Originally posted by petrus4
Which would be great, if the psychopaths were going to let us have it. The problem is that they won't.
I completely agree, they will fight it to the last, they will even start world wars. I believe that WWII was a consequence of the Spanish revolution, and Hitler was just an excuse. Sounds crazy I know but the establishment before the revolution were pro-Hitler. Nobody cared when Hitler was dropping bombs on Spain, or invaded Czechoslovakia. He invaded France because the French declared war on Germany. The war was escalated by France and Britain, it could have stopped at Poland.
That was the conclusion I drew after reading Bellamy's novels; that a socialist scenario could truly work gloriously, but only if the psychopaths did not exist. The fact that they do, is the spanner in the works.
That's a good point. I agree they are psychopaths, or sociopaths, I think you have to be to exploit and cause such misery, and be able to justify it in your head.
We need to develop a system for definitively identifying the psychopaths, and then we need to figure out what to do with them, that minimises their potential for harm to non-psychopathic society. I do not necessarily advocate either eugenics or capital punishment, but the reality is that we do need to figure out some way of preventing the psychopaths from doing the amount of damage that they have traditionally, so far. If we don't figure out how to do that, they are going to render all of us extinct.
We have to remain vigilant for sure. But once the systems if capitalism are replaced it would far more difficult for anyone to gain ultimate power. People have to be educated though, because they still fall for the idea of picking an ultimate leader (president/prime minister) expecting the new one to be better than the old one. But history shows that nothing really changes.
One of the things which Edward Bellamy's second book helped me to figure out, was that the definition of liberty, as advocated by people like Milton Friedman, was the liberty of a single individual to theoretically acquire literally all of the property on the planet. The only problem with that scenario is, if one person literally owns everything, what happens to the other 6 billion+ of us?
Yes it is liberty from the capitalist perspective which is basically the freedom to exploit with no oversight from authority. It is not liberty for the proletariat, we are not included in 'We the People', in reality 'the people' are the capitalists, the Nobility, are still the commoners.
If nothing else, I have realised that the game of Monopoly is not a positive model for running the world. It isn't even really desirable as a board game, for similar reasons as to why people don't want their children playing Grand Theft Auto. I don't advocate anything which teaches or encourages psychopathic behaviour.
I think the state school system teaches and encourages psychopathic behaviour.
I personally do not advocate the size of groups being large; ideally no more than 50-100 people at the very most. Beyond that, I feel that accountability becomes impossible. I also, as mentioned, do not advocate any form of legislature, which makes binding decisions for anyone who is not physically present in the room.
I agree. Small companies would be the ideal. Much more healthy for the economy, and for ourselves, than huge corporations.
I do instinctively want a high level of personal freedom; but my definition of freedom does not include me having everything, and everyone else around me having nothing. Truthfully I've been very reclusive for most of my life, and that is mainly because people fairly consistently tend to bully me if I am around them. That is the main reason why I do not like joining groups, for the most part.
To me freedom has nothing to do with government or economies. True freedom is the ability to be yourself and not be judged for it. Freedom is a community condition. If communities are divided and struggling and conditioned to be overly competitive, and they're always being told how to think by the MSM, they become insular and suspicious of others. This leads to people not wanting to stand out, everyone starts to act the same in order to fit in. We become clones of what we're told to be by pressure from peers and media. All true individuality is stiffed from the fear of being different and not fitting in. Gangs are a result of this.