trained now by pandering right-wing politicians to expect it all for free. Cutting taxes without simultaneously cutting expenditures (let alone while massively increasing expenditures) is one of the single most recklessly irresponsible acts a government can undertake. Since the only solution to the deficits that must ensue from this simple math is to borrow the difference, the polity in question is simply taking its desire to live large and handing it off in the form of a problem for someone else to deal with, on top of their own problems. Plus interest on the loans, of course. And who is that someone? Faraway foreigners? Some despised underclass? The millions we've incarcerated as criminals, perhaps? Not at all. The crime runs even deeper than that. It's our own children who are getting the bill.
Which is precisely what we've been doing. I saw Californian voters, when I lived there, launch the modern taxpayer revolt movement by passing the infamous Proposition 13, which took a meat-cleaver to property taxes in the state. Never mind that the effect would be the same on California's schools, which are largely funded by property taxes. They went from being the best in the country to nowadays hanging around with Mississippi, down at the bottom of the list. But who fucking cares, anyhow? People got their bloody tax cuts, and they got to buy that nice, shiny new car they wanted with the money. So what about the kids?
And so it has gone these last decades, tax cut after tax cut in America, which really means tax transfer after tax transfer. And now we have a ten trillion dollar debt we are passing along. So that means that the next generation will have to pay enough in taxes to run the government then, plus the share that the current generation didn't really feel like paying to run the government today, plus interest on that borrowed amount. What does that mean, up close and personal? If, right this very moment, we somehow stopped adding to that pile more debt and more interest every day, and just handed out the bill for what is currently owed, it would average out to $67,000 for each and every taxpayer.
I know what you're thinking. That sucks, eh? Well, at least the good news is what you got for it. For instance, a really expensive war in Iraq that diminished American national security. And the chance for really, really rich people to become really, really, really rich people through humongous tax breaks. How about a GOP pork-barrel spending spree - including the Bridge to Nowhere - of unprecedented size in American history? Huge oil and agricultural company subsidies? A giant prescription drug bill which provided corporate socialism for drug and insurance companies? A chance for George W. Bush to frolic in the White House for eight years? I'm sure every American, working some job they're not particularly fond of, won't really mind the extra hours they have to work to pay for all this. Especially since, if you make, say, 15 bucks per hour, that would only translate to 4,467 hours you'd be working to finance your share of this past years' pig-out. Based on a forty-hour work week, that's roughly two-and-a-quarter years worth of your life. When you look at it that way, it doesn't seem so bad, does it? And, again, that's just if we stop deficit spending now, and stop accruing interest now. In fact, we're actually deficit spending about another $400 billion per year, every year, which just gets added to the pile (and lots more, as well, if John McCain is able to slash taxes on the wealthy even further). Moreover - maybe it's just my pessimism kicking in here, but - I don't think the Chinese or our other creditors are going to be much inclined to waive the interest accruals due to them for financing our decadent little party. So, in fact, the above accounting of our national and personal liabilities are actually rather, ahem, conservative. In every way imaginable.
But, of course, America's problem is way deeper than one kleptocratic president or even a generational binge coupled with a three decade long vacation from responsibility, not to mention rationality. We have established a pervasive culture of greed, and that's one angry chicken that has now come home to roost. What's worse, we've lost the capacity as a society to even imagine an alternative ethos to guide us, though the looming economic tsunami may be just the thing - and likely the only thing - big enough to get us thinking once again.
This massive poverty of imagination is what is killing us now, undermining us at the most fundamental levels of societal identity. To grasp the magnitude of our problem, consider how we socialize our citizens and how our culture sets the priority structure of their values and aspirations. Sure, some Americans think it is noble and wonderful to pursue careers which serve the public interest, but most are taught, and simply accept, that one should aspire to making boatloads of money, and that the measure of one's achievement is the size of their bank account and the number of toys parked in the driveways of their McMansions. I am constantly astonished by the quantity of Americans whose expressed goal in life is simply to make lots of money, which I find especially bizarre since they don't seem to have any particular use in mind for all this cash. What this phenomenon has long suggested to me is a country full of sheep so unoriginal in their thinking that they can't even figure out what to aspire to on their own, and a society so bankrupt in its morality that it feeds them the goal of wanton greed to fill that yawning void.
All that's bad enough, but, besides the current economic meltdown and a society populated by moral midgets, there are also other repercussions to this ethical failure and this poverty of imagination. Chief among these is the false choice we are always presented between governance in the public interest, on the one hand, and prosperity, on the other. This bogus diversionary tactic forms the central argument of the economic predators who've been bleeding the country of its wealth (and, in fact, prosperity), as to why we can't have regulation. You know, all that Washington red tape (you can't profit off of pollution, you can't exploit children as factory workers, you have to pay a minimum wage - horrible restrictions like that) will keep innovators from innovating and entrepreneurs from, uh, entrepreneuriating.
And, you know what? They're actually more or less right. They're right if, that is, you accept as a predicate would-be innovators and would-be entrepreneurs who are only motivated by an ethos of personal greed, which has been duly pounded into them through the socialization processes of a society that lost its mind and its moral bearing decades ago. Sure, okay. Under those conditions it's probably true that most people will only work for themselves, and will only be motivated by self-interest. But what if we taught these people something different, right from the get-go when they were toddlers, and reinforced those different values throughout their adult lives? What if we taught the members of this society to value the community's welfare as much as their own? What if we taught them that massive personal wealth was not only not the highest achievement to aspire to, but actually a sort of crass and tacky goal, only to be found amongst the most juvenile and selfish in the society? What if we strongly imprinted the idea among our people that improving the welfare of the country (or, gulp, the world) is an important life aspiration, and that those who do so are considered among our most admired countrymen, rather than those who have acquired the money to purchase bitchin' toys and trophy wives? Is it not possible that our citizens would innovate, and that they would be every bit as motivated as they are today by greed? Maybe even more so?
And, therefore, could we not transcend this false choice of good governance versus prosperity? (Not to mention the fact that whatever prosperity we've experienced of late is not going to the society, anyhow. In the last three decades, while GDP has grown at a handsome clip, the middle class - and, of course, we've long ago now abandoned even talking about those below middle class status, let alone fighting a war on poverty - has not even stood its ground, but rather has actually lost overall purchasing power. That, of course, leaves only one mathematical explanation for what has happened. You guessed it. All that growth in national wealth has gone to the already richest Americans.)
You know, I'm not a subscriber to the prescriptions of communism for constructing the best system of political economy, much as that might come as a shock to any conservative reader of this piece. And I think it's fair to say that the world's experiments in communism to date - to the extent they weren't actually just experiments in totalitarian brownshirtism - failed in large part because they possessed just the opposite flaw as that described above. They attempted to build economic systems on the equally false notion that selfishness can be completely erased from human psychology as a motivating force. It can't. And any system dependant on that proposition for its success will have none. But, by the same token, a system that is built on the premise that people are only motivated by selfish greed, and therefore can only produce prosperity by letting every actor pursue their own self-interest, unfettered by any societal concerns, is an equally disastrous notion.
And such a society is equally bound for the ash heap of history, just as was the Soviet Union or Maoist China.
In fact, I ‘m pretty sure that's just exactly what the cosmos is screaming in our ears, at about 150 decibels worth of volume, right at the moment. The only question is whether we are so deaf we can no longer hear the warning call, even when it's broadcast over a galactic PA system.
But just in case, here it is. Newsflash for America! This just in! Sorry to burst your little bubble, people, but it turns out, after all, that...
Greed is not good.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
60 Comments so far
Show AllIt seems to me that there is some confusion here about the meaning of "socialism", a social democracy and "capitalism."
How dou you define capitalism? What does it mean for you?
Scholars will point out to the works of Karl Marx of course, and anyone who manages to read all volumes of "Capital" and does not get lost in the complexity of Marx´s analysis, deserves admiration because it is a tour de force. E.g. for insight on the current "credit crisis" try:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch30.htm
Marx had astonishing foresight: he predicted most of the problems we have been facing for the last 100 years. He understood that capitalism has inherent contradictions that cannot be overcome but simply mitigated for some time, but in the end the problem will only be exacerbated... (one of the major problems is overproduction)
I have tried to put some of his thoughts into the current economic / environmental context here: http://uglyrumors.wordpress.com (Title: "We Never had it so good"... and "Financial Crisis: "Global economies left teetering"
In light of the current "financial crisis" I think that the greatest danger of capitalism is the concentration of extreme wealth in the hands of a small elite who have used their money and influence to undermine democracy as much as they can. Marx understood only too well that capital "rights" (which of course do not really exist) will override human rights in the end and this is exactly what happened (just take a closer look at the "free trade" charade...)
The most important role of government is to make sure that the created public wealth (the source of which is human labour and imagination, not capital) is somewhat fairly redistributed to society via a reasonable tax system, and to create a buffer against the capitalistic boom and bust cycles through a social security net.
In the US (at least in my view) government does no longer deserve the name because it´s main task is now corporate and banking welfare at the expense of middle-class Americans (to say nothing of the poor people).
Instead of giving a fair share of the immense corporate profits to the workers, they have practiced a "trickle-up" policy: wealth distribution in the US is now comparable to Latin America and other former "third-world" countries:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
An excerpt of the studies : "Just 20% of the people own a remarkable 84% of all wealth, leaving only 16% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers)
In plain English: US governments govern for the interests of a small elite at the expense of the rest of the population (upward distribution of wealth)- in a nutshell: they have stolen the wealth you created and the capitalistic imperative to drive down wages (labour cost) of course results in a growing lack of purchasing power which was compensated with artifical credit: http://video.google.de/videosearch?q=money+as+debt&emb=0&aq=f#
This insane system is now imploding and rightly so, but the Fed and the Treasury are re-animating the monster and the game will continue until the bitter end.....
See also Michael Hudson on Democracy Now!....
Christians are some of the most blood thirsty people on the planet and probably responsible for more deaths and wars than most other religions. You can start with the genocide of the native inhabitants (your neighbors)in America. Then read the history of Mexico. If you haven't read or don't know what the facts are, history is and simply believe what you are told you haven't evolved. It is an unfullfilled spiritual step. I never believed America was a christian nation, I believed in the constitution that provided for free individual thought. I was wrong and I can admit it.
You think secular regimes have been good for the Mexican people? From what I've read in recent year, it seems to be plagued by far-right gvoernments, a shockingly high incidence of rape and even mass murders, with the complicity of, if not indeed at the hands of the police.
That said, while many heroic Catholic priests, nuns and lay-workers, trade-unionists and activists have been martyred by putatively Christian, mostly Catholic, regimes thoughout South America, the history of Catholic regimes, world-wide, has been a massive scandal. Bishops taking cocktails with the likes of the Somosas has apparentl been the norm.
However, you are deeply ignorant on this subject and probably quite young. You need to be able to distinguish between those who claim to be Christian, while running diabiolical regimes, and genuine Christians. Christ made that very clear in his altercations with the leaders of Jewish, religious Establishment of his day.
I am sure you will be surprised and shocked to hear that you too are a sinner, and far worse person than you imagine - though that may only be a function of your youth and immaturity. There are no exceptions. We are all sinners. But when disasters, such as Katrina, occur, it has been established that 80% of the people who actively assist the victims belong to Christian organisations. I haven't heard of a Humanist humanitarian charity, though maybe one exists.
Joe Bageant mentioned a while back that the radical leftward movement in South America has been promoted by charismatic Catholics. That has been some achievement. I believe Chavez is a believing Catholic. It has not received official approval in some its aspects, but Liberation Theology has been a great asset to the people in South America. What have your atheist chums been doing down there to help?
And as for your last statement, I don't have a lot of atheist chums but I am sure they are simply celebrating the diversity of the existing culture without trying to convert the society or kill those that resist.
Excuse me, I am not young probably older than you and I don't make rash assumptions about other posters or would make this a personal issue. I am not a sinner and neither are you.(well maybe you are because you actually believe that crap) There is nothing wrong with the creator, it's the religion that by historical fact is disgusting hypocritical. I am aware of the disparities, hence my post.
Absolutely brilliant article. But his equating the failures of Maoist China with Communist Russia Is, I believe erroneous, though even Russia protected its poor, and avoided the depths of predatory sexual depravity which infects far-right Western regimes, and all of them to an extent.
It was inevitable that an atheist regime (albeit very scripturally-based, were it not for its crucial failure to attribute the burden of its precepts to Christ) would fail, even had it not been hijacked by the psychopathic Stalin.
China, on the other hand, was able to blend Christ's priorities with the Gospel priorities to great effect, without of course avoiding failures. It fed, clothed and housed a quarter of the world's population, and British people who lived and worked there as school teachers were visibly moved at their shared memories of how joyful and law-abiding the people had been. No barring hotel rooms for fear of burglary, rape, etc. You could leave the doors wide open.
Christians will always feed the poor and unfortunate, all they want is thier souls. And what they are not honest about is that they were also instrumental in creating that poverty.
URGENT!!!
PLEASE GO TO PBS AND VOTE AGAINST PHALLIN!!!
http://www.pbs.org/cgi-registry/poll/poll.pl
The result will go MSM. Please don't allow the right wing scum to prevail on this one!
Thank You for our own sake!
It's just Karma
May all Beings be blessed. Specifically the weak and ill minded.
This link wont open. What is it?
And to think that the Fascist Congress and the Dictator gave all the REAL taxpaying Americans a $600.00 check to go shopping and prop up the economy, which tantamounted to a joke,,,,,,
What WE need is the elitists to go on a shopping spree,,,,,,, cause 99.9% of us only have a few percent of the wealth,,,,, and the other 90 plus % of all the money is in the hands of greed.....
I hope the market crashes bigtime, I want chaos and everything that goes with it...... and then WE go and take our country back. Bring it on!!!
Coffeelover,,,,,,,,
Coffeelover, couldn't America just go bankrupt then resurrect itself by itself? Why should the rest of the world have to suffer because of what is predominately American greed and its badly flawed political system.
If America just disappeared for a decade or so, that would be best!
www.dangerouscreation.com
Sioux Rose
BRAITHWA: I need this community since I live in a right wing area. Did you ever see the marvelous film, "Bell, Book & Candle" where Kim Novak, a witch, is tempted to use her capacities to cast a spell over her intended, played by James Stewart, the consumate "everyman"? Well, she learns that LOVE is the ultimate spell, and it works! That's my response to Starhawk. Rove is tapping into evil which is always on hand to those who wish to work with this force. It kind of reminds me, too, of the play, "The Devil and Daniel Webster," this idea that some will "sell their souls" on the mortal plane for temporal advantages, often at cost to their fellow citizens... but the price paid is heavy on their immortal souls, and as the Buddhists relate, presents a rough future incarnation. I do believe that. Nearly forty years of analyzing astrological charts, birth blueprints, have made it quite clear that our personal tests are not the result of mere caprice. One may have body/health issues, another fiscal issues, another a recurrent broken heart. As author Richard Bach put it, "Look down to see if you still have a body. That will determine if you're done with the work on your issues." (I paraphrased him here.)
Have not seen those, but I will look out for "Bell, Book and Candle".
Once you understand that money is the determinant for who lives and who dies
You can not refute the fact that...
GREED IS APPROPRIATE
At all levels as it's just a matter of perspective
We need to change the way we have organized ourselves.
"Thomas Moore"
>>>Capitalism done correctly, i.e. regulated, has still proven to be better than any other system so far.
Keep repeating this to yourself, if you do it long enough it may come true. Otherwise, wake up you and look around: you are in a western social-economic madrassa and when the food runs out so will the energy traveling back and forth between your 5 neurons.
You are no different than the morons who blow themselves up for another's gain. I am sure there are some rich bankers and financiers that are reading your post and saying: Thanks little buddy. God bless you.
What a sucker.
Cheers
frangelica
Thanks very much for the compliment to my intelligence. Reasonable and civil compliments are always welcome.
Capitalism did exist even in FDR's days but at least it wasn't RIGGED unlike the past 3 decades. Do you really think an over-inflated individualistic nation such as the USA will ever even give socialism a chance? Other than the corporations, not a chance. Capitalism doesn't have to be so shitty though. In fact, any system is prone to abuse and rigging and that's what needs to be corrected.
I do not believe that all systems are as corruptible as pure capitalism.
Where is it that it is "working so well"?
Capitalism works well when there are anti-trust laws keeping human nature in check.
That is not what repugs consider capitalism however. That would be socialism.
In other words, capitalism works great for big rich jerks.
Jesus was a little brown person.
"What's worse, we've lost the capacity as a society to even imagine an alternative ethos to guide us, though the looming economic tsunami may be just the thing - and likely the only thing - big enough to get us thinking once again."
Thanks for this post!!! As much as I would like to believe that there is a real possibility for this dark page in history to turn into an object lesson that stimulates real change, I'm going to have to point to most all applications of shock induced disaster capitalism and conclude that only those who have initiated this kind of class-warfare terrorism have benefited... and they stand to benefit enormously through this particular act.
I would like that to change. However, our primary tactic of hiding behind a keyboard doesn't really lend to that change. We need to go analog... and in a big way.
For millions who will soon be on the streets or fighting for a spot under an overpass, or won't be able to pay for heat, food, proper clothing or medical care... especially if you have children, a concentration camp may be a step up... and if unsuccessful, at least we can console each other that we honestly tried to stop them. We have yet to make an effective attempt.
Oh yeah... and please vote for the greedy men and women who did this to us.
Sioux Rose
RICH M: (Slightly off topic, but something I meant to ask you) Given your wise assertion that there are slim to no differences in policy and acted-upon-principle by both major parties, do you think ROVE knows this? I mean is he there just to give the crowd a good, convincing circus act? If he recognizes the game is rigged, that either "presidential candidate" results in the same basic outcome (slightly softer if it's a Democrat as most of us agree), why would he get the crowd so rev'ved up over the illusion of a difference? To the point as we saw in the latest Palin presentation, there are calls of "death" to other? Does Rove get it, or is he another clown in the circus with blinders on. (Please don't ask me to ask Rove...)
Hi Sioux Rose.
I like to read your posts. I am pleased that you are still here, in the
"new" CD.
My intuition is that Rove, although handsomely payed for his effort,
he is blinded by his own propaganda. I can support the this:-
I doubt that the invasion of Iraq would have happened without the
efforts of Carl Rove. Rove does not need facts, because that is not his
campaign style. He is very effective in the absence of facts. His
efforts to raise support for the Iraq war lacked any
facts, and yet he pulled it off brilliantly.
Later, I cant remember whether he interviewed, or if he just volunteered
the information on his own. He said that there was no need for him to
feel bad about the Iraq war, because EVERYONE thought that Saddam's WMD
was a threat to us. Well, that is true only because he pounded that
into us in so many ways. And Rove was one of the people hypnotised by
the propaganda.
Actually, he gives himself a little too much credit, because
substantially less than 100% of all people thought so, despite his
efforts.
In early 2003 I attended a talk by a visitor from the USA who claimed to
be a witch, Starhawk. She claimed that a spell was being woven, using the media
to amplify the spell. She claimed that it took a witch to recognise
such a magic spell. If we accept that, then Rove is a wizard, and he
was not immune to his own spell.
Sioux Rose
RACE TO INFINITY: You covered the spiritual dimension of this discussion well. It explains why thinkers like Mr. GREEN never felt the need to store up riches on this plane, nor did I. I, too, inherited stock recently so it's something of a letdown to (as a freelance writer who frequently struggled near poverty with a child on each arm) see it go up in smoke. Not all of us have sought greed! It probably could be said that people who live a RICH inner life and appreciate life's intangibles like love, wisdom, peace, beauty and truth require less in the way of the expensive toys. It was clear to me early on that there will always be the NEXT toy, and that DESIRE itself is what's cultivated by media through its magnetic arm of advertising. In the TAROT the DEVIL card represents the insatiable lust for material things. NEVER do these things satisfy... because as Christ taught, the kingdom is within, or we cannot be really sated by things outside the self. Inner peace is priceless. Anything with a price CAN and does challenge that state. Because of the economic uncertainties, I am really making a point of being conscious of EVERY small blessing. When I have my morning espresso, I am grateful. I think a grateful heart is the richest heart... and it seems that the attitude of gratitude, if experienced in accord with a truly generous spirit, ensures we will have what we TRULY need.
RTDRURY: Great post.
USAN: Love your idea!
Perhaps an economic melt down would not be so bad in the long run if would lead to a more sensible use of our resources with more localized economies that practice permaculture.
How many earth’s would it take to lead the good life popularized by the media and bought by the populous?
Why is it that no matter what type of political system is in place that a hierarchy of the elite tend to lead a life of privilege?
Maybe our basic motivations and values sets need to be seriously reexamined.
Blame the educational system for teaching that life is all about money. Blame the culture - the game shows with screaming contestants hoping to win a ton of money. Blame the political system that is based on money. Blame Oprah, the champion of Capitalism. Blame the republicans and the democrats who want to keep this system going.
Rumor has it that Congress voted for the bailout because they were threatened that martial law would be declared otherwise. The troops are ready to put down any uprising? Wow - how did things get this bad. Something in the water - radiation from cell phone towers - not enough vitamin D.....
I bet that 95% of the voters will vote for more of the same. The enemy is not in Washington. He is the guy next door who will not vote for any candidate who is not a dem/repub.
VOTE NADER - or please don't vote. The lesser of the evils, is still evil.
What happened to Cynthia Mckinney, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and the rest? They're not Republican or Democrat.
Great post! Thank you!
You wrote (repeatedly in different words): "I am constantly astonished by the quantity of Americans whose expressed goal in life is simply to make lots of money, which I find especially bizarre since they don't seem to have any particular use in mind for all this cash."
One answer I gleaned from the writings of developmental/evolutinary spriritual philsopher Ken Wilber, who, in his book "The Atman Project", theorizes that the endless desire to pile up more and more money and possessions (or erecting monuments to oneself as emperors did in the ancient world) is fueled by a spiritual void, that is, by a desire for immortality (overcoming death - caused by a fear of death), and that this, of course, is a false answer, since the only true immortality is that of transcending the material and the ego and contacting eternal Spirit (Love) INSIDE oneself. It's a case of arrested development, almost completely unconscious on the part of these greedheads, and sold to the populace who can easily be persuaded that this is the answer to their death terrors (along with mythic-membership Christianity which promises an eternal chair in a mythical pre-rational "heaven" - a complete dumbing down [reducing to the mythic level] the true teachings and spirit of Christ whose true higher teachings remain "The kingdom of God is within" and "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to enter heaven" ["heaven" meaning the state of inner peace when one is in touch with Spirit/Love inside oneself which is at/one with all else in love and caring/compassion]).
In short, people chasing endless increase in money and property are falsley chasing immortality, reacting to their fear of death.
We have petty larceny laws, and at what, $1000, grand larceny laws.
We should have life-without-parole larceny laws at, say, $1 million, and capital larceny laws at $1 billion.
Hear, hear! This is an excellent suggestion!
"Greed is good" mania is what empowered the Pilgrims to show their ungrateful attitude against the heartwarming Native Indians and wipe them out. Except for the Great Depression Era to a limited extent, this country has always been founded on and credited with greed and violence. Why else do we fight resource wars for oil such as the one in Iraq? America loves violence and it's greedy for more oil and money. The thing is, the "greed is good" mania started its escalation under Ronald Raygun and has since never looked back. People who are frugal and don't gamble their money on Wall Street are somehow cast aside as pariahs. Greed was NEVER good, never is, and never will be. Until people quit being baited into money, greed is here to stay and torture us forever !
Greed is not good! What kind of heresy is this? Why the whole American Dream is based upon greed. Next we'll be being told that Manifest Destiny is not good, or faith is not good, or patriotism is not good.
My blog asserts all these things. Should I be rendered, sent to Guantanamo?
www.dangerouscreation.com
.
Nader says...
"Wake up Americans! Cut the crap and take over."
VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008…
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
So what are you going to do in the next 24 DAYS?????
We can beat the MSM by using the INTERNET...
Spread the word.Go to all the blogs.
Nader for President.
What say you America ?????
VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
http://www.votenader.org/blog/
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
"VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…"
I'll be glad if Nader is even remotely lucky to get Congress on his side should he win. Don't get me wrong. I like the guy and love his ideas. However, what has he done for the Green Party for the past 8 years other than leave them crumbling and now in shambles with Cynthia left to try to put together what's left of it? Wouldn't you agree that Nader's great ideas and dedication be better spent towards empowering other young folks like him trying to run for local, state, and even Congressional offices?
.
HEY! I SAY YOUVE GOT IT THERE!!
What do you all think>?
Greed is good for animals, bad for humans.
Not very good for very many animals either. At least all those with any kind of social structure - which is a majority of mammals, a lot of birds, even some fish and insects.
Animals, except us, generally, just take what they need, nothgin more.
Until they come into contact with human animals. I wonder how we could iradicate the "greed" gene.
Margaret Mead--"When evolution decided that man needed a bigger brain, it wildly overshot the mark"!
"Animals, except us, generally, just take what they need, nothgin more."
Exactamente.
Animals don't have money. They take what they can defend, nothing more. Money goes against nature. It turns natural competition into mindless destruction.
Great article. My sentiments exactly. This bullshit system of greed and exploitation has finally shown its true face, not that many of us hadn't known what it was for decades. Let it crumble.
"They attempted to build economic systems on the equally false notion that selfishness can be completely erased from human psychology as a motivating force. It can't."
As the Cubans have illustrated in their very successful communist experiment, the idea is not to erase selfishness from human psychology. The idea is to erase selfishness from the institution of governance. This of course requires control over the institution. It is not an easy prospect for those with an agenda to erase selfishness from the institution to achieve control over the institution, but the Cubans prove that it is possible. Maybe Americans can erase selfishness from their institutions too. Progressives suggest an embrace of localism to build people power, so that the people's agenda may be realized sooner.
I agree with you.
Will another $1000 fil the hole in your soul?
When every living human being has what they need to survive with dignity, greed will be seen as vile and out of place. I am not sure that, even Cuba has achieved that . But I do not think that it is impossible.
They are certainly doing better than they were under Baptiste'!
Mr. Green lists some of the dubious things we get in return for the massive federal debt, e.g. oil and agri subsidies, etc. But those subsidies are just the tip of the iceberg. By allowing elites to define our federal policies, and in turn the bulk of our resource allocations, we get a massive infrastructure of unsustainable systems and methods in return. The interstate freeway system versus a similar capacity rail system represents about a ten-fold waste of resources. The federal policy to push meat over-production, to addict Americans to a diet of 1/2 lb. of meat every single day of the year, represents another ten-fold waste of resources. The finance industry dropped the interest rates to enable over-building in housing that represents yet another effective ten-fold waste of resources. Isn't the US military expenditure about ten times that of the next highest country? And the healthcare master plan no doubt is to increase the current two-fold waste toward another ten-fold waste of resources. The economic instability so evident today is only part of the problem. The volume of economic activity, driven by the idiotic logic of perpetual economic growth, is simply not sustainable.
Those are all great examples of how massive wastefulness is essentially "built in" to the American mode of economic organization. DMG mentions that "...no politician can even talk about raising taxes in America anymore without risking career suicide." Likewise, no politician can question any of these other areas of waste, either -- because to do so would be to threaten those whose wealth is based on doing things in the current wasteful fashion.
The subjects that politicians can address constitute a tiny subset of the total range of "potentially discussable" subjects. Any subject or idea that might in any way be threatening to any powerful domestic interest is effectively "off the table" for discussion. For instance, you can't talk about cutting military spending. Relatedly, you can't challenge any of the "external threat" concepts ("The War on Terror") that serve as props for military spending.
One might well ask, "How are the ruling elite able to control the range of permissible subjects?" The answer is that they do it through the corporate media, and the 2-party system. Those institutions serve as mechanisms via which elites are able to keep unwanted ideas "off the table." They are effective & powerful "filters" serving to block any conceptual challenge to the status quo.
Despite limited differences between the worldviews of the D's, the R's, & the media, they all unite in enforcing the core defenses of the status quo, centering on corporate capitalism, and its corollaries, militarism & nationalism. For instance, rtdrury writes, "The volume of economic activity, driven by the idiotic logic of perpetual economic growth, is simply not sustainable." This is a good example of an idea that D's, R's, & the media would unite to block out.
Brilliant Rant! This is spot on. The death of Gordon Gekko. I have never voted Rethuglican and more or less ignored politics until 2000 when GWB was threatening America. I was young and stupid in 1980 when Lord Reagan started tearing America down. I inherited a pretty nice chunk of money invested in mutual funds about 7 years ago and those funds are going up in smoke. I have had an uncomfortable feeling about the US dependence on oil ever since I started driving in the early '80s. It just seems so..... Obsolete and primitive. Kinda like the dinosaurs that Pallin insists were co-existent with Homo Sapiens. Note to Sarah: The Flintstones was Not a Documentary!
Greed has undone more men than anything. GREED, LIE, MISLEAD, FRAUD, under the Bush/Cheney Administration has become the American way. In SWVA, our 350 Million year old Appalachian Mountains are being decapitated and gouged to death all for the love of money. http://www.wisecountyissues.com
Thanks DMG - as usual, a most insightful rant. I don't care about money - except making enough to live on - never did. Of course, I'm a Musician. I guess that makes me 7 standard deviations out - hahahaha. And, I love it.
So true! Prof. Green speaks for me almost uncannily (if that's a word)!
But push me even further out on the left tail of the curve, because I'm a licensed "professional" civil engineer and still feel that way too.
Everybody Can Be As Rich As A Wall Street Banker!
I have earned just as much money in my "life" as the $480 million that Lehman Brothers paid their former CEO Richard Fuld, but it took me a little longer to earn it.
When I was born in 8000 BC, before the invention of agriculture, I immediately began receiving a typical salary for an assistant professor at a small southern college, $48,000 per year.
I earned this princely salary without a break for 70 years, and as soon as I died at the extraordinarily old age (for a caveman) of 70, I was immediately reincarnated in the obstetrics ward of our cave, and began earning exactly the same salary as before.
At the time of my first "death," 70 years of non-stop professoring had earned me about $3.5 million, significantly more than the average assistant professor will earn in an ordinary career of about 40 years, but some of us are just luckier than others.
After 70 more years of academic toil, I expired again and was immediately reborn and re-hired, and likewise again and again through 143 generations, until my accumulated earnings added up to $480 million!
I hope this little story will inspire the youth of today to get out and fight for the few remaining tenure-track postitions at small southern colleges.
In only 10,000 years, you can earn just as much money as former Lehman Brothers CEO Richard Fuld, or any of the other bankers who destroyed the global economy.
Jacob Freeze
Good for you Orez-Eno for seeing their deception & not being pressured into buying stock through their mind control brainwashing manipulations of being a disloyal employee. A system of greed, & manipulations. Perhaps a Beast Kingdom of the Book of Revelation as Revelation talks about the Buyers & Sellers of things & not in a good light at all.
They were selling you that you were disloyal & you didn't buy into their sales job.
As their system becomes a globalist system & what may really be what is meant by they will be worshipping the Beast & the image of the Beast. They'll love this globalist Beast that some refer to as the New World Order just as they love their Beast Kingdoms that make up this Beast.
But those thoughts are particular to myself & I don't require any agreement on them by any other person.
Quote from article:
“…a system that is built on the premise that people are only motivated by selfish greed, and therefore can only produce prosperity by letting every actor pursue their own self-interest, unfettered by any societal concerns, is an equally disastrous notion.”
I couldn’t agree more. One regulation that I would like to see imposed is the following:
No person should be allowed to purchase stock in a company that they are an employee of, or that they are on the board of directors of. I believe it is a conflict of interest.
I worked for a company (Comverse) who pressured its employees to purchase their own stock, with the crooks walking away with the money when it fell from $150.00 to $2.00. I was one of the few employees to refuse to purchase, but I was ostracized as a disloyal employee. But I got the last laugh when in the end my boss lost all his money. I laughed so hard it hurt.
If the corporation is owned by it employees in equal amounts that is called
a co-operative. These are known work very well, so long as the total number
of employees is small. Everybody then works in a constructive way for the
common good.
"with the crooks walking away with the money when it fell from $150.00 to $2.00"
That does not sound like a co-operative at all. Who walked away, and how did
they manage to take everybody's money with them?
"No person should be allowed to purchase stock in a company that they are an employee of, or that they are on the board of directors of. I believe it is a conflict of interest."
What a great idea!
'd do away with stock ownership altogether. Only worker-owned cooperatives would be legal businesses - shares (and salaries) would be either equal, or based on some measure of effort or sacrifice for the enterprise.
Financing could be provided by publicly owned, community-based, people's banks. very large publicly vital enterprises - all infrastructure, natural resource development, would all be nationalized.
The whole idea of capitalism being the only only alternative, represents a breathtaking (I think deliberately engineered) lack of imagination!
Capitalism done correctly, i.e. regulated, has still proven to be better than any other system so far.
But if we don't start re-regulating fairly quickly, I may have to rethink my opinion. This system we have now is not capitalism.
Where has that happened. Can you give me an example.
"Where has that happened"
Capitalism did exist even in FDR's days but at least it wasn't RIGGED unlike the past 3 decades. Do you really think an over-inflated individualistic nation such as the USA will ever even give socialism a chance? Other than the corporations, not a chance. Capitalism doesn't have to be so shitty though. In fact, any system is prone to abuse and rigging and that's what needs to be corrected.
So, if it "worked so well" (you didnt really say that it did), then, why did FDR have to "fix" the Great Depression?
Dont you have any examples of where it has worked well int the world? Dont say Austria--I'vwe been there.
If you say teh EU, Canada, etc.--those are Socialist Democracries, and I would agree with that form.