Capitalism's Self-Inflicted Apocalypse
After the overthrow of communist governments in Eastern Europe, capitalism was paraded as the indomitable system that brings prosperity and democracy, the system that would prevail unto the end of history.
The present economic crisis, however, has convinced even some prominent free-marketeers that something is gravely amiss. Truth be told, capitalism has yet to come to terms with several historical forces that cause it endless trouble: democracy, prosperity, and capitalism itself, the very entities that capitalist rulers claim to be fostering.
Plutocracy vs. Democracy
Let us consider democracy first. In the United States we hear that
capitalism is wedded to democracy, hence the phrase, "capitalist
democracies." In fact, throughout our history there has been a largely
antagonistic relationship between democracy and capital concentration.
Some eighty years ago Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis commented,
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth
concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." Moneyed
interests have been opponents not proponents of democracy.
The Constitution itself was fashioned by affluent gentlemen who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to repeatedly warn of the baneful and dangerous leveling effects of democracy. The document they cobbled together was far from democratic, being shackled with checks, vetoes, and requirements for artificial super majorities, a system designed to blunt the impact of popular demands.
In the early days of the Republic the rich and well-born imposed property qualifications for voting and officeholding. They opposed the direct election of candidates (note, their Electoral College is still with us). And for decades they resisted extending the franchise to less favored groups such as propertyless working men, immigrants, racial minorities, and women.
Today conservative forces continue to reject more equitable electoral features such as proportional representation, instant runoff, and publicly funded campaigns. They continue to create barriers to voting, be it through overly severe registration requirements, voter roll purges, inadequate polling accommodations, and electronic voting machines that consistently "malfunction" to the benefit of the more conservative candidates.
At times ruling interests have suppressed radical publications and public protests, resorting to police raids, arrests, and jailings-applied most recently with full force against demonstrators in St. Paul, Minnesota, during the 2008 Republican National Convention.
The conservative plutocracy also seeks to rollback democracy's social
gains, such as public education, affordable housing, health care,
collective bargaining, a living wage, safe work conditions, a non-toxic
sustainable environment; the right to privacy, the separation of church
and state, freedom from compulsory pregnancy, and the right to marry
any consenting adult of one's own
choosing.
About a century ago, US labor leader Eugene Victor Debs was thrown into
jail during a strike. Sitting in his cell he could not escape the
conclusion that in disputes between two private interests, capital and
labor, the state was not a neutral arbiter. The force of the
state--with its police, militia, courts, and laws-was unequivocally on
the side of the company bosses. From this, Debs concluded that
capitalism was not just an economic system but an entire social order,
one that rigged the rules of democracy to favor the moneybags.
Capitalist rulers continue to pose as the progenitors of democracy even as they subvert it, not only at home but throughout Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Any nation that is not "investor friendly," that attempts to use its land, labor, capital, natural resources, and markets in a self-developing manner, outside the dominion of transnational corporate hegemony, runs the risk of being demonized and targeted as "a threat to U.S. national security."
Democracy becomes a problem for corporate America not when it fails to work but when it works too well, helping the populace move toward a more equitable and livable social order, narrowing the gap, however modestly, between the superrich and the rest of us. So democracy must be diluted and subverted, smothered with disinformation, media puffery, and mountains of campaign costs; with rigged electoral contests and partially disfranchised publics, bringing faux victories to more or less politically safe major-party candidates.
Capitalism vs. Prosperity
The corporate capitalists no more encourage prosperity than do they
propagate democracy. Most of the world is capitalist, and most of the
world is neither prosperous nor particularly democratic. One need only
think of capitalist Nigeria, capitalist Indonesia, capitalist Thailand,
capitalist Haiti, capitalist Colombia, capitalist Pakistan, capitalist
South Africa, capitalist Latvia, and various other members of the Free
World--more accurately, the Free Market World.
A prosperous, politically literate populace with high expectations about its standard of living and a keen sense of entitlement, pushing for continually better social conditions, is not the plutocracy's notion of an ideal workforce and a properly pliant polity. Corporate investors prefer poor populations. The poorer you are, the harder you will work-for less. The poorer you are, the less equipped you are to defend yourself against the abuses of wealth.
In the corporate world of "free-trade," the number of billionaires is increasing faster than ever while the number of people living in poverty is growing at a faster rate than the world's population. Poverty spreads as wealth accumulates.
Consider the United States. In the last eight years alone, while vast fortunes accrued at record rates, an additional six million Americans sank below the poverty level; median family income declined by over $2,000; consumer debt more than doubled; over seven million Americans lost their health insurance, and more than four million lost their pensions; meanwhile homelessness increased and housing foreclosures reached pandemic levels.
It is only in countries where capitalism has been reined in to some degree by social democracy that the populace has been able to secure a measure of prosperity; northern European nations such as Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark come to mind. But even in these social democracies popular gains are always at risk of being rolled back.
It is ironic to credit capitalism with the genius of economic prosperity when most attempts at material betterment have been vehemently and sometimes violently resisted by the capitalist class. The history of labor struggle provides endless illustration of this.
To the extent that life is bearable under the present U.S. economic order, it is because millions of people have waged bitter class struggles to advance their living standards and their rights as citizens, bringing some measure of humanity to an otherwise heartless politico-economic order.
A Self-devouring Beast
The capitalist state has two roles long recognized by political
thinkers. First, like any state it must provide services that cannot be
reliably developed through private means, such as public safety and
orderly traffic. Second, the capitalist state protects the haves from
the have-nots, securing the process of capital accumulation to benefit
the moneyed interests, while heavily circumscribing the demands of the
working populace, as Debs observed from his jail cell.
There is a third function of the capitalist state seldom mentioned. It consists of preventing the capitalist system from devouring itself. Consider the core contradiction Karl Marx pointed to: the tendency toward overproduction and market crisis. An economy dedicated to speedups and wage cuts, to making workers produce more and more for less and less, is always in danger of a crash. To maximize profits, wages must be kept down. But someone has to buy the goods and services being produced. For that, wages must be kept up. There is a chronic tendency-as we are seeing today-toward overproduction of private sector goods and services and underconsumption of necessities by the working populace.
In addition, there is the frequently overlooked self-destruction created by the moneyed players themselves. If left completely unsupervised, the more active command component of the financial system begins to devour less organized sources of wealth.
Instead of trying to make money by the arduous task of producing and marketing goods and services, the marauders tap directly into the money streams of the economy itself. During the 1990s we witnessed the collapse of an entire economy in Argentina when unchecked free marketeers stripped enterprises, pocketed vast sums, and left the country's productive capacity in shambles. The Argentine state, gorged on a heavy diet of free-market ideology, faltered in its function of saving capitalism from the capitalists.
Some years later, in the United States, came the multi-billion-dollar plunder perpetrated by corporate conspirators at Enron, WorldCom, Harkin, Adelphia, and a dozen other major companies. Inside players like Ken Lay turned successful corporate enterprises into sheer wreckage, wiping out the jobs and life savings of thousands of employees in order to pocket billions.
These thieves were caught and convicted. Does that not show capitalism's self-correcting capacity? Not really. The prosecution of such malfeasance- in any case coming too late-was a product of democracy's accountability and transparency, not capitalism's. Of itself the free market is an amoral system, with no strictures save "caveat emptor."
In the meltdown of 2008-09 the mounting financial surplus created a problem for the moneyed class: there were not enough opportunities to invest. With more money than they knew what to do with, big investors poured immense sums into nonexistent housing markets and other dodgy ventures, a legerdemain of hedge funds, derivatives, high leveraging, credit default swaps, predatory lending, and whatever else.
Among the victims were other capitalists, small investors, and the many workers who lost billions of dollars in savings and pensions. Perhaps the premiere brigand was Bernard Madoff. Described as "a longstanding leader in the financial services industry," Madoff ran a fraudulent fund that raked in $50 billion from wealthy investors, paying them back "with money that wasn't there," as he himself put it. The plutocracy devours its own children.
In the midst of the meltdown, at an October 2008 congressional hearing, former chair of the Federal Reserve and orthodox free-market devotee Alan Greenspan confessed that he had been mistaken to expect moneyed interests--groaning under an immense accumulation of capital that needs to be invested somewhere--to suddenly exercise self-restraint.
The classic laissez-faire theory is even more preposterous than Greenspan made it. In fact, the theory claims that everyone should pursue their own selfish interests without restraint. This unbridled competition supposedly will produce maximum benefits for all because the free market is governed by a miraculously benign "invisible hand" that optimizes collective outputs. ("Greed is good.")
Is the crisis of 2008-09 caused by a chronic tendency toward overproduction and hyper-financial accumulation, as Marx would have it? Or is it the outcome of the personal avarice of people like Bernard Madoff? In other words, is the problem systemic or individual? In fact, the two are not mutually exclusive. Capitalism breeds the venal perpetrators, and rewards the most unscrupulous among them. The crimes and crises are not irrational departures from a rational system, but the converse: they are the rational outcomes of a basically irrational and amoral system.
Worse still, the ensuing multi-billion dollar government bailouts are themselves being turned into an opportunity for pillage. Not only does the state fail to regulate, it becomes itself a source of plunder, pulling vast sums from the federal money machine, leaving the taxpayers to bleed.
Those who scold us for "running to the government for a handout" are themselves running to the government for a handout. Corporate America has always enjoyed grants-in-aid, loan guarantees, and other state and federal subventions. But the 2008-09 "rescue operation" offered a record feed at the public trough. More than $350 billion was dished out by a right-wing lame-duck Secretary of the Treasury to the biggest banks and financial houses without oversight--not to mention the more than $4 trillion that has come from the Federal Reserve. Most of the banks, including JPMorgan Chase and Bank of New York Mellon, stated that they had no intention of letting anyone know where the money was going.
The big bankers used some of the bailout, we do know, to buy up smaller banks and prop up banks overseas. CEOs and other top banking executives are spending bailout funds on fabulous bonuses and lavish corporate spa retreats. Meanwhile, big bailout beneficiaries like Citigroup and Bank of America laid off tens of thousands of employees, inviting the question: why were they given all that money in the first place?
While hundreds of billions were being doled out to the very people who had caused the catastrophe, the housing market continued to wilt, credit remained paralyzed, unemployment worsened, and consumer spending sank to record lows.
In sum, free-market corporate capitalism is by its nature a disaster waiting to happen. Its essence is the transformation of living nature into mountains of commodities and commodities into heaps of dead capital. When left entirely to its own devices, capitalism foists its diseconomies and toxicity upon the general public and upon the natural environment--and eventually begins to devour itself.
The immense inequality in economic power that exists in our capitalist society translates into a formidable inequality of political power, which makes it all the more difficult to impose democratic regulations.
If the paladins of Corporate America want to know what really threatens "our way of life," it is their way of life, their boundless way of pilfering their own system, destroying the very foundation on which they stand, the very community on which they so lavishly feed.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
161 Comments so far
Show AllWith respect, I suggest that Mr. Parenti errs in not making a distinction between "Corporate America" as a whole, and the elite financial community in particular. This distinction is particularly important if the "paladins" (the top deciders) happen to be the bankers.
The collapse of the the growth paradigm was always inevitable on a finite planet. What the financial elite has done is accelerate and orchestrate that collapse, so that it hit the whole global financial system at the same time. This created global panic, what Naomi Klein calls a Shock Doctrine scenario. This enabled them to push through the bailout schemes, which leaves every Western nation with unrepayable debt to the bankers.
The world will pass through very bad times, and many will starve, but some new economic regime will emerge, there will be billions of survivors, and the bankers will be in charge of the reconstruction process, creating their new world order. They will continue to lavishly feed.
Nobody is going to read this but I'll post it anyhow.
We are NOT IN A CAPITALIST SYSTEM.
The system where government uses tax payer money (your money) to bail out certain favored companies that it deems need "your support" is fascism. We are in a fascist economic system.
In a Capitalist system, companies that make bad decisions go bankrupt. They never get bailed out by government, and government doesn't give money to private corporations for assistance. If banks fail in a Capitalist system, they fail. Depositors who didn't due their diligence before depositing money with them may even lose their money, since the banks loaned it all out to deadbeats.
In a Capitalist system, people go to JAIL for making "mistakes" like this. They don't get bailed out. They end up in the clink for stealing depositor's money.
In a Capitalist system, banks that didn't make wreckless loans run by people who are not criminals see a surge of business as investors and depositors flock to them to deposit their money there.
And the system corrects, violently, and swiftly.
In a Fascist system though, we all pretend the government can fix it until the government itself becomes insolvent and that's right where we are. You better buy at lest a little gold and some silver, because what you have left in dollars may soon be as worthless as toilet paper.
Please reference:
"UNEQUAL PROTECTION", by Thom Hartmann! Also, his "What Would Jefferson Do?".
At the root of all this is the CORPORATION as a way to organize commerce.
Legal "personhood" giving inanimate, amoral entities the Constitutional rights of humans is the root of this astounding, but predictable failure we now have. Its little brother is the combination of business and state.
The only children of the last Iceage to have Corporations and profit are we... the ones now currently failing the sustainable society test.
What's the real bottom line?---We're not homosapiens, we're homocleverass, and Mother ain't buyin' it.
Man finds himself finally arriving, after a long and painful history of trying to force his laws above natures laws, lusting to make his laws superior finally to hers. He turns reluctantly now from the edge of the abyss.
This man never was trying to find hope, he was trying to find a way to end the power of hope forever. We see him now bowing his head as he turns away from his own sure death, percieved finally in the end of hope. Humbly bowing his head again to nature and her laws and beginning anew again, accepting finally and forever that with hope there is life and without hope there is nothing but sure death for him and his kind.
We pray we, his children, the generation of hope, have learned his lesson. We pray there is not one more mad rush back toward the false belief that we can overcome nature if we only try hard enough. This backslide may be the one that finally gives the darkness the final hold necessary to pull us to our final reward for such foolish desires.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Michael Parenti, An excellent article it is! Well written and always aptly exposing the colossal lies and hypocrisy of the capitalism-democracy song.
Capitalism is not a political system, and its twentieth-century history shows very graphically that it is in fact compatible with just about any regime: for example, with a phony democracy such as the one Japan has had since the end of World War II (basically, a one party system; see the analysis of Chalmer Johnson in his book "Blowback"), with Germany's Nazi dictatorhip, with Franco's brand of authoritarian rule, with Mussolini's fascism, with the Greek military junta (installed by courtesy of the CIA), with the terror regime of Suharto in Indonesia (1965-1998; another gift to the world from the CIA), with a theocracy such as that of Saudia Arabia, with Communist China, et cetera.
As long as a political regime can accomodate the greed, venality, disregard for human decency (not to mention human rights), the plundering of the ecosphere (its animals, plants, minerals, water, etc.) characteristic of capitalism (all of it euphemistically called 'growth'), capital will move in and make itself at home.
The best example of the contradiction of assuming all Americans are on equal footing within our society is the example Obama gave yesterday when he informed his White House staff that all those who earn MORE THAN $100,000.00 PER YEAR would have their wages frozen!!! What more proof does one need to understand this is not a genuine democracy we live in???
I'm 65 years old and have never actually met someone who earns that amount of money per year! But then I'm just a member of the "middle class" who enjoys the right to "vote."
I have a Ph.D. and have spent my working life in jobs which provide direct service to individuals (counseling), the majority of whom have responded with deep gratitude. I wonder how many of our "financial elite" have ever experienced that kind of genuine satisfaction?
Something to consider: capitalism is a suicide bomber.
capitalism can't be saved.
all the "fixes" obama and other capitalist system governments try will only eventually prolong the decline - and even , from the way they are doing it, "bailing out" the very institutions that are at the heart of capitalism that produces these disasters , worsen things in the end. the only way to do it is to invest in PEOPLE...not "money capitalists" . invest in HIGH WAGES, invest towards FULL EMPLOYMENT economies that are the rational thing to do and very do-able and just a matter of mentality.
PEOPLE are the TRUE WEALTH OF NATIONS...not MONEY...not the system that merely serves to "hoard" wealth represented as money in the hands of a few.
obama will find out -- he will have to do something MUCH MORE RADICAL than merely 800 billion dollars ...it is just a drop in the bucket and USELESS when it doesn't translate DIRECTLY into HIGH WAGE economy with full employment as the goal.
it is nothing more than a matter of POLICY from the correct mentality.
capitalism is "zombie" walking......
First of all, thank you Michael Parenti for hitting the bulls eye and unveiling the myth of capitalism and it's insatiable desire for monopoly and greed at all levels of government and commerce.
There are so many interesting and insightful comments, offering opinions and the ways and means many of you believe are achievable for a more equitable egalitarian society. I share many of your concepts.
In 'Plutocracy vs. Democracy', Dr. Parenti illustrates the sum total of the anti-democratic, plutocratic/capitalist system, and how it keeps the citizenry in place. Look at the Electoral College and for instance, the unequal representation in the U.S. Senate. California, the nation's most populous state, with over 35 million people has two US Senators, as does Wyoming, with less than a million people. At least in the House of Representatives, the larger the population, the more seats in the House.
Throughout the ages, in just about every type of society, the two biggest crimes committed against individuals and nations are the personal (it starts with me) and collective (national) destructive desire for money (wealth) and power. (control over others or their countries and resources) This has been going on since the beginning, with very brief intervals of brotherhood and harmony between individuals and society.
Most wars are fought for the control of money and power, and in some cases, ideology is thrown in as a sideshow and a diversion. The masses who are willing to sacrifice their lives and limbs on the battlefield have been duped into thinking their sacrifice was for a good cause, and that the other side are the bad guys. Capitalists, monopolists, and just about every other type of tyrant fear the educated classes most, and do their best in keeping the public in the dark, and hopefully, non-participatory.
Michael laid it out, and we need to organize our communities to better serve each other, and by doing so, create a sustainable economy and improve the quality of the environment for future generations. Militarism and flag-waving is not the answer. Think of all the energy and natural resources used to create this culture of violence. For whose benefit?
And now the Wall Street rip-off, while schools, libraries and social services are being closed, cut, or eliminated. Do our so-called "representatives in Congress really work for us? Grass-roots action is surely needed. Get involved in your local governments and local community sovereignty building. You'll be surprised at what can be accomplished by "the will of the people."
how you envision organizing our community , and what's your explanation on the mismatch between the level of technology we have and the primitiveness of social structure we live in
"... what's your explanation on the mismatch between the level of technology we have and the primitiveness of social structure we live in."
My answer in two words: religious faith.
Parenti comprehends the context people in politics function. The rollercoaster of values of their shares hardly make them ably to think about anything else. And jet they must remember the speeches; opium for the masses.
In Obama's inaugural speech he criticized and admonished "those who prefer leisure over work". Maybe the obsessive work ethic is what's wrong with our culture; work more to buy more to pollute more while enriching the wealthy. Was he criticizing the wealthy? Who was he suggesting prefers leisure and who was he implying needed to work harder? I prefer leisure, is there something wrong with that? I guess it raises the question of what constitutes leisure and what is work?
Do we work in order to live or do we live in order to work?
I think what he means is that after work or school you need to do national service instead of leisure. Also, it might be a warning to those on welfare.
I am pretty sure he is not talking about the wealthy. Their leisure is picking your pockets, so technically they are at work, despite having so much fun.
Of course, he said nothing about why the good jobs have left the US so people who want to work can not, nor high immigration despite high unemployment and stagnating or declining real wages due to excess labour. Same same. Change-not.
Why do people need to do national service? Isn't working a 40-hour work week producing everything that adds wealth to the society national service? Can you see the likes of Rush Limbaugh doing national service? The culture is live to work, instead of work to live. On the surface, national service sounds like a grand idea. Could it be, however, that is it is another method by which the owning class can become more wealthy and dilute the value of labor? The Calvinist ethic is the root of many of our problems today. And no amount of excess Calvinism is going to solve anything until those that make hundreds of times more income than the minimum wage worker realize that they (the wealthy) are the root of the problem.
When I was a kid, my father's income from a 40 hour work week as a laborer supported an entire family. Today, the two over worked adults can't do that with full time jobs. Now tell me, why should these people do national service. Those that own government should not be asking what what can people do for me. Enough of that.
I agree that in our current culture, adding national service to our already full plates seems to be daunting at best, impossible at worst. However, I don't think that the intention of service is to build monetary wealth so much as to build human wealth?Perhaps Obama's strategy is to get more people involved in national service so that we as a society will not be so far removed from the plight of everyday Americans & a culture shift will begin to emerge? Personally, when I feel as if I'm pushed to the brink with trying to manage life, I feel better about my own struggles when I take the time to reach out to other people. Imagine if the end result of this initiative is a nation that replaces personal greed with empathy & action for others? Likely a daydream I know, but worth the effort I think.
A nascent direct democracy with an uneducated public may be as bad as an established representative "democracy". However, the public demonstrates time and again that it wants good education. And unlike representative governments that invariably come to represent oligarchs or commissars, in a direct democracy, the public will get what it wants. Chances of becoming an educated public with good government increase exponentially in a direct democracy, whereas they decrease under representative government. The right wants to keep the public dumbed down and the left wants to keep it unnaturaly uniform and under an iron fist.
ezeflyer,
Agreed. The plan must include specifications and procedures for the new institutions needed to establish and maintain the agenda, research and present the relevant information on which decisions can be based, and conduct the actual polling. Further, there may be a need for voter registration, identification, and verification.
Your point about education is fundamental. J.S. Mill, for example, asserts that true democracy is the only form of government that educates its citizens by their participation, thereby making them fit to govern themselves. Without that, they become as 'a nation of sheep grazing contentedly on the hillside' which phrase provided some book titles.
Also agree about we get what we want, as distinct from what someone else decides to offer us. One popular complaint is that government now is not about my needs or what interests me. I think all the implications are salutory, even in matters like foreign policy. Like people the world over, we just want to raise our kids and be left alone otherwise. We want a peaceful, orderly world and harbor little or no messianic urges. We do not want to be the world's policeman.
And we must have the facts. A modernized and expanded version of the Congressional Research Office or the Library of Congress could house a horde of highly educated people who can be charged with discovering and presenting honestly the needed intelligence. That function is much too important to be entrusted to private interests as is now done.
Thanks for your contribution.
Gorsegrower
People must understand the difference between competitive capitalism and monopoly capitalism. For the past 10 years, this country as tended toward the latter. Government regulations are written by the largest corporations and designed to weed out competition since the largest corporations are best able to handle the new regulations. There is a revolving door between the regulatory agencies and the corporations that are regulated.
When democracy represents the interests of not the worker and the corporate citizens, a balance and prosperity for all is reached. We no longer have a representative democracy. The Corporations pre-select the candidates among which the citizens may vote, and MSM helps voters make the "right" choice. Those who get elected serve their corporate masters. Keep in mind the largest corporations are global corporations and not loyal to America.
The silly voter continues to vote for the lesser evil and place their money on the horse most likely to win. Poltics has become a religion with those on the right or the left treating their leaders as high priests or even a messiah, and have faith in slogans like Hope and Change. Amen. We had separation between religion and state, so today politics has become a religion and there is no separation, and global corporations control government.
there is no difference between Monopoly Capitalism and "competitive" capitalism.
Monopoly capitalism is simply the RESULT of "competitive" CAPITALISM. CAPITALISM ITSELF - regardless of whether it can be defined as "competitive" to begin with or initiated by "monopolistic" capitalism and vice-versa - engenders BOTH results. one flows from the other.
Capitalism, by NATURE is exploitative, rapacious and wasteful - for the sake of profit. since that is its nature -- and places Profit above all else , whatever the process to GET profit above all else - it EVENTUALLY arrives at MONOPOLY by large corporations and entities (even something called "state capitalism" that really looks after the interests of private conglomerates under the banner of "government" (which is of course , by this point already Fascism -- "the proper definition of fascism is CORPORATISM...for it is really the use of the power of the state to enhance the power of corporations" : Benito Mussolini)
this is also called by Karl Marx :"the special phase of capitalism before its collapse"
Monopoly is itself the result of course of PROFIT MAKING ABOVE ALL ELSE which eventually seeks to preclude ANY rivalry ...again : it is the NATURE of capitalism.
it can't help itself. it is like a never-ending CONSUMER of all things and life in order to create for its adherents what marx also correctly called (near the very end of his Das Kapital) - paraphrase:
a way to make oneself (adherents) feel important and valuable by means of never-ending profit seeking.
HOW COULD that nature be BENIGN fundamentally? it CAN"T - whether one wants to make differentiations between "competitive capitalism" and "monopolistic capitalism".
there is only one necessary definition - CAPITALISM.
it is BOTH Monopolistic and competitive for BEING
"competitive" TOWARDS monopoly. its aim for its adherents before they TOO are swallowed up by ever larger entities -- is to be "top dog" in this so-called "competitiveness" which is NBOT competition towards ENHANCING life and the value of human beings and life -- but competing towards who gets to BE ULTIMATE TOP DOG.
the PROCESS that comes with it, whether it takes generations or a century or four years or whatever ....leaves behind its "wealth accumulation" (NOT WEALTH CREATION) -- a wake of enormous untold disaster and suffering.
if anything the main reason capitalism is made to appear as "creating wealth" is because it has to HIDE the fact during the processes that it DESTROYS the REAL "wealth of nations" which is PEOPLE by DEVALUING THEM in comparison with Money Capital which is THEN used as the "power tool" with which to "asign value" to human labor and human beings and earth resources -- ALL in service to "money capital"...which is of course capitalism's great "insertion" into economics as its "power tool" ..but which is really WORTHLESS in essence..and which in ORDER to "become of value" to enact capitalism's "usefulness" -- people - by means of governments , central banks serving private interests, etc...and the attendant institutions which SERVICE this "BIG BOSS - Capitalism" -- INSINUATES ITSELF between people and resources ---
as something of Value "IN ITSELF" even IF IN REALITY-- it is WORTHLESS and just the product of theories of "value" and even if by itself - it has NO INHERENT VALUE -
as opposed to a human being, the labor of a human being, and the resources of the earth. .
CAPITALISM is a monstrous concoction. nothing more. there doesn't need to be differentiations between "monopoly" and "competitive" capitalism.
CAPITALISM , in reality -- is a WEALTH DESTROYING philosophy.
I agree with some of what you say. Monopoly capitalism in it's essence is fascism (or corporatism, a merger between capitalism and government) which is the stepping stone to global communism according to Marx (imagine if you will a single global corporate entity which also governs the citizen workers).
In a competitive market, there is competion for labour, prices are low, and quality high. The good companies prosper, the bad ones fail. Where there is monopoly, you have high prices, low quality and labour is enslaved. The problem is the marriage between government and the global monopolists, which eliminates competition among corporations in selected industries. It is not capitalism itself.
Also, our financial system where private global banksters are given monopoly control over money creation, and so determine which industries and technologies get financing is a big part of monopoly capitalism. Thats why we have not developed alternative sources of energy and why our infrastructure is decaying, and why health care is so expensive.
People do not realize how Big Oil/Energy and other large industries are married to each other and global banking and finance cartels via interlocking directorships.
The same vultures are behind the abomination driving the push for carbon credits and trading under the new age religion of Gaia worship to save the world from mans CO2 (the devils going to get you, burn the witches who produce CO2 with their over-consumption or the sinners (man) will burn in hell on earth, a poor man may take comfort in that he serves Gaia by his inability to consume as much as he might, those who cast doubt on CO2's role despite the consensus of the high priests of this religion are deemed denialists/heretics).
Man can not progress without competition, stress and shock, thats one of the dictates of the theory of evolution. Of course, monopoly capitalism promotes competition and stress among the working class who compete for fewer jobs for lower pay, it finances and supplies wars of destruction, and manufacturers economic crisis and phony wars like the war on terror This is in accordance with the desires of the social darwinists who have given us eugenic programs under other names so as to keep man evolving. In a utopian world that an industrial world might be, the fear is that evolution would end, and perhaps there would be de-evolution.
Monopoly Capitalism, Government and Religion are soon to be merged under a Global Government (after a large depression and one more big war). In this world, the top dogs are the ruling class. The working class serve the ruling class. The individual has no value or rights, only responsibility and he must sacrifice for the well being of Gaia and their fellow man, and especially the ruling class. Thats the plan.
DNA testing will determine who can have children, how many, and which children will be allowed to live. When you retire and can no longer work, you will get to go to a Happy Home (address unknown). Stalin once said, if you don't work, you don't eat. Thats what Marxism is all about.
A Democratic government which limits the excesses of capitalism, and balances the interests of the working class and business interests works. Unfortunately, we are a Democracy in name only, and this has been the case for almost a 100 years.
It's not just for the last 10 years. It's more like ever since the Civil War.
To describe the trend towards monopoly capitalism accurately, you'd need to sketch out a timeline. Teddy Roosevelt was supposedly the "trust buster," so trusts were a problem even in the early 1900's. When Lenin wrote about "Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism" in 1916, he was already well aware of the rapidly increasing concentration of wealth of the biggest companies, & of the existence of a "financial oligarchy." Baran & Sweezy wrote "Monopoly Capitalism" in the mid 1960's, already saying that Marx's original analysis of capitalism had to be revised & updated, to describe an economy where there was no longer any such thing as real competition.
And of course, since the crisis of the 1970's, the trend towards monopoly capitalism has intensified much further, still.
Sorry, I meant 100 years with Teddy and his phony war on trusts which were replaced with regulation and did the same thing the trusts did.
Worse than the eradication of competition, the nature of the imposed currency gives those most closely tethered to the purse strings of the central banking system the power to take over all industry. But the irreversibility of the process of multiplication of debt nonetheless inevitably takes the system down, destroying even the biggest players, like the so called big 3 right now. The favored corporations of the central banking system line up for the handouts first, knowing of course that the system of exploitation will be served above the people, and at the ever further cost of the people.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
This sounds like a forum for the World Social Forum. There are links and interactive video options on the English Site.
Theree are 1804 organizations converging in Belem, Brazil in one week.
You can register on the website, wathch videos being posted. Heck - you can even try and get in touch with people there.
I think more and more that trans national civil converstions on economics is an absolute necessity. We have been conditioned to see únderdeveloped" countriies as incapable of contributing to progessive economic matters - just the opposite!
http://www.wsfprocess.net/msearch?portal_type=SFOrganisation
HUGE THANKS for this notice! I'll get registered as soon as possible. Won't be able to attend of course. Any other suggestions welcome.
BTW, if anyone here has experience with organizing a major political initiative, we're looking for you.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
There is an unmentioned even more critically fundamental and crippling problem that capitalists face, the basic problem of how to continue to turn a profit as goods are continually produced more more cheaply and easily for technological progress of the human mind. Marx and Thorstein Veblen especially saw the nature of capitalism to be one of depressions mitigated by war expenditure and other means of creating scarcity.
Veblen assumed depression to be the normal condition in a business-enterprise economy, to be relieved in periods of excitation caused by stimuli not intrinsic to the system (e.g., war, expansion abroad, etc.)
"THORSTEIN VEBLEN BY DOUGLAS F. DOWD 1966
An of course he would have agreed with Michael Parenti's description of the manipulation of fictitious money producing an eventual catastrophy for all including eventually the wealthy manipulators.
"The fabric of credit and capitalization is essentially a fabric of concerted make-believe resting on the routine credulity of the
business community at large." "Theory of the Leisure Class"
JayJanson wrote: "There is an unmentioned even more critically fundamental and crippling problem that capitalists face, the basic problem of how to continue to turn a profit as goods are continually produced more more cheaply and easily for technological progress of the human mind."
Jay,
This is neither unmentioned, nor critically crippling. The drive of truly free enterprise and humanity itself were always to innovate. You better serve the market, or you fall by the wayside. Truly free markets and truly free industry thrive on competition; they stagnate by the lack of it.
Sharing the fruits of industry rising and disappearing under this evolution is only a matter of distributing the work fairly... equally as much as necessary. "Profit" is merely integral to the end price you have to charge for potentially ever reduced involved labor. Natural improvement of the productivity of industry allows all of us to work less to maintain the same standard of living.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
All the above is misdirected. The analyses are correct, the inferences illogical.
Capitalism and its sins are the symptoms. The disease is the lack of democracy, which could be used to fix the symptoms.
Reform the political system first and you will then be able, as you are not now, to make the corrections. I remain unable to comprehend how you all can make this error in simple reasoning.
How many more years, he asked rhetorically, do you plan on spinning your wheels like this?
Gorsegrower
"He who's vision cannot cover history's three thousand years must in outer darkness hover, live within the days frontiers."
Goeth
Applying the above wisdom, tell me Gorsegrower, what is "democracy" in context what is it we are missing?
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
I think you're largely right in your disposition, Gorsegrower, except for one thing.
What we have really here is not free enterprise. We have a form of currency imposed upon us which can only destroy us by dispossession. That currency has an inherently finite lifespan. The first lifespan ended only 15 years into the imposition of that system, which of course promised it would prevent all the evils it actually brought upon us.
None of this could have transpired without usurpation of representation. No principles were proven. The 1912 Democrat Party Platform in fact promised there would be no central bank if the Democrats were returned to power:
http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-congressman-louis-t-mcfadden-1932.html
So from the very 1912 election, the people were betrayed. To this day, that betrayal has been reinforced a thousand fold by the vast wealth exploited from us by this unassented system.
So when you stand up calling for reform, you are only going to get tokens of reform which represent practically nothing, because the powers that be are the powers of exploitation through the vehicle of the so called central banking system.
What we have now, is an opportunity. That is, having a *singular* absolute solution to 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt... you have critical arguments which cannot be denied (to grant us our right to mathematically perfected economy™); and you have the inevitable collapse of the system of exploitation, the immediate dispossessions of which are sufficient cause for all-out rejection of the usurpers.
So no, we cannot reform the political system *first*, because we are denied representation. But understanding the flaws of the purported monetary system which has been imposed upon us, and the same fact of *singular* solution, we have the vital leg to stand on to insist upon *both*.
If we pass on that... I agree, you're absolutely right. We missed our chance. Our chance is here, now. Not in Obama. But in our vital understanding of the fundamental issue.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Mike,
I didn't mention it in this post, but in previous ones. The point is that the reform neeeed goes directly to your objection; it is to eliminate the recourse to representation, which is no longer needed give present information technology, thereby creating a formal system in which the citizen's authority is kept where it started, in his own hands.
Think Rousseau's 'little band of peasants conducting affairs of state under an oak, and always acting wisely.' (Never mind his irony.) Wealth, whether derived from capitalism or not, has no inherent ability to influence political outcomes. A rich man on a desert island cannot buy his rescue. Power is not a property of wealth, it is bestowed upon wealth by the political structure. The peasants need not be materially equal, it is of no consequence who owns the means of production when decisions are arrived at by a public process.
There is, in a true democracy, no Congress. Hence, no Achilles heel, no market in which wealth can be exchanged for influence, as now happens on K Street and in Gucci gulch. There is no such animal as 'representative democracy.'
Current thinkers resemble a pioneer man struggling to clear a forest so he can grow some food, complaining to high heaven about how hard it is to do this Herculean task with an axe, but who refuses seriously to consider using a proferred chain saw.
I'm aware, boy am I, that methodology isn't sexy. No heroic scent of revolution lingers around it. But if you're having trouble doing what you claim to want to do, it's a self-cocking, belt-fed, recoil operated cinch that you're going about it all wrong.
It doesn't require genius to see the way to stop losing is to change the rules of the game.
Gorsegrower
This discussion brings up some huge questions for me about the nature of humans and human life.
Are all to become equals in all ways and what would that look like? Doing everything for ourselves and having none do for us, does that then mean that we are not different at birth, and the idea of personality and natural inclination or calling toward certain kinds of work are actaully a byproduct of our own corporate legacy?
No representatives means no one more or less inclined to represent, and then do we go on to no butchers, bakers and candlestick makers????
I think that if this is what democracy is I'm all for it, but in it's idea I find myself struggling to imagine it's material expression.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Well, although it may be fine points, I'm gratified to learn that evidently we're exactly on the same page then. That makes this a country.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
In a more rational world, we would be debating whether capitalism even works.
The corporations have lived the life of Reilly for the past eight years. There were no regulations, no taxes, no bids, no laws to speak of. Vast portions of the U.S. Treasury were poured into their coffers.
Oddly, the corproations weren't calling for help while they were making profits up the wazoo. The bottom line is that they had it 100% their way all this time...and now they're falling apart.
The logical conclusion is that capitalism doesn't work--but of course, that would be blasphemy.
If the goverment had screwed up a tenth as much, you can bet we'd be hearing the usual memes about how evil government is and how government doesn't work. It shows you how incredibly pro-capitalist even the most progressive discourse is.
"Person" status of corporations needs to be revoked. Corporate lobbying needs to be prohibited. Corporations need to actually PAY equitable taxes. No corporate welfare.Wealthy need to pay a fair share in taxes Strong unions.( I think part of the demonization of Hamas by the USA is that it is a birth to death welfare society).
Perry Logan wrote: "In a more rational world, we would be debating whether capitalism even works."
You're right. It doesn't work. But what the real issue is, is central banking systems imposed about the world everywhere without public assent, the currencies of which can only multiply debt in proportion to a vital circulation as we are forced to maintain a vital circulation by re-borrowing principal and interest paid out of the general circulation in servicing debt. What we perpetually re-borrow then perpetually increases the sum of debt by ever greater increments of ever greater periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt, until we succumb to a wholly artificial, unnecessary, and unjust, terminal sum of debt.
So these are the folks who come to own the corporations... the "corporate media" which perpetually avoids telling us the whole and obvious truth -- that this is not "an economy" at all, but instead a purposed, imposed system of exploitation.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Is it safe to push for socialism when our current system was destine to fail due to poor monetary policy. Try abolishing the federal reserve, use the treasurey to print the debt-free money with the oversight of congress, and put some regulators in there that will not stop enterprise, but oversee it. A capitalist system based on localization and worker co-ops would prevent us from dealing with a central bureaucracy that is given way to much power. The Kremlin was as corrupt and hawkish as Washington. We need to avoid large centralization of power.
you mean a confedration?
Swiss decentralization is done direct democratically. The result is one of the highest per capita incomes in the world and no wars in over 150 years though surrounded by warring nations, etc., all good.
Now you are talking EZ!
I don't see how abolishing the Fed and creating a different monetary system will, by itself, creat a better society. Let's say there's no Fed, is there still "fractional reserve banking"? Cause fractional reserve banking was around centuries before there was even such thing as the United States. If you get rid of the Fed, will you then get together with other countries to abolish the Eurodollar zone, where financial capitalists can increase their wealth with NO reserve ratios? What about the Bank of International Settlements, the BIS? Tax havens? In other words, will you radically change, worldwide, how monetary and financial policy works, or will you allow it to stay in place, and simply get rid of the Fed, cause private bankers SURELY didn't cause economic hell before the Fed now did they?
Our society has HUGE differences in wealth. Unless you take that unearned wealth away (and who else but the government can do that?), what happens when a new monetary and financial system is created? Well, the rich will buy up the best assets first, will outcompete who buys the lesser assets and eventually take them over as well. Unless you also do something about the differences in wealth, the lack of direct democracy, questions on the means of production, including missing ecological information in economics (which alone would cause problems for capitalism) and strengthening worker rights you'll have a society no more equal or just than ours now.
naomi kline's "shock doctrine" documents the transfer of power in south africa - the newly elected democratic government went to the bargaining table with the outgoing apartheid government - and voila - EVERY economic "power" was ceded to the outgoing folks - poof!... democratically elected and in power... without a pot to piss in...
like the article started with - wealthy white male land and slave owners didn't want their "profits" siphoned off to the king... and they got the "everyman" to pick up arms for their cause...
sort sounds like today's republican wealthy elite... how many people would have killed for john mccain and sarah palin... GUNS! GAYS! ABORTION! FLAGS! yeeehaaa... and of course voted themselves right into the poor house...
the "standing" of the "everyman" (aka wage earners) and the big disconnect - is the poor actually pay for everything - it's just the rich had more money - first - so they make the rules -
so capitalists will create a system to protect themselves - think about it - if "you" are designing the system - are you going to design yourself "in" or "out"?
it matters not what you call it - it's what you get people to "believe" what it is - and the power to pound the shit out of anyone who disagrees helps a little too -
Wilber1 wrote: "Our society has HUGE differences in wealth. Unless you take that unearned wealth away (and who else but the government can do that?), what happens when a new monetary and financial system is created? Well, the rich will buy up the best assets first, will outcompete who buys the lesser assets and eventually take them over as well. Unless you also do something about the differences in wealth, the lack of direct democracy, questions on the means of production, including missing ecological information in economics (which alone would cause problems for capitalism) and strengthening worker rights you'll have a society no more equal or just than ours now."
Excellent points, Wilber.
Fractional reserve goes away in mathematically perfected economy™, but it is erroneous to associate our failure with fractional reserve technique, because it is the nature of the currency which devalues the dollar or any other currency subject to interest, as ever more of the circulation is dedicated to servicing the ever escalating sum of debt, leaving ever less of the circulation to sustain the industry which is obligated to do so.
The idea behind "reserves" is that they attempt to guarantee the redeemability of the circulation, should some fault/faults of the monetary system engender failure. The fault of a finite volume of such a standard (gold/silver for instance) is that you can never sustain industry requiring a circulation exceeding the volume of the standard. So, for the faults of the idea of a finite reserve itself, you have to abandon any pretended integrity of the principle (which actually fixes nothing) to resort to a fractional reserve and ever worse, just to sustain intended industrial growth.
Couple interest to the currency, and you exacerbate the problem, because you also have to continually increase the circulation so much as to leave industry enough circulation to sustain the industry, while the costs of servicing an ever multiplying sum of debt continue to erode the utilitarian value of the circulation at an ever escalating rate.
So what do we have here?
We have interest inherently and irreversibly multiplying debt as we maintain a vital circulation by re-borrowing principal and interest as an ever greater and inevitably terminal sum of debt. This is the ultimate, fundamental cause of failure; and it is also one of our reasons why we have to abandon the concept of actual reserves. Our other reason is that we have to support further industry, hopefully maintaining circulation to production ratios which are consistent with our system of values. We can't do that either unless we abandon the reserve; but then a fractional reserve is a reserve in name only.
On the other hand, if we eradicate interest, we have no multiplication of debt; and if we make the very production the money is intended to represent, itself the effective reserve; and only if we further pay such debts at the rate of depreciation/consumption (which are to be understood to be equal), then our money never devalues; we never have to issue more than the wealth we have; we have no cause of failure against which to provide the facade of any form or reserve, pretending it can save us from what it can't, and so forth.
So only mathematically perfected economy™ solves all these problems.
Now, as to your fear the wealthy will just buy up all our assets, I offer the opposite is likely to transpire under mathematically perfected economy™, because the reason to finance our own businesses is to prosper; and we can do so by issuing our own promises to pay, free of exploitation.
But you are right that we have to protect ourselves from the further exploitation of buying our wares to sell us to them for more than we ask. We can prevent that by outlawing profit without contribution to worth.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
With the fall of Communism in the east the only remaining enemy of Democracy is Capitalism"
-George Soros (paraphrasing)
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
Thats from the bigest capitalist of them all, he sure did not live what he preached.
HA! Nice! Concise!
Yes,
But it's curious how those most guilty of the crime come forth at the eleventh hour, claiming to be benefactors or supporters, when I've written George Soros for decades without an answer. Where was George Soros then? Where are you now, George? You could help. You could make this thing fly like it's supposed to. We need help, George; and if you're a supporter, why don't you at least give us your ear?
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Because we cannot know for sure who is or is not guiltiest, and considering that when it comes to this crime the least guilty of us may not be saved by our little bit of guilt any more than those with assumed greater guilt, it might behoove us to stop focusing on that.
How does the old saying go? there is so much good in the worst of us and so much bad in the best of us, it hardly behooves any of us to point fingers at the rest of us.
Perhaps it will benefit us greatest to feed only the good until it blossoms and bears fruit.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Democracy and Capitalism are wedded together .This the common refrain from the current crop of conseravitevs . Problem is that the so called great Capitalist thinker Like Adams Smith, or conseravtive stalwart like Burke or political thinker
like Hobbs, or Hagel would never have approved the current practice of Democrcay or Capitalism.Neither would have Voltaire or his opponent Rousseau.
The modern propangda -theorist of 20th century capitalism and macho Democracy often throw the enlightenemnt names ( including phrase like invisible hand) to gain legitimacy, accecptance,and to numb the masses.
In a way they are like fundamental fanatic religious groups who distort religious ideas
The Enlightment figure talked of separation of churches and state, individual choice,sanctity of self -preservation, public education, anti serfdorm, anti tariff, anti protectionsim, regulation , and strong stae to oversee the reules of the law and regulation. Burke evn condemned the destruction of Indian market by East India Compnay,aginst lobbying by the same comany for more privileges and against exemtion from taxes from English Government and aginst their corrupting role, Adam Smith foresaw the manipulation of public knowledge and suppression of information by paid opinion-maker in the media .
The classical economists rationalized colonialism and their ideas were only relavent in a society that was relatively equal in political and economic power to begin with, which hasn't been the case in modern times. Adam Smith assumed that small trade and business would be the foundation of economy if his ideas were to have any real world relavence, not giant corporations (which were at the time, as now, closely alligned with the state). He also said that things like the division of labor (contrary to what is said) was in the end a bad thing, that workers should be able to join unions and that labor should be given equal flexibily as capital (so if a capitalist has the right to ship financial or actual capital from the US to Mexico labor should be just as free to flow across boarders, how many "free market" politicians call for this?). If both didn't happen capital would be given an unfair advantage. Smith said that profits above the "natural rate" was bad, a tax upon all that didn't receive the profits (most of the people), and that profits tended to be highest in the countries going quickest to ruin. Try and find me a person that isn't considered a radical these days who says this, find someone near the top of either political party who would dare to say any of this. If the economy is in place in a society with huge differences in wealth and political power, with preferencial treatment towards capital over labor, there will be large inefficiencies. Even worse if there are ecological costs and information missing within the economic system, like now, the economy would create large externatlities, which would be paid largely by the general public.
Capitalism doesn't go with democracy in practice, and hasn't for centuries. Capitalism and democracy can work on some level in countries that have high standards of living. THAT is predicated on other people being poor, where the rich country can monopolize resources elsewhere and keep consumption levels down. It used to be colonialism, then imperialism, now it's mainly economic, financial control.
If the Banco del Sur does its job, the financial capitalists will pry their way all the more into Africa. Democracy will be nowhere to be found as Africa’s resources continue to fall into the hands of the foreign capitalists and small groups of domestic elites.
Amen again, Wilber.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
We should recognize on the contrary (as Jefferson, Lincoln, Adams, Monroe, and so many others postulated) that nothing is more foreign, adverse or dangerous to *a republic* than a monetary system comprised and intended to be a vehicle of exploitation. It is an incontrovertible and immutable right of a republic therefore to issue its own promises to pay as currency, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of those promises, or the natural opportunity to make good on them.
The fundamental problem is exploitation, wielded through an imposed currency which makes it impossible even to maintain a vital circulation without multiplying debt into an inevitable terminal sum of debt. After all, just to maintain a vital circulation, we are compelled to re-borrow principal and interest back into the general circulation, which of course perpetually increases the sum of debt so much as the periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt; and this proportional multiplication of artificial debt therefore inherently engenders a terminal, unrecoverable state.
The idea of the capitalism comprised in the apparatus and currency of the modern, imposed central bank then is as foreign and mutually exclusive to true free markets or true free enterprise as is communism, at least insofar as the purposes of freedom are in fact negated.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Thank you. Our debt-based monetary system is the culprit, not market theory. Some market theory is good, some is not so good. Some socialist theory is good, some is not so good. We need a just monetary policy first. Then capitalism might thrive or we would be able to afford socialism... because right now even a "free market democracy" like ours is going broke in a hurry.
I urge all progressives to read about this issue. Research the federal reserve and our asinine monetary policy. I reccomend web of debt and the creature from jekyll island.
You'll pay for both works, and both simply reiterate the work of others without qualification. Ellen Hodgson Brown denies interest irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to the circulation, and has proven incapable at length to defend a vast scope of her assertions:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Borrowing-from-Peter-to-Pa-by-Ellen-Brown-081229-255.html
http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-ellen-hodgson-brown-web-of-debt.html
http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-no-ellen-its-not-the-derivatives-stupid.html
Ellen stands up at the eleventh hour, pretending not to borrow our work from so long ago, not even able to provide models or accountable descriptions and proofs of her assertions, and and yet claiming a preferable solution which you'll see thoroughly shot down in each of these pages (even by conflicting testimony of her own). EHB can't even tell us how much money there should be in circulation (not sarcasm... that's a fact).
Likewise, G. Edward Griffin even thinks he's disproved that interest inherently multiplies debt; thus he denies himself even a reason to cry out against the iniquitous system he borrows so heavily from Mullins to merely replicate Mullins. The only other fundamental to decry is volume of circulation. Here's my invalidation of Griffin's purported proof that interest does not multiply debt in proportion to a vital circulation:
http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-invalidation-of-griffin-creature-from-jekyll-island.html
You're welcome to read the borrowed repetitions of these eleventh hour late comers if you want, but there's far more I assert on our pages. In "Ellen's" 600 pages (is it?), she doesn't even take you as far as our home page.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
lord sweet jesus
finally i get to read an overview of the "system" that simply put describes the sickness of capitalism
as we plod further into this morass these words can be a beacon
imagine how the third world feels, ripped off as they are, with nothing to show for it
this is a big step
if we could take another and allow the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job (don't tell me its a crazy notion) then maybe we could press for an investigation and the maybe FOR THE FIRST TIME we could develop an idea of what really happened that day
the corporate community which has benefitted in so many ways would not like it too much
as they do not like democracy itself
the united states has been a fascist state for some time now:
i think of generals patton and macarthur chasing the bonus army down the mall in washington district of colombia
the jailing of union leaders
the red scare
the control of the corporate media is an absolute essential in providing the necessary fantasy world or alternate reality where so many americans live today
maybe we should fix that too
maybe we should burn down the fema prisions before we get asssigned to them
empty guantanamo, not only the prison but the naval base as well
stand down the garrison of the world and actualize a peace dividend
provide government health care for all
somebody stop me
i must still be giddy over obama's inauguration
finally, maybe we should put bushco on trial
a million person boo,as the one i saw on tv for bush, is not enough
i feel tingly all over....
cheers, b
Let us for a moment consider that what you have stated above is true. 9-11 was an inside job. Can there be any greater punishment for those who committed such a crime than the sure knowledge of guilt?
We must all die, and it is not how we die that makes a difference, it is how we lived.
If some have lived a life of hurting and even killing others to promote their own selfish interest, do we imagine they will escape this fact or redeem it through hiding it? As many great stories real or imagined have shown, no crime ever remains hidden because in hiding it we make it grow beyond the power of an individual to contain it.
The greatest punishment is escaping punishment. Let us pray for their sake that if indeed they are guilty, eventually the pain of living alone with that fact will bring one of them forward to find the only redemption they have left for themselves, freedom from the lie by putting it back into in the light of truth.
Though we may suffer from their crimes, and desire to have justice be delt to alleviate such suffering, we will never suffer as much as the criminal does who imagines that they may evade their own sure suffering through keeping thier crime in the dark.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulation. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the street. Corruption...is why we win."
--Danny Dalton
When you consider that bankers who were so greedy that they were willing to make enough fraudulent loans that would destroy their own businesses, you have to come to the realization that excessive greed is just plain stupid. Oil speculators jacked the price of oil up until they destroyed the auto industry who was their buddy/ their pal who kept Americans in gas-guzzling tanks. Stupidity? Lack of strategy? Corruption? I would say that anyone who has as their main goal in life to make as much money as possible and who considers his own self-worth tied to wealth, has the potential to be nothing more than a criminal. You have unchained criminal dogs devouring everything in sight including their own flesh. The business class has as its goal to make as much money as possible on the backs of everyone else including the planet. They would destroy the planet and enslave all of is inhabitants to satisfy an insatiable desire.
You wrote: "When you consider that bankers who were so greedy that they were willing to make enough fraudulent loans..."
It isn't that they are just so greedy as to do so when it cannot work out... the nature of the money compels that the middle/satellite banks do so on behalf of the central bank. In the end, the middle/satellite banks' profits vaporize as we cannot afford to service a sum of debt which inherently and irreversibly multiplies as we can only maintain a vital circulation by further borrowing. It is that *obligation* to borrow further and ever more just to maintain a vital circulation, which ensures the ultimate and inevitable failure of the system.
Try it. Throw some Monopoly money on the table. You're "the economy." Count the money. In the empty chair across from you is the bank. You borrowed all the money into circulation. It doesn't matter what you do *within* the general circulation. You're obligated to pay principal (the circulation) plus interest out of the circulation -- more than exists in circulation. You decide the rate of interest. Write it all down, period by period (or download our free Excel spreadsheets which do this for you). Pay the periodic interest an principal out of the general circulation to the bank. Now borrow it back to maintain the circulation, so that you can continue to service your initial debt.
Do the math. Your sum of debt just increased so much as the periodic interest on the sum of debt, didn't it?
Now you can calculate just exactly how many periods you can survive at whatever rate of interest you decided. But in the end, you'll pay the entire circulation to service debt (leaving nothing to sustain the industry which is obligated to do so), and you won't have any credit-worthiness whatever remaining, with which to borrow further, that you can continue to service a now utterly monumental, artificial sum of debt.
All this happens merely because you allowed the banks to issue your very own promise to pay, and to charge you interest for that -- denying the real creditor (who gives up property for your promise) any interest at all... and thus disproving the very assertion that earned wealth was at risk, justifying interest to a creditor. After all, the central bank merely published your promise to pay at virtually no cost whatsoever.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Sioux Rose
SHANKARI: This is why the adage, "The LOVE of money is the root of all evil" proves so true and contemporary. If the state is really interested in the preservation (defense!) of its people, then a good place to start is reining in the trespasses inevitably resulting from rabid capitalism without conscience, i.e. THAT same love of money. Time for some WISE regulations, bring Glass-Steagall back from the dead!
Or change our mount to the horse of unbridled love for wisdom, and forgive forever tryig to force our will upon another by reigning over them.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Capitalism in America received a death blow in 1937 when the vested business interests teamed up with Big Oil to overtax Cannabis and later outlaw it. Capitalism is supposed to be about choices, not rigging it and leaving it unfettered for the top few. What we have is a RIGGED and unfettered capitalism that must be returned to regulated form. It will be interesting to see how Obama and Congress try to get that underway because the ball's in there court and no more Dubya to kick around at anymore !
Good point JWVerez, and fancinating conversation on this thread/story.
It occurs to me the reason Cannabis was demonized is simply because it will grow anywhere. The power elite only permits industries to flourish that they can monopolize the raw materials of. This is why residential roof-top solar was penalized/discouraged for the southern states: because the sun is free and the source of energy cannot be controlled by a cartel like the way EXXON/OPEC manipulate crude prices.
Now all nations are being forced/bribed into Nuclear plants as an alternative to oil since the Royal Family owns a controlling interest in most high grade uranium output. Yes Uranium is cheap right now.... but so was crude before Rockefeller started monopolizing it.
What's really amazing to me is how we all swallowed the Bush Bank Hiest the last few days he was in office. The Walker side of the bush clan was huge into banking (including backing you-know-who.) Heil! Source: New Hampshire Gazzet.
Whooops! 350 billion gone, and nobody will allow an audit to find out what these banks did with it. Wanna bet the bushmonkey shows up on a banking board of directors in the next few years?
We are so dumb.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
There is no need for regulation whatever if you eradicate exploitation through the nature of the imposed currency, and afterward, by further unearned taking.
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
It's nice to see Michael Parenti's thoughts added to the usual clutter of capitalist cheerleaders on CD.
With the recent swearing-in of our new president (who wants us to think he is "change we can believe in"), one of my favorite quotes from Michael came to mind: "The enormous gap between what U.S. leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology."
and on the flip side the other great deciet is the gulf between what the people themsleves think they do, and what they are actually doing.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Parenti again strikes at the heart of our dilemm - the system that has caused wars for the last 100 years!!!!
But I could be wrong !
This is the historic case from our revolution onward. Hessians were hired to fight the colonists by the Bank of England (Rothschild). The banks (not yet united formally under a purported central bank) financed both sides of the Civil War. Lincoln, pondering the consequences of an unlimited loan (of our own promises to pay, merely published by private banks) at practically 30 percent interest, opted to publish our promises to pay himself. The only step short of mathematically perfected economy™ was a rate of payment which would have solved inflation and deflation. But he was killed for it.
As registered in our very Congressional Record, Congressman Louis T. McFadden reported that the Federal Reserve Banks were removing some $60 b *in gold* annually from the U.S. Treasury to finance Hitler's military escalation, and even to pay the debts of the Japanese military escalation *to German munitions makers (Dynamit Nobel). Reporting this 7 years before WWII, The Hon. Congressman McFadden did not even know he was indelibly registering an account of "our very own" central bank illegally funding our opposition, vastly strengthening them, and ensuring the inevitability of the coming war:
http://perfecteconomy.com/pg-congressman-louis-t-mcfadden-1932.html
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Do you mean Lincoln offered to publish the promisory notes for free? Thus we would have only incurred the actual cost of war, minus paying someone to set an artificial cost for us?
Then he was killed and we ultimately bowed to such coersion? Too tired of war to keep fighting for justice, or was it good enough justice for the day?
This seems ridiculous!!! The idea that we were enslavened to be beholden to others in such a way! Beyond childish.
I find this extremely interesting, and did that set the stage for the base model of our economy as it has stood? How could we possibly in our day accept such terms as "good enough"
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Michael Parenti never takes any prisoners. Yes, a severe critique of capitalism is much needed in the present national introspection on how our nation must deal with the current economic meltdown and the unsustainable and restless nature of a capitalistic consumer culture.
The lesson to be learned though is not that capitalism is ALL bad, but that a healthy and well informed democracy is the only answer to predatory corporate capitalism. This of course leads to the root problem of the severe lack of good civic journalism. The corporate controlled mainstream media has become nothing less than a propaganda voice for a capitalistic corporate consumer culture. Then the U.S. goes to war to protect our consumer culture.
Today, American democracy is on life support because the intended spiritual dynamics of democracy have been suffocated by a materialistic corporate consumer culture.
More democracy is the only answer to the greed of capitalism and more democracy throughout the world is the essential path to a more just, sustainable and compassionate world.
coldponder
an excellennt discussion, so far the best i find on this wwweb. i agree w/ mt mike, that though the discussion is a good one, it is pretty much theoretical. and old goat makes the case that it is if not the only game in town it is at least is the prevalent one. so, how to make it real? and i am really looking for advice here. the business i have built up over the last 25 yrs has after all turned into something that needs to be kept alive and supported and it's assets protected. not really what i envisioned back so many blinks of an eye ago. so what are the alternatives? cash out and enjoy the fruits of labor? or what sounds more attractive, cut and run? just let it all go and stop feeding into a system that ultimately doesn't meet people's real needs anyway? i'm tempted and if i find the courage, to leave it all behind and just trust that i will find something real somewhere...
The plutocracy devours its own children.
One of the emblematic banana peels is "its the only game in town". Otherwise relatively thoughtful people will look at their desires to raise a family, have a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage, an ipod in every ear, etc...
and suddenly the system is absorbed through every pore.
Michael Parenti missed the point of what has happened and what we need to do now. His article is too academic and philosophical.
What has happened? America has shifted its economy from one of production right after WWII to an economy based on making money on money investments. The problem with an economy based on making money on money investments is that it needs to be aggressively regulated to prevent what just happened. Most economists saw the housing speculation bubble grow to huge proportions by 2002. Without regulation stock brokers, CEOs and their executives could hide what was really happening - widespread investment in toxic loans created by loan shark strategies. We need a mandate for corporate transparency. Anyone manipulating books needs prison time. Because there was no oversight of maintaining a balance between corporate equity and corporate debt, everyone could go deep in debt without adequate equity so they could bail themselves out. We could have at least intervened in 2002 and prevented the current global economic collapse.
Parenti is right about capitalism devouring itself. In this case, we had CEOs and their executive teams making obscene salaries looking for unethical means by which to bloat their profits even further.
We do not have a Trickle Down economy nor do we have free market capitalism. These are two convenient lies that have been turned into Republican dogma. In 2006, the Forbes richest 400 list for the first time had only billionaire Americans. They are accumulating their wealth, not reinvesting it in America. They are the same people outsourcing jobs and factories offshore and engaged in offshore banking as a tax evasion strategy. So lets call it for what it really is, a TRICKLE OUT ECONOMY.
We do not have a free market capitalism system. People need to quit insulting Adam Smith by using this term. Smith was the first to warn us about "merchant cartels" - merchants organizing into large groups to manipulate the market. Smith would be appalled if he saw our current multinational, multi billionaire, huge corporations. Smith's concept was individual capitalists being successful through hard work and ingenuity while maintaining a high ethical standard. In comparison today, we have a bunch of money grubbing sociopaths.
What we have is privatized profits and socialized losses - in short, government assisted corporate profits / bail outs invariably creating a Super Rich OVER class while also creating a permanent under class, a permanent working poor class, a middle class bearing most of the tax burden, and then the traditional upper class of millionaires.
You wrote: "The problem with an economy based on making money on money investments is that it needs to be aggressively regulated to prevent what just happened."
A further thing we must understand is that these things are consequences of the nature of the currency, and that we would be at the brink of failure regardless if any of the further crimes transpired. A currency subject to interest can only multiply debt into a terminal sum of debt as we are forced to maintain a vital circulation by re-borrowing principal and interest paid out of the general circulation in servicing an existent sum of debt, as an ever greater sum of debt.
All the secondary crimes can be understood then of manifestations of this process: of expatriating our industry; of competing with irreversible multiplication of debt to maintain a former standard of sustenance; to maintain margins of solubility; to justify ever greater lending to sustain ever less, our very own production; to replenish a vital circulation by government over-spending which is never serviced after the private sector becomes so saddled with debt that it cannot service the existing sum of debt, or qualify to borrow further, as is necessary to sustain the vital circulation.
All these things arise in the wake of artificial multiplication of debt into an inevitably terminal sum of debt. And all these things, which have one and one only solution, are not solved, only because the representatives of the exploiters are installed by the omnipotent leverage of their vast unearned takings from us.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
What Thomas More said above about Marxist Theology applies to Libertarian Capitalist Theology as well. Your Valhalla of "free market capitalism" is a pipe dream. It cannot exist, and will never exist. Neither will Communist Heaven.
Sioux Rose
MT MIKE: Excellent analysis, added to Parenti's brilliant assessment. So it boils down to regulations, but who regulates the regulators? When the political muscle of D.C only operates in a fashion consistent with its fiscal sponsors, then the lobby network becomes the barrier to said regulation. When the population is taught to trust its leaders to use their access to our massive collective funds (taxes/treasury) wisely, and the media fails to report what's actually going on because it, too, caters to those same moneyed interests who employ the lobbyists... then we experience the catch 22 now underway. Some speak of changing the charters given to corporations that the public good is configured against all balance sheet profits.
We do have the solutions; what is lacking is will on the part of the privileged sect to enact what is needed that this experiment in governance (U.S.) has a shelf life greater than what will otherwise result if the cannibalizing behavior is not MADE to stop cold in its tracks. Having given bailout money TO THE OFFENDERS, the capacity for things to right themselves has been delayed, with precious assets wasted.
Sioux Rose wrote: "We do have the solutions; what is lacking is will on the part of the privileged sect to enact what is needed that this experiment in governance (U.S.) has a shelf life greater than what will otherwise result if the cannibalizing behavior is not MADE to stop cold in its tracks. Having given bailout money TO THE OFFENDERS, the capacity for things to right themselves has been delayed, with precious assets wasted."
Great points, Sioux.
What I see this coming down to is, at risk of losing their wealth or their necks (the former of which is often more precious to them), they're going to have to bow out of the way. We are the ones we *have* been waiting for. I see we can take back our country on the obligation to deliver us mathematically perfected economy™. I do not see us getting our country back (or effectively resisting "globalization" and so forth) otherwise.
But shame on us then if we lose it, for we probably deserve to.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
I'm not sure we should bank on them "bowing" out of the way. But if we stop bowing to their way, they will be left hanging. Remember what fuels them is not the pursuit of good but the pursuit of their own good. Expecting them to bow to our pursuit of good, seems counter intuitive. They may be seen frozen in time behind us, long after we sidestep them, trapped eternally in bowing to their own self interest as we move toward the common good.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Mountain Mike, ...an excellent post.
Did you ever try to get a hundred dollars back from the government to use to buy food? It's almost impossible; days waiting in lines, humiliating forms, delays, you have to have an address and professional references and complete ID and be fingerprinted and show receipts and take a job hunting course and come back between ten and ten in three days with forms G through K and do the hularamapoona dance naked balanced on a pole.
But if you want fifty billion and you are already rich, you just say outright, 'I'm not telling you what I am going to do with the money.' Bingo! It's yours.
There are more and more common people giving private loans online, perhaps the new government of the people in it's inception.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
And the alternative system that has worked so well and proven to be superior or just as good as regulated capitalism, the one that has generated the same freedom and wealth for all citizens is......oops, there hasn't been one so far.
Marxist theology has been proven to be an utter failure. To those that suggest that its never been tried in its oure form...ask yourselves why not. The answer is clear.
Unless a clear proven example of a better system can be demonstrated, what would any discussion be about?
We have reached the time of reality not theoritical dissertations. Lets hope we can correct our system in time.
"And the alternative system that has worked so well and proven to be superior or just as good as regulated capitalism, the one that has generated the same freedom and wealth for all citizens is......oops, there hasn't been one so far"
The better system you seek has been described and tested. Marx identified the root cause but his remedy did not account for human nature. Henry George saw both the problem and came up with a workable solution. Read the abridged (easy to read) book here: www.henrygeorge.org or listen to the audio book here: www.hgchicago.org/audio or take the online course here: www.henrygeorge.org.
Disclaimer: I'm a big fan of the ideas of Henry George but I'm not associated with any of the aforementioned links in any way.
90% of the wealth is in 2% of the hands.
Bummer to be in the majority.
Centralized governments of right and left become corrupted by money and power. Direct democracy cannot.
It can if it preys on the weakness of other countries. Here for instance, the unions have worked for decades along with the CIA, the NED and other imperialist organizations to squash progressive and leftists movements. Remember the "free trade" unions in Latin America, their connections to the military juntas? The unions worked on their behalf and agaisnt the majority of workers in those countries. If you are a nationalist first, you are ok with your country's imperialism, however "moderate" it may claim it is, as long as the stolen loot is shared more equitably. If there is imperialism and the stolen wealth is monoplized domestically then it is a problem. Remember, South Africa had a direct democracy, with strong unions and government, they just excluded the majority of people based on race from participating, and have stood in the way (with the new ANC elite),through neo-liberal policies, of their economic development since. If the workers aren't international in outlook, if they are nationalist, they could do the same, only it won't necessarily be race that is the basis of their exclusion, it might be nationality, religion, or something else.
I agree Wilber that there are creative ways to usurp ostensible direct democracy, and in fact that practically all the necessary branches of usurpation are in place to do so, however effective they may be if we took our country back.
But a greater worry I have which actually comes right back to advocating something like direct democracy (in terms of its presumable power)... is that the reasons for creating a republic are that the populace can't decide on what to do. There are forums all over the internet which call monetary solution socialism, Marxism, communism.
The idea of representatives is to elect higher individuals who *will* serve us. We haven't voted intelligently enough since Kennedy was killed to say we've given representation a decent shot. We should have rejected most of the candidates we've had since then; all are guilty of great crimes against us.
As Jefferson told us many times and in many ways, and as the single sentence of the Preamble instructs us carefully, it is our obligation to perfect the Constitution. The thing the founders never imagined was the dual degeneration of the people and the government together, that would make representation obsolete. This of course is intended, and particularly it is intended where usury is imposed upon every unassenting populace of the world.
The thing we have to insist upon then is public affirmation of all law. We have to insist upon full accountability and mandatory rejection from office on failure to meet delicate standards, easily tread on by any betrayal whatever. This idea, taken to the extents that would protect us, still make a republic preferable on vital grounds to a democracy. The founders saw democracy as mob rule; and direct democracy would certainly be mob-like and ineffective unless it were attended to by a public ascribing to far higher principles than we do now.
There is much to be said still about the fault of having a leader at all. Intelligent evolution of government is important; but it is something we must be very careful about, for behind a carrot can be our demise.
I do a lot of thinking on the issues and balances. Having a republic, I think the best thing to do is to exercise our responsibility to hold it accountable. We are substantially at fault for our own negligence.
We have a great story on our quotes page:
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-relevant-historic-quotes.html#NativeSon
I hope everyone will enjoy it.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
It's actually that they will serve our will. Indicating we know exactly what we want if we know our will that they then serve.
I have noticed that in my case I expected them to know my will without myself knowing it.
Talk about childish.
But once we are inline with our will, there is no loophole to not serving it as a form of democracy.
Again the onus of change seems to be with us and not them, the corruption a direct cause of us, with the effect so obvious we call it the cause as it seems so obviouly to be.
The problem is just too easy and too obvious and in line with humans biggest flaw, the pursuit to be blameless in the face of fault.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
The success of social democracy in Sweden is ruthlessly surpressed in the American press because it is too frightening to our oil barons, weapons producers and other parasites, so there is one alternative model right there Thomas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_welfare_in_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_welfare_model
Another example is the multi billion dollar cooperative business in Mondragon Spain:
"The Mondragon Corporacion Cooperativa (MCC) began in the town of Mondragon in 1956 when a group of five young engineers were encouraged by their socialist priest, Father Jose Maria Arizmediarrieta, to set up a cooperative to make paraffin cooking stoves. Using Arizmediarrieta's vision the five young students built a financial base for the MCC today. By 1959 they had already formed the Caja Laboral Popular (CLP), the Working People's Bank, which is not only the bank for the cooperatives but is run as a cooperative itself. MCC has grown in its forty years of operation to include 160 employee-owned cooperatives, involving 23,000 member owners, with sales grossing US$3 billion in 1991. The main focus of the Association of the Mondragon Cooperatives is the creation of owner-employee jobs to expand the opportunities for people to participate in the relationship economy. Statistics show the Mondragon cooperatives to be twice as profitable as the average corporation in Spain with employee productivity surpassing any other Spanish organisation. It is focused on social success, involvement of the people and industrial democracy.
MCC has grown to be one of the twelve largest companies in Spain and is the biggest in Basque County. The MCC includes numerous community and employee based programs, their social systems include health care, housing, social security, primary and post secondary education, training and retraining and unemployment insurance. Extensive efforts to retrain or relocate workers who are affected by changes that occur in the wider economy is an essential component of it's program. The educational system that they have implemented has over forty schools and a college; there is also a student relationship cooperative, which allows working students to cover their tuition and living expenses for their private high school and college education while having the experience of running their own cooperative."
http://www.iisd.org/50comm/commdb/desc/d13.htm
As is the example of giving people a pile of bricks and land to build their own houses in Curitiba Brazil:
http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1258
(Read this please Thomas and THINK)
Other examples are community supported agriculture where small groups of people agree in advance to buy food from local organic farmers, the thriving food co-op in the U.S. and the successful development of free Linux operating system.
And that is just off the top of my head, in short there are MANY other models of how a society could look that aren't publicized by our comfortable entrenched establishment.
Capitalism has worked so well, right Thomas? That's why the vast majority of the world is poor, underdevloped, and consumption of resources & economic & political power is highly unequal and growing throughout the world (outside of Latin America, which is rejecting the failed system), with large differences between the rich countries (a minority of the world's population) and the poor countries. No country has EVER developed using "free market" policies, not one. Every country that has developed, including our own, has used massive state intervention. Once countries develop and adopt free market policies (without exception because they feel they have a competitive advantage in industry with other countries) the end reslult is always concentrated wealth, increased poverty, weakening of democracy (where public opinion on the issues differs strongly from government policy, like here), and lack of or reduction of social services, amongst other things. In practice, the only thing that has worked for the majority of people is social democracy, which is just as much socialism as capitalism. Again, if you want to CALL it capitalism go ahead.
Since there is a finite amount of resources, and since we in the West consume per capita six times more than people in underdeveloped countries, the only way the poor countries can increase their consumption is by us decreasing ours. If not, the environment will be severly harmed, as it is now, which will harm us all in the future. So what happens if Latin America continues to reject our policies, to increase their consumption of resources? IF we don't want to destroy the environment, we have to consume less, or go elsewhere and hope we can push them around. What effects will that have on "capitalism" here? How do we, within the current capitalist financial environment, get the industrial base back to the US? If we can't, and we can't within capitalism, what effects will that have here? Will we, once again, choose military intervention to stop poorer countries development? What if these countries develop using more socialist means, as Venezuela and most of Latin America has and is attempting (El Salvador might be next)? I'll link some facts for you, including attitudes of Chileans, a country whose economy the US and people like you would claim is the counter example.
According to the UN, Venezuela has seen the most social gains in the region since Chavez took over, and wealth inequality (measured by the GINI coefficient) has decreased sharply in Venezuela in those same years. Some cut backs will occur with the drop in oil, but the results to this point are clear and consistant, according to independent observers:
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/press-releases/press-releases/cepr-paper-responds-to-foreign-affairs-on-...
"The only consistent measure of the Gini coefficient (see Table 1) shows a substantial decline from 48.7 in 1998, or alternatively from 48.1 in 2003, to 42 in 2007. For a rough idea of the size of this reduction in inequality, compare this to a similar movement in the other direction: from 1980-2005, the Gini coefficient for the United States went from 40.3 to 46.9, a period in which there was an enormous (upward) redistribution of income."
http://www.embavenez-us.org/news.php?nid=4751
"The United Nations (UN) published a report this week that updated the 2008 Human Development Index (HDI). This index placed the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in 61st place out of 179 countries, with a high level of human development."
"...According to the UN, in 2006 a total of 75 countries had high levels of human development. 78 had medium levels and 26 had low levels. Venezuela, which is 61st with an HDI of 0.826, has had a high level of development since 2000."
"Venezuela has made progress in each of these components during the last decade, even though the report uses literacy rates calculated in the 2001 Census that took place four years before the UN declared Venezuela an illiteracy-free country."
"Regarding the report, the INE maintains that the results reflect the economic and social policies developed by the Bolivarian government, given that in 1990, the HDI was 0.787 and in 2006 it rose to 0.826."
"...Marxist theology has been proven to be an utter failure. To those that suggest that its never been tried in its oure form...ask yourselves why not. The answer is clear..."
- Yes, it's clear all right, but you have no idea what it is. The real answer is that the big capitalist powers have quickly moved to crush each & every attempt to develop alternatives. That's what much of US foreign policy has been about for the last 100 years.
"...Unless a clear proven example of a better system can be demonstrated, what would any discussion be about?..."
- The minute any country made any move to develop a better system, the US government (with support from the other leading capitalist powers) would quickly find a way to destroy it. First they'd try to subvert it, via economic embargoes & other sanctions. Then they'd try to overthrow it, via the CIA. Then they'd send in the Marines. This has been the pattern all over the world, from gunboat diplomacy in the Caribbean in the days of Gen Smedley Butler, to the nascent USSR in 1919, to Congo in 1960, to Cuba, Indonesia, Vietnam, & Chile, etc.
You should consider again the point where Parenti writes of "capitalist Haiti, capitalist Colombia, capitalist Latvia," etc. The point is that when Americans think of "capitalism," they think only of how it's worked for the US and Western Europe. They don't recognize that this same global system which has brought so much wealth to the "First World" has done so in large measure by systematic exploitation of the Third World. Countries like the US have been able to control the less-developed countries, & to profit from the latter's labor, natural resources & markets. So the same capitalism that works pretty well for us, has screwed over these other peoples. It's the flip side of the same coin.
DaveBronstein wrote: "The minute any country made any move to develop a better system, the US government (with support from the other leading capitalist powers) would quickly find a way to destroy it."
Perfectly said. This compulsory initiative to destroy the very opportunity to solve usury is likewise well said in the so called "Hazard Circular," which was purportedly distributed (London Times) after Lincoln issued his "greenbacks" to pay for the Civil War without multiplication of debt. However genuine, referring to Lincoln's interest-free greenbacks, the so called Hazard Circular declares the principle:
"If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic should become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without a debt. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."
"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power. This I and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor, and carries with it the care of the slaves, while the European plan, led on by [The Bank of?] England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages.
The great debt that the capitalists will see to it is made out of the war, must be used as a means to control the volume of money. To accomplish this, bonds [sic, notes] must be used as a banking basis. We are now waiting for the Secretary of the Treasury to make this recommendation to Congress. [Thus confirming the fact of usurpation.]
It will not do to allow the Greenback as it is called (Lincoln's currency) to circulate as money for any length of time, as we cannot control that. But we can control the bonds [sic, notes], and through them the banking issues [multiplication of debt]."
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-post-revolution-attempts-to-impose-usury-succeed-in-the-unconstitutio...
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Very well said.
Hi Thomas. I think the key phrase in your response is "regulated capitalism." Parenti has for decades pointed out the tension between capitalism and democracy, and the Northern European countries he mentions exemplify better regulation of capitalism for greater social benefit. Certainly, the last thirty years of deregulation contributed to this current crisis, so I think the discussion is about re-regulation rather than a shift to some sort of orthodox Marxism. "Let's hope we can correct [re-regulate] our system in time."
Why do you want to save this moribund system that is responsible for the suffering of so many?
-----------------------------------------
Remember the butchery in Gaza by the IDF.
In regards to Jim Eldon's Mathematically Perfected Economy" (read "the invisible hand"), I think libertarian analysis of the present crisis has been, for the most part, spot on. (e.g. Cafe Hayek, The Daily Reckoning) They recognize that most of the proposed solutions depend upon re-inflating one fantastic speculative bubble or another and coaxing american consumers to resume their unbridled consumption on credit. As far as government intervention is concerned, their distrust is well-founded on that ground alone.
As detailed and clear-headed the libertarian analysis tends to be, with moral dimensions that are completely absent from, say, a neo-conservative or even so-called 'progressive' point of view, their solutions are hopelessly naive or even utopian and hardly represent anything more than a prayer.
Perhaps the implications of Parenti's essay and the various suggestions made by Slavoj Zizek are better: Take the idea of "animal spirit" which J.M Keynes identified as the fundamental engine of economic growth and apply it to politics, for a change. I wouldn't even mind seeing a few heads start to roll even at the risk that sometime down the road mine would be one of them.
You write: "As detailed and clear-headed the libertarian analysis tends to be, with moral dimensions that are completely absent from, say, a neo-conservative or even so-called 'progressive' point of view, their solutions are hopelessly naive or even utopian and hardly represent anything more than a prayer."
It's hardly "hopelessly naive or even utopian" to solve inflation, deflation, and inherent multiplication of debt by interest. In fact it's only audaciously pretentious that the imposed system of exploitation purports to "fight" price inflation by maintaining elevated rates of interest which only make it impossible to afford the increasing prices industry must maintain to survive infringement on margins of solubility by inherent multiplication of debt. All that "fighting" of inflation does is transfer the same cost we would pay to surviving industry to the central banking system instead.
Which of course is the obvious purpose.
Now, if you're also asserting it's hopelessly naive to solve inherent multiplication of debt by interest (see my pages or my post below), I assert you're even more awry there, because we only have to eliminate pretend creditors, and the interest they impose upon our very own promises to pay, to do so.
This idea of hopelessness runs against the grain and very thread of our republic. It is the most pretentious and destructive thing imaginable, because it only seeks to preserve a system of exploitation which can only destroy us... and obviously, it does so recognizing there is no argument whatever that we cannot solve inflation, deflation, and multiplication of debt by interest, for the very imposed, man-made purpose of exploitation.
If all men were of your disposition, there would be no republic called "the United States of America."
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
Mike within all of us lies a grain of truth that when seen as complimentary to our own grain of truth, creates an unstoppable force.
The onus is upon us all to see how others grains compliment ours, because we need every grian of truth if we are to turn the tide, one correct grain of truth cannot do it alone.
I suggest, only because my respect for you has been growing by the moment, that you reread the above post, and find the grain of truth.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
How about some links to these ideas? I would like to be educated on those ideas.
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
I certainly agree, and have agreed for decades, with Parenti that capitalism is self-destructive and antagonistic to democracy. But I must observe, recognizing that such an observation is not PC and probably not welcome at CD, that Parenti includes in his argument certain assumptions that make it unlikely his argument will ever win the day.
Parenti states that the plutocrats fight against:
"freedom from compulsory pregnancy, and the right to marry any consenting adult of one's own choosing."
That is false and dangerously so. I suspect that the great majority of plutocrats would love to end traditional marriage and bring back polygamy or any number of alternatives. And I seriously doubt they are against "freedom from compulsory pregnancy." It is the plutocrats who have worked hard to insert these issues into the debate in order to split the working class so that it can never challenge the power of the plutocrats. And Parenti has followed their formula to perfection. Is he an unwitting tool or is he in on the game?
I'm having trouble following your point here --
If plutocrats "fight against freedom from compulsory pregnancy," they favor compulsory pregnancy. IOW, they oppose a "woman's right to choose." That's today's Republican position. Most Democrats, meanwhile, defend abortion increasingly half-heartedly, even though Roe v Wade is still the law of the land (a residual artifact of the 1960's/70's -era Women's Movement).
So, isn't it fair to say (as Parenti does) that there is considerable ruling class sentiment opposing a woman's right to choose? True, it's not 100% opposed. If it was, Roe v Wade would already have been overturned. // To my eyes, Parenti is presenting the freedom to choose as a hard-won democratic right -- a "social gain," and thus something that plutocrats typically wish to roll back.
You seem to be saying that the plutocracy has no real opinion on abortion per se, but is simply using the issue as a wedge, correctly & cynically calculating that it will be immensely controversial, will fan religious sentiment, & will split the working class.
My sense is that Parenti would concede that there's something to that interpretation. I don't think it really conflicts with the point he's making, though. // IOW, it seems to me that he has a point, & that you also have a point; but that the two don't necessarily conflict.
But I could be wrong!
I would think that the great majority of plutocrats would not want to restrict their wives, daughters, and, most importantly, their girlfriends, from getting an abortion. But, as you well state, they see value in "using the issue as a wedge, correctly & cynically calculating that it will be immensely controversial, will fan religious sentiment, & will split the working class." By playing the plutocrats' game, and asserting that is an issue the plutocrats really care about, Parenti does appear to be unwittingly aiding and abetting their side. And he is not alone, though since Frank's book came out ("What's the Matter with Kansas") more and more on the left recognize what is going on. It is frustrating to me since I recognized it decades ago and watched as the left became marginalized.
Nothing new here. Read Karl Marx's "Das Kapital, Volume I", 1867. Parenti fails to atate that government ownership of corporations is fascism. Mussolini called it the best form of government. When the corporations control the government you have the same shade of self-destructive brown. Surplus value for the sake of surplus value is the central driving force of Capitalism. It is unsustainable, and current economic trends appear to reinforce this notion. The only thing that matters to Capitalism is its continuation which in essence is the perpetuation of the commodity-money-commodity transaction. This cannot go on-forever. What Capitalists call a "correction" is a failure of the system. It is plutocratic spin. Unfortunately, the people/workers wind up being the collateral damage.
No argument from me. I read Marx over 30 years ago for a university course and it did influence my thinking. A good first step towards developing a broader understanding amongst the populace might be to get young students to start with a focus on the human story of the last 50,000 to 100,000 years. Then it is easier to see the transitions in human society and economic and political development and to develop a more complete and useful big picture. An initial focus on existing systems creates too many filters and unjustified assumptions.
Ooooh! Thanks kivals! Your suggestion for education in the many dimensions of the "larger picture", in order to put some perspective/distance between oneself and the myriad details in ones immediate environment, is one that I have had (in my head) for a long time. Such a program would be one small, but effective step, towards making real progress in the world (I believe).
every spirit that wishes to incarnate here takes up residence inside their mother's womb, a necessary haven in which to undertake the construction of their bodies per DNA code...they are completely reliant upon the very molecules of this very planet, delivered through their mother's body, as the building blocks with which to work on their own...seen from this perspective, polluting and toxifying the molecules that this planet contains forces each spirit to unavoidably incorporate said altered molecules into their developing bodies, which can cause all kinds of horrific deviations, some known, others yet to be...this is why I am against industrialization, whether termed 'green' or no...not only are we destroying the only planet we have to live upon, but we are, in a very real, physical sense, preventing future souls from the opportunity to enjoy a healthily-constructed brain and body with which to begin the ever-more difficult experience of living here...in fact, if one understands that the number of molecules that make up our very real mother planet (in every sense of the word) is finite, it quickly becomes clear that every molecule we alter to the point that it is no longer part of the living cycle is one less that is even available for incarnation...we are actually reducing the number of living things the planet can create and support...when does this activity become immoral? when do comfort, commerce and entertainment cease to be legitimate reasons for the destruction of the mother of all? what right do those spirits already incarnated here have to deny others the same?
It might be that because the spirit never does incorporate the material deviations that we have an eternal promise to overcome them in time.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Sioux Rose
DUBET: Your argument is compelling for the fact that so much depleted uranium, not to mention the genetically altered materials are now part of said "molecular" chain. If you are familiar with the story of Christ multiplying the fish and the loaves to feed hundreds seated on a hillside, it mirrors the pheneomena produced by a number of live and deceased gurus of India. My point is that matter and energy can be interchanged.
The ancients were not aware of the 3 outer planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. Around the time of the discovery of each one, a new energy system manifested through as an invention coming through an awakened inventive human mind. I mention this as I believe another planet will be "discovered," and it's my hope that a parallel new energy system will simultaneously ensue. This one, I pray, will have the capacity (like certain vital foods that pick up "free radicals in our blood streams") to separate the tainted "wheat" from the "chaff," so that perhaps all the assembled toxic material can be placed into containers and never again let loose to compromise nature, ecosystems and the progeny of the future.
Did you know Sioux that oxygen is actually a poison to our body that we evolved to buffer with the absorption of vitamin C. The greater intelligence in life to overcome all obstacles to it's expression may be the very foundation of change.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
While your ecological perspective is cogent, I must disagree that there are disembodied "spirits" awaiting incarnation. Cartesian dualism should have died hundreds of years ago.
I appreciate your response...do you feel there is a moral component to our ecologic behavior, then, or not?
I think that, yes, there is a moral imperitive to stop fouling our nest. Unfortunately, I am quite pessemistic about where we presently stand in that regard. Your thoughts?
I am so concerned about our future, and so certain that our current industrial path leads to nothing but our utter destruction, that I am willing to risk the embarrassment of desperation...
my first play would be to elevate human consciousness on a global level via the naturally-occurring mind-altering substances this planet offers, including cannabis, the opiates, and select mushrooms...in fact, I would suggest that the human brain is unable to achieve\maintain these necessary altered states of consciousness without such assistance, and that, further, we are meant to explore them, as they are to our benefit...many of us do this already, but with a necessarily limited focus, due to the obvious consequences of such activities under our current system...
secondly, we need to come to grips, somehow, with the fact that our current system of government is not representational, and cannot be made so...where does this take us? An underground society? As Leea and Poet, in particular, were discussing in another thread, this sounds radical, but one must confront the fact that the status-quo opposition controls virtually all of our fundamental systems, and maintain that control via weaponry and the financial\legal\judicial\penal systems..my hope may quite possibly and arguably be viewed as naive, or prayer-like, but it would be that the 'community' would begin to explore, in particular, different avenues of living, focused on the basics: shared shelter, availability of healthy water and food, and a much more natural approach to health...I believe it is fundamental that the individual re-acknowledge their own role in their own survival...even the concept of small farms includes the notion that some are working to feed others...I would suggest each entity should accept their need for nourishment as their own to satisfy, and work toward re-creating an environment in which that is not only possible, but the accepted way...to my mind, this fundamentally requires the de-creation, if you will, of what we have created, and the re-creation of the natural environments we have destroyed...while some of you may argue we have already passed the point where this is even possible, I am absolutely ready to adopt virtually any philosophical position that might allow me to go to bed at night, not feeling as I do now, which is that the planet is x worse off than it was 24 hours ago, but, rather, that humanity, as a whole, has come together in the last 24 hours to begin moving in the opposite direction, by stopping the destruction and beginning the clean-up and regeneration...if a religious or moral perspective is not sufficient to spur such a change, and my suggestion of mass use of mind-enhancing substances is rejected, then I ask all readers here: what rationale(s) might you propose that might convince humanity, as a whole, to reverse the industrial tide?
I am aware of how this sounds, but, again, in my opinion, conventional thinking is not working, and neither is the concept of 'jobs', and we are hurtling toward our doom, new president or no...
dubet, your above expression is very compelling to me for a variety of reasons. There is a book called "The mind in the cave" that presents the theory that the basis for our conscious development was through the use of mind altering drugs used in sacred ceremonies by our spiritual leaders or shamans to see a view otherwise beyond our grasp.
This tradition of using drugs to "percieve" may at this point be a genetically encoded trait carried within our humanity that is an intrinsic part of our nature, and perhaps often an underused trait in our time. No longer needing "mind altering substances" we instead have our imaginations to guide us. I think science is often guided by imagination, but who knows, scientists did develope many of our current "legal" mind altering drugs.
Then again I still drink coffee and that is a mind altering drug even if to a lesser degree than many.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Unconventional thinking, while it risks backlash from the more conventional among us, requires no apologies. Not in my book anyway. I have to run out the door now, but I will briefly suggest that alterred states of consciousness are possible through disciplines such as meditation or yoga. I don't oppose substance use (I'm a cannabis fan myself), but it's not the only path. Gotta go (hurtle toward our doom...)
Huh?!
Nothing is changing with Mr. Obama.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-chapman/obama-stimulus-plan-break_b_159134.html
President-elect Obama's refusal to take decisive action to stop the diversion of up to $100 billion a year in federal small business contracts seems to be a direct contradiction to everything he has said about taking "dramatic action" to "put people back to work."
On February 22, 2008, Barack Obama released the following statement:
"It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."
The statement was made in response to more than 12 federal investigations, which found billions of dollars in federal small business contracts had been diverted to Fortune 500 corporations, their subsidiaries and thousands of other large businesses in the United States and Europe.
"New boss just like the old boss"
I think it must be recognized that it was quite unusual, daring and progressive for the creators of the U.S. Constitution to provide the extent of democracy that they did, namely, the House of Representatives elected more or less on a proportional basis. As a national system it was unheard of at the time, and neither was such a thing as the Bill of Rights and at least the semblance of a judicial system at least capable of delivering the possibility of justice on an individual basis. Even in Europe today this is still not entirely the case.
Naturally, history has clearly show that that Americans are more interested in smashing this foot-in-the-door than opening the door even a little bit wider. This is especially the case when in comes to the job of so-called national security and the protection of property though the imposition of various concocted moralities provides a strong counterpoint, second fiddle-wise.
That said, Parenti's vision of the monster devouring itself is apt. Where, for instance, are the plans to manufacture simpler less expensive cars that can be sold without the need for complex plans to bolster the risky credit necessary to purchase them? Where are the plans to expand housing and reduce rents, or make changes in the forclosure and bankruptcy laws which would prevent banks from dictating mortgage re-negotiations? What about plans to grow wages or to institute wider measures of evidence-based medicine into our health care systems? What is going to be done about collapsing public transport systems in our cities? The problem of corruption and waste in the Pentagon- always a favorite issue during the campaigns- when is Congress actually going to do something about it besides issuing another report? To get even more specific- what about a recent CBO report that "infrastructure spending" as now envisioned by leaders in Congress and Obama himself are unlikely to "stimulate the economy" in a way that has a chance of pulling us out of recession any time in the near future.
And how bad is this recession, apart from lost opportunity for the mega-rich to expand their fortunes, tax credits and off-shore acounts? People are losing their jobs but for the rest of us-nothing really has changed- same old struggle, same hassles, same lack of understanding and help from "above".
Sioux Rose
JOHN: Good points. How many Katrina-style-altered New Orleans type cities (tent cities filled with the newly-rendered homeless) will this gun-bearing nation tolerate? THAT is yet to be seen and may answer some of your otherwise rhetorical questions.
Indeed, this historic moment begs us to question the basic premise of capitalism that as John Maynard Keynes once said "is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all." But Parenti has failed to identify the essence of the irrational and amoral system that is capitalism. It is not private ownership of the means of production, but private ownership of the means of non-production, namely, banks. Or more specifically, the central bank, The Fed. And the essence of the banking elites' power is their protected monopoly as the sole legal arbiters of debt and credit. With this power they have instituted a privatized currency subject to interest - the true engine of the concentration of wealth. Since a currency subject to interest creates inherent, irreversible and ultimately terminal debt, this can be seen as the essence of our monetary system's trend toward self-destruction. Again, the core problem is that we have a privatized monetary system subject to interest.
That a currency subject to interest terminates itself in insoluble debt has been proven mathematically by Mike Montagne, who's solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (MPE) therefore prohibits interest. As I wrote to Mike privately awhile ago, the essence of his solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, is at once an economic principle and an ethical one. The principle is that of non-intervention; a principle which is found at the heart of Democratic Theory. His is the economic corollary to the conception of civil liberties which seeks to guarantee for each individual all those freedoms which are consistent with the same guarantee for every other individual. In its economic manifestation it can be stated as follows (Mike's definition of MPE): It is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.
From this perspective it should be abundantly clear that bankers as usurers and faux creditors have no place in a democratic society. They are neither desirable nor necessary. They should be no more welcome than slave owners, political dictators or murderers. They have no right to insinuate themselves into economic relations as the only legal arbiters of debt and credit. But having done so, they have impaired every other freedom inherent to the democratic ideal and continue to prevent a truly free market economy from taking shape.
see www.perfecteconomy.com
Sioux Rose
JIM & MIKE: I'd suggest avoiding small planes for a while. Your stuff is HOT.
Yes, and hundreds of thousands of copies of my website have been downloaded for free over the years... which is a bit of an insurance plan, as well as ensurance that mathematically perfected economy™ is inevitable.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Very well said (and I work for a bank).
At a very basic level, most of the problems in the world seem to be caused by people who want to live off of the production of others instead of relying on their own labor.
q
Part 2/2
How so?
As Jim says, mathematically perfected economy™ is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it.
That is, the only reason you think you are "borrowing" "money" from "a creditor" is you have allowed a pretend creditor to merely publish your promise to pay (note) to the real creditor (who accepts your promise in return for their property). Pretending earned wealth is at risk, and with this purportedly justifying interest while the pretend creditor actually deprives the real creditor of interest (disproving the proposition on that count as well), you're simply paying for your own promise to pay.
Mathematically Perfected Economy™ thus certifies your credit-worthiness and issues a standard currency just as we are familiar with then. It does this through a common foundry, with no need for regulation whatever (mathematically perfected economy™ is itself the only regulation), and of course, without interest and subject to an obligatory schedule of payment, which together comprise the one and one only solution to 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt.
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
Mike,
Thank you for that concise summary of your theory. I have bookmarked your web page and intend to explore it at greater length.
Are you familiar with LETSystems? A local money system in which money is created by the user's promises to pay back into the system, and in which interest, and other means of profiting from the money itself are forbidden. http://www.gmlets.u-net.com/
In light of our government's unwillingness to deal with this issue, do you think that extensive implementation of LETSystems would be a practical way for the average citizen to deal with this problem at a grassroots level? If not, do you have any other suggestions?
Katherine
National Initiative for Democracy: Creating a Government BY THE PEOPLE
ni4d.us
Yes, Katherine.
Way back in the 70s, and into the 80s, people who heard of mathematically perfected economy™ wanted to erect local implementations. I have been approached by many of these over the years for my blessing; and many others have risen in the wake of the first, not knowing anything (evidently) about my work. I was also asked by the arrested minters of coin associated with Mr. Ron Paul for their blessing. You'll even find links to my early (pre official web) or more recent (official internet) pages on some of their sites.
I have not given my blessing. Why?
As you see, it is not possible or practical to save a whole "economy" subject to interest by even however many small subsystems or contending/competing systems. Why not?
Because wherever those systems must coexist with any implementation of interest whatever, then so long as the system is dependent on the interest-bearing circulation, debt inherently and irreversibly multiplies in proportion to the whole system even, as the need to service the interest-bearing debt consumes ever more of the circulation.
It is not possible then to save ourselves by hoping we can build independent, isolated islands of commerce, insulated from the terminal effects of interest, but yet coexisting with interest implementations.
I am aware nonetheless that even after receiving my rejections so long ago, that many of these purported alternate economies claim success. What they mean by "success" however is that people *do* in fact exchange their production by them. Well, that was an obvious and easy goal from the beginning, but not the goal which counts. The goal which counted, which is sustainable, and which sustains the justice we desire in every case is mathematically perfected economy™. The present failure proves that. What little these alternative systems emulated my principles is futile if the whole system does not deploy them, completely excluding interest/usury from the equation.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Part 1/2
Jim,
You articulate your thought so well.
It's funny how all this stuff works. Many years ago, against routine objections from every quarter, I was pointing out that we have a plutocracy, an usurpation by imposition of a central banking system; that we have lost a republic. Now, not only do you find the term plutocracy everywhere (you have to have the concept of multiplication of debt to qualify its application), you have adulterers (here) demonstrating their poor grasp of the issues at hand by decrying that the plutocracy has usurped a democracy. We are a republic; and while both are classes of self ruling publics, a republic is a far cry from a democracy — a *very* far cry.
There are only two fundamental issues in a monetary system subject to interest (volume and cost of circulation), and only one issue in a perfected economy (volume of circulation). The present circumstances are readily understood in their entirety, to every detail, from a reasonable inquisition of the nature of a currency such as has been imposed upon us. Particularly and most importantly, a circulation subject to interest inherently and irreversibly multiplies debt in proportion to a vital circulation, to the degree that it is necessary to maintain a vital circulation, and that we must do so by re-borrowing principal and interest paid out of the general circulation, as subsequent sums of debt, perpetually increased so much as periodic interest. What we pay against principal does not pay the sum of debt down, to the degree that we must re-borrow it as a new debt, equal to the prior resolved debt. What pay against interest of course then increases the sum of debt to the degree that we must re-borrow this too to replenish the circulation. Thus the sum of debt inherently and irreversibly increases so long as we maintain a vital circulation, by ever greater increments of ever greater sums of periodic interest on an ever greater sum of debt.
All the irregularities of the imposed system of exploitation descend from the interest attached to the circulation. For instance it is mathematically impossible to solve inflation and deflation owing to interest, because we must pay more out of circulation than originally represents the value of the associated property.
Every implementation of a system subject to interest has a finite lifespan which we can even forwardly calculate for any rates of interest and circulatory growth, simply by borrowing back obligated periodic interest into the future, until a sum of debt is accumulated which can no longer be serviced from the circulation. Because that inevitable sum of debt exceeds our capacity to service debt; because this destroys any credit-worthiness to borrow further; and because we must yet continue to re-borrow what principal and interest we remain obligated to pay out of circulation against the existing sum of debt *if we are to maintain a vital circulation*, this inevitable, terminal juncture explains the disappearance of money, inability to justify borrowing further ("credit crisis"), and ultimate failure of industry.
Every President since and including Gerald Ford has been presented proofs of inevitable failure and singular solution to all the resultant issues. In the early 1980s, the Reagan Administration asked if I could project the ultimate failure. In turn I provided them with computer models (complete with source code which you can still download from our pages, run the same numbers, and come up with the same projection) which not only forecast Reagan's tripling of federal debt, but which, with exceeding accuracy forecast the accumulation of debt to now, [conservatively] projecting systemic failure under a terminal sum of debt at approximately 2010 AD.
In the work I published in 1979, an immediate and costless solution to all the issues was worked out — an unrefuted proposition which since 1975 we've called "mathematically perfected economy™." In our page, "If I Were President..." I show a) how to arrest the present monetary failure in a day by suspending all payments against debts originating in the central banking system; and b) then how to establish mathematically perfected economy™ in little longer.
To summarize, mathematically perfected economy™ solves 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of money or property, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to a vital circulation, engendering inevitable systemic failure at a finite system lifespan defined by an inevitable, terminal sum of insoluble debt... by eradicating interest and paying debt at an obligatory schedule no less than the rate of depreciation or consumption of the related property.
What does this mean? It's best understood by an example.
In the case of a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan, the cost of the home ($100,000) is paid off at the overall rate of $1,000 per year, or $83.33 per month. Little wonder how many tens of thousands of homes would be going into foreclosure then under mathematically perfected economy™, or how far more liquid we would be immediately, with no bailout, virtually no cost whatever.
As if we can only think to cut off our noses to spite our face, many people turn away immediately, declaring/questioning, "Who would loan us money if the money is not subject to interest?"
You're right. No one would. But no one would have to, either.
I find it interesting that the word interest is being bound to monetary gain in this scenario, circumscribing it's value to such a narrow limit as to being appealing to none who care about the greater good.
It would be in all of our interst to have everyone in our world within possesion of at least the necessary basics of life, liberty and justice as is right by nature and her greater laws.
This fact alone would end all wars, of what value is that?
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
A simple math question:
If one pays off a $100,000 home at $1,000/year, would'nt it take the homeowner at least 100 thousand years to pay it off? If your system could guarantee me a hundred thousand year lifespan, I am a convert!
That's 100 years, Tom (not your 100,000, which would be $1 per year). Otherwise... the rest follows as I replied.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Exactly, Tom. See said expression of the lifespan.
We only solve inflation and deflation (defined as increases/decreases in circulation per represented property) by maintaining a schedule of payment equivalent to the rate of consumption of all related wealth. So, in each case, financed property is paid off over the course of its lifespan. No one gets anything for nothing: We are paying for the production of others with equal measures of our own production, as we consume of the production we take possession of.
If the lifespan of the home is 50 years then, it costs us $2,000 per year, or $167 per month. The natural rate of depreciation over the lifespan of the related property *must* equate to the rate of payment in order to solve inflation and deflation.
Obviously then, this would affect construction. What costs more? A $90,000 home with a 50-year lifespan; a $100,000 home with a 100-year lifespan, or a $110, home with a 200-year lifespan. Well the latter of course costs more overall, but far less per year of service. The overall rate of payments for each are $1,800/yr (50-yr), $1,000/yr (100-yr), and $550/yr (200-yr lifespan).
See our forums for initial (newbie) questions. Our main site articles lay it all out. The article, "If I Were President..." outlines how to arrest monetary failure in a day, and establish mathematically perfected economy™ in little longer.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Sioux Rose
MIKE: It sounds like l00% altruism, too. Where are administrative fees in this scenario, the mechanisms to maintain the records of say the monthly mortgage payment? How does that fit into this calculus?
Rather than a central bank, I envision a software application, validating credit-worthiness by the obvious mathematic bounds, plus whatever further restrictions a public may want to impose upon itself. I've written about this extensively in answering to questions in our forum, so you'll see answers to many further questions there (please join and ask, as your questions and their answers will be helpful to others).
In any case, "let's say" (hmmm) that we want to do away with so called Social Security not only because it's unsustainable, but because its a further vehicle for stealing from us (the funds have been robbed to cover other federal deficits). Let's also say that the public wants therefore to enforce saving a whopping 50% of all earnings for the first 25 years of working lifespan, that the savings *under a monetary system which maintains the value of money* can sustain the same persons over an average of another 25 years. So this much is deducted from their earnings automatically and saved in a special account, leaving what can be spent elsewise. So we agree on a formula for how much food costs to allow for and so forth, and further deduct the costs of servicing current debt commitments, to determine automatically what debt they can service further.
So for instance they just took a drive to Florida and decided to buy a second home; and this $200,000 home is going to cost them $175/month for 90 years. The application verifies their creditworthiness in seconds, credits the builder with $200,000 by issuing the debtor's promise to pay, which then, like now, is circulated as currency because it represents the like $200,000 value of the home.
So this takes seconds, costs virtually nothing, doesn't even require paper/metal currency, and the payments are automated forever. To provide for the use of cash, we could provide automated tellers, charging whatever it costs to maintain them, and assigning this cost of course to the issuance of cash. Whatever book-keeping charges cost is distributed across the system likewise -- practically costing us nothing whatever for all this combined.
Rates of depreciation will probably not be linear. But the prescription for solution of inflation, deflation, and multiplication of debt by interest remains the same. Automated payments simply observe the formula for depreciation.
In any case, overall then we have no inflation or deflation, because the only money which comes into circulation represents the existing/remaining value of the related asset across the entire lifespan of the money, and the whole system altogether. There is no multiplication of debt by interest, because we effectively issue our own (certified) promises to pay, without interest. The real creditor is not at risk, because the remaining value of the property can at all times be redeemed in circulation; likewise all remaining debt is at all times collectable in the remaining value of the related property. This of course then is the only system which preserves the value of money across its lifespan, because it is the only prescription which *perpetually* preserves a 1:1 ratio between circulation, remaining value of related property, debt, and redeemability of the currency.
One further thing we do in mathematically perfected economy™ is allow equity to be immediately converted into circulation. This further solves the inability of a deficient circulation to sustain the upper limit of trade. While this potential may seem only theoretically valuable, in fact it alleviates even the least unnatural restriction of liquidity in lesser trades as well. But as a consequence of this virtue, it is also possible in mathematically perfected economy™ to trade all wealth at once... something which is impossible in generic systems.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Sioux Rose
MIKE: It's poetic for its sheer genius and ultimate egalitarian/utilitarian value. Of course leaving out ALL the henchmen who are to banking what vultures are to nature will prove the problem. I thank you for taking so much of your precious time to clearly articulate the basics of this concept and its potential execution.
Do you have a place for insurance in this model? Nature has been restless lately, what with tornado outbreaks, floods, hurricanes and tropical storms, she takes a cut of property values from time to time, too. (I am not trying to be glib, I think this is a factor worthy of consideration, particularly as per the linear scale of property depreciation that you've include in this model.)
For everyone who contributed today in this forum, it's been refreshing. No name calling, a lot of shared respect, and quite a bit of intelligent thinking all amicably shared. Bravo!
Sioux Rose wrote: "Of course leaving out ALL the henchmen who are to banking what vultures are to nature will prove the problem."
Yes, it's just that simple actually... and you're most welcome.
Sioux Rose wrote: "Do you have a place for insurance in this model? Nature has been restless lately, what with tornado outbreaks, floods, hurricanes and tropical storms, she takes a cut of property values from time to time, too."
Great and just question. Yes, absolutely. Only *real* insurance. That is, if you build your home in a flood or hurricane zone, you share the costs with others of like risks. No investment and all the usual contemporary obfuscation of wealth and attempted unearned profit to provide "insurance" by exploitation. Simply shared costs, as in a cooperative is the right way to do it. But this isn't a feature or obligation of mathematically perfected economy™. It's just how I would do insurance, and how I believe an intelligent public would want to do insurance.
After all, *production* and innovation are the only things which increase the pool of wealth. The idea for us to abandon is unearned profit, which of course depends on the leverage of exploitation.
So I expect 2 consequences of such an implementation of insurance in conjunction with mathematically perfected economy™. First of all, we can afford to build stout, well engineered homes which can withstand tornadoes, hurricanes... and so forth, because our production only costs us an equal measure of production. The second thing is that the costs of insurance are minimized, because the replacement costs are minimal as well.
How then would this work out?
Let's take our $100,000 home with a hundred year lifespan, and revise it to fit a hurricane zone scenario. Let's say it costs another $50,000 to build that home to withstand anything which mother nature might throw at it. Still lasts 100 years.
So this practically hurricane proof house costs us $1,500 per year instead of $1,000, or $125 per month instead of $83.33.
Now let's say that 1 out of every ten homes in the whole hurricane belt of the country is destroyed during its like 100-year lifespan; and so the average age of the house which is blown down is 50 years. So (figuring depreciation linearly -- which makes it high), the average value of the home at blow-down is $75,000. So we divide this by 10 to get the cost of shared insurance among all such homes, leaving $7,500 of additional cost to finance in our hurricane-proof hurricane belt home.
This makes the cost of the insurance $75 per year or $6.25 per month.
So this ever stronger home runs us $1,575 per year, or $131.25 per month.
Of course, doing the same for new commercial construction, you can imagine how much more liquid and secure we'd be both under mathematically perfected economy™.
Thanks to everyone as well for the civil tones and intelligence of this forum. This is a good group.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
NO REGULATION!
PS Sioux Rose,
I should point out that there is no need for regulation at all, because the incumbent schedule of payment and publicly assented rules for certifying credit-worthiness are the sole vehicles of regulation. There is no human intervention. There is no productive apparatus owned by the state. It's not socialism; it's merely the one and one only form of currency which sustains truly free enterprise.
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Excellent article.
The following conservative economic policies have failed, any further promotion of these policies should be rejected, and these current policies should be reversed:
- free trade
- tax cuts
- deregulation
- exclusively private enterprise
- current corporate governance laws
On the "People For A New Society" website (http://www.hwforums.com/2201) which articulates a highly democratic alternative, the most frequent comments are, "I agree with what you say, but what can we do?"
We need to take a page from successful grassroots organizations who advocate MEETINGS, discussions, questioning, and learning.
Got a living room?
Visit our forums to discuss these issues to their end. Our main site articles (and blogs) address practically every issue you can imagine. In our forum, people ask what they don't understand, or for elaboration on fine points. Mathematically Perfected Economy™ derives from a proof of singular solution (that is, there is no bona fide alternative); and was here long before any of the eleventh hour unqualified solutions.
http://www.perfecteconomy.com (main site)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/f/index.php (forum)
http://perfecteconomy.com/wp/ (blog)
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
This new form of Communism is chock full of black holes, and if someone thinks it will work they are deep in the looney bin.
Love
Zero
It's biggest hole may be that it's intent is to improve the problem. But I defer my judgement for now I do not feel I have put enough into it as of yet.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Solution or eradication of a method of exploitation imposed by an unassented form of currency which can only multiply debt into terminal debt is hardly communism; it is in fact a vital, incontrovertible, and indispensable right of a republic.
If you want to argue holes in mathematically perfected economy™, you best come up with a hole, rather than a "bad name."
Regards,
mike montagne — founder, PEOPLE For Mathematically Perfected Economy™, author/engineer of mathematically perfected economy™ (1979)
http://www.perfecteconomy.com/
Assuming you do indeed have a form of economics that will not inherit the flaws of it's predessor.
Have you been able to put this new idea into practice at all or is it still in formulation?
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
You should try actually reading the article, Zero. Parenti didn't propose any form of "Communism." He is merely pointing out the faults of capitalism. If you are referring to NJDave's link, that also is not about a "new form of communism," but a discussion of democracy.
All progressives have to read Michael Parenti's articles and books. His analysis is a Marxist one and his ability to explain the real world is second to none.
-----------------------------------------
Remember the butchery in Gaza by the IDF.
Wow!I saw this too and wanted to say it the way you did so well. Nice job Michael.
Pretty good examination of the 'free-market' capitalist myth.
The Reagan-Bush-Cheney worldview sees the Capitalist as Scavenger, creating havoc among markets and institutions in order to profit from their disintegration. War is a favorite tool of these montsters.
q
Wrong!
It is "the Market" which has made America the most prosperous nation on earth.
"Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control -- and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous." - Our President Barack Obama
Capitalism will always fail because it ennobles wrong-doing and is, allegedly, based on the negative concept of competition rather than the positive one of cooperation. It rewards the best liars, cheats and thieves and elevates them according to their ability to exploit and oppress those who are honest, creative and hardworking. Capitalism has a built in self destruct mechanism that can’t be eliminated. It’s part of the system.
Anyone who can voice any defense whatever for any aspect of “free market" capitalism at this point is beyond delusional. Try completely psychopathic. "The proof of the pudding" as they say. We've had this trickle down bullshit shoved down our throats long enough, centuries in fact. Noblesse Oblige is a myth.
It's true that government interference is largely responsible for the current disaster we’re facing. Can you say deregulation? That’s what has allowed the criminals who run corporate/fascist amerika and wall street to do whatever the hell they please with absolutely no thought of any consequences. Even after driving the country into complete bankruptcy and collapse they are being handed something like $2.5 trillion, probably a lot more, to make sure they won’t suffer any undue inconvenience or discomfort from the catastrophe they caused.
After virtually millennia of repeating the same mistakes you might expect rational beings to “get it”. Apparently this isn’t true. The human race seems content to keep repeating the same cycle of exploitation, oppression and bloody revolution over and over ad nauseam.
A species as destructive, arrogant and self-serving as homo sapiens should not have survived even this short time. Our extinction is overdue. We have abused and exploited our world and its resources far too long; nature will take its course and we will be fortunate to survive at all.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
ColdWarBaby,
Come on, capitalism is just an incredibly efficient economic system. It's not pure evil. It can be used for good or bad purposes. But to say that "capitalism will always fail" is ridiculously ignorant. History clearly shows that communism has failed, not capitalism. Even Cuba and Vietnam are beginning to transition into more capitalist societies, in the same way as China has done.
But if capitalism is not for you, there's still N. Korea. I just hope you don't mind not having enough electricity, starving to death, and having every aspect of your life controlled by the state. But if that's what you want, well, bon voyage! Enjoy yourself!
Perhaps all of you Marxists need to construct a time machine to get yourselves out of the 19th century.
OK joe.
“If you don't like it here, go live someplace else.”
A typical response from a well indoctrinated money worshiper. Spouting shibboleths and slogans as if they are facts does not make them so. You can put a cat in the oven, that doesn't make it a biscuit.
As I stated in my comment, the “evils” of capitalism are inherent in the system. It rewards the worst characteristics and punishes the best. Beyond that, any time a monetary/economic system is based on debt subject to interest it is guaranteed to fail. At some point, such as the one we have currently reached, such an economy will destroy itself when the debt becomes insoluble.
Whenever any variety of just and equitable society begins to show any signs of defying capitalist fascism it is immediately set upon by the propaganda, military and political machinery of capitalism. If the offending leaders can’t be persuaded, bribed or intimidated into compliance they are simply assassinated and replaced by a more amenable dictator who will simply kill, at the behest of his capitalist masters, anyone, in any numbers, who doesn’t like it. It’s a very common amerikan practice. What can you expect from a country built on genocide and salvery?
“In the bloody coup of September 11, 1973, Henry Kissinger and the CIA helped General Augusto Pinochet overthrow the democratically-elected leftist government of President Salvador Allende. The Fascist puppet-regime of Augusto Pinochet then embarked on a 17-year terror campaign against the people of Chile, which included mass arrests and executions, death squads, torture and disappearances. Many of the victims were fingered as “radicals” by lists provided by the CIA.”
“In February 1963, Juan Bosch took office as the first democratically elected president of the Dominican Republic since 1924. Here at last was John F. Kennedy’s liberal anti-Communist, to counter the charge that the U.S. supported only military dictatorships. Bosch’s government was to be the long sought “showcase of democracy” that would put the lie to Fidel Castro. He was given the grand treatment in Washington shortly before he took office.
Bosch was true to his beliefs. He called for land reform, low-rent housing, modest nationalization of business, and foreign investment provided it was not excessively exploitative of the country and other policies making up the program of any liberal Third World leader serious about social change. He was likewise serious about civil liberties: Communists, or those labeled as such, were not to be persecuted unless they actually violated the law.
A number of American officials and congresspeople expressed their discomfort with Bosch’s plans, as well as his stance of independence from the United States. Land reform and nationalization are always touchy issues in Washington, the stuff that “creeping socialism” is made of. In several quarters of the U.S. press Bosch was red-baited.
In September, the military boots marched. Bosch was out. The United States, which could discourage a military coup in Latin America with a frown, did nothing.
Nineteen months later, a revolt broke out which promised to put the exiled Bosch back into power. The United States sent 23,000 troops to help crush it.”
Study some math and history. Economics is math. History is not subjective; revisionism and omission can’t change reality.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
- Excellent post(s), ColdWarBaby. You know your stuff -- glad to have you here. (I think I once knew you on DU, before they banned me for writing things like you just wrote, & for regularly remarking on the two-faced nature of the Dem Party.)
Thank you Dave.
I'm not here that often anymore and don't necessarily comment when I am. Occasionally I respond to a comment that is just too absurd to be ignored. At one time I frequented this site and commented regularly. I was censored and banned so frequently for advocating activism that I reduced my visits and am now here rarely.
If by DU you mean Democratic Underground, I don’t recall having done much reading or posting there. I don’t generally pay much attention to anything using the name of either alleged “party”. I haven’t seen my moniker used by others. I don’t know if I’m the only ColdWarBaby out here but I suppose it’s very possible there are others.
There is a site where I’ve commented a bit called Dissident Voice. Am I seeing DV but reading DU?
Anyway, thanks again for the props. CD looks a little different now. I still see a lot of names I remember. It remains to be seen if they’ve lightened up on the censorship.
There is no way to Peace. Peace is the Way.
joehope - What astounds me about you is that you're so willing to show everyone what a simpleton you are. You apparently lack the neural connections enabling one to feel a sense of embarrassment (a sense which serves a protective function for the organism, by preventing him from revealing what a fool he is). When I read your stuff, I cringe in embarrassment for you, even while I'm laughing.
Why should I be embarrassed for: 1) agreeing with Obama, 2) having my own opinions, and 3) not becoming a CD "dittohead"?
joe - I commend you for #2, having your own opinions.
On #3, in a sense it's a positive that you're not becoming a CD dittohead, but it's unfortunate that you're a Dem Party dittohead. It's doubtless best not to be a dittohead at all. The way to do this is to try to learn enough so that you can see whose arguments are most valid; then you integrate these stronger ideas into your own worldview. If you do it that way, it's not being a "dittohead" (ie, someone who mindlessly echoes kant & propaganda).
As for #1, agreeing with Obama -- do you mean when he talks out of the left side of his mouth, or the right side?
Finding "who's arguments are most valid" is the curse of humankind. When we find all arguments to be valid we will be free at last.
I need not tell Joe to keep being a painful reminder of our need to work through equality, from what I get through his persistence that is self driven, I may as well request he not sell his soul to the devil.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"Free markets" exist for those who own one.