Actually I disagree with the term 'capitalism' as the great evil. Honest capitalism, mostly local, seems like a fine thing. Who's shoes do you like better? Which are the better value?
Yet 'The Corporation' has become the all powerful tool of the old masters of the universe, and we see that globalism, environmental disaster and so many other ills derive from the juggernaut of money, the Corporation...
Oh, contraire Wes. Capitalism is a barter system. Corporations are legal entities with all sorts of ridiculous rights first initiated by British royalty (actually Danish, soon supplanted by Great Britain). Of course as they've grown in power and influence, they've done just what a mindless system for making money would do - screw up everything to achieve their prime directive. Corporations and healthy cultures cannot coexist. I don't find the same true for capitalism...
I think a better understanding what Capitalism is, can be found in the book by ~Ellen Meiksins Wood~ known as "The Origin Of Capitalism--a longer view".
For me it is the defining source for understanding Capitalism, in my opinion.
Just check it out quickly Rick, but I would offer the same complaint. Corporatism and capitalism can't be confused...
"Capitalism is not a natural and inevitable consequence of human nature, nor simply an extension of age-old practices of trade and commerce. Rather, it is a late and localized product of very specific historical conditions, which required great transformations in social relations and in the relationship between humans and nature."
I define capitalism as that age-old practice of trade and commerce. It was and is the corporate model that 'required our subjugation and the ruined relationship between humans and nature.'
Agree. Corporatism has blanked the old definition of Capitalism AND has insisted on a corrupt US Congress to write legislation that benefits Corporations, Billionaires and ultimately Wall St.
John Perkins referred to it as a "Corporatocracy" that is intertwined with the Military Industrial (& Intelligence) Complex that insists on establishing ~600 military bases around the world to protect US corporate interests in this countries. That's spells I m p e r i a l i s m.
That is what Capitalism has become..a mutant of it's former form and established definition.
This corporatocracy has been operating since WWII ended.
It began it's climb to power during Truman's Admin. and escalated during Eisenhower's Admin.
Whatever democracy we had in 1945, it began to metastasize after 1947 and the National Security Act of 1947.
We gradually lost the power to regulate corporatism, over a 2 decade period.
Remember what Eisenhower said in his January 17th 1961 "Exit interview" with the American people, on network TV:
~"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.."~
Yes. It' possible to abolish corporations without abolishing all private property owned by individuals. One of the keys is limited liability. Any enterprise on which no individual or small partnership is willing to risk their entire net worth, should be owned by society at large -- the state. The financial owners of all private enterprises must be held personally responsible for any debt or tort generated by the enterprise to the point of personal bankruptcy, including environmental externalities. No such individual or group would be willing to risk their entire personal fortune(s) on a nuclear power plant. If the state decides to build a nuclear power plant, then all benefits of that enterprise must be shared equally by all citizens. If it melts down, the state must fully compensate all losses from that meltdown.
Not sure how we get there from here, but a first step is to establish a system where corporations do not have the rights of "persons," where money is not "speech," where any private financial contributions to government must be made to the general treasury and not to specific executive agencies and where individual government employees do not receive royalties or profit sharing for inventions or enterprises in which they participate.
I suspect the species will survive but the civilization will not. I think most people fear of losing the amenities of Western life, but we know we can survive without all that. I propose we relearn how to live simpler, less technologically enhanced lives, aligned with our true animal nature.
They do fear losing what they got, and it's one of the reason I try to avoid shaming the rich, or news commentators with multi-million dollar contracts.
Maybe some of us would remain centered & aware. But once the lifestyle has taken hold & become a habit, I'm pretty sure I would accept & use the standard rationalizations for being an agent of inequality.
I'm not just talking about the rich. I'm talking about everyone living within Western cultural frameworks. We're all terrified of death and discomfort. Giving up the "gains" of Western tech and the "security" of Western society is absolutely necessary but is like asking an NRA member to give up their weapons.
Thought-provoking and well-written! Though to argue from the injustices of capitalism toward a post-capitalist world is outdated and unnecessary. We can argue about justice all day long, but even if we do agree that capitalism is unjust (which it is), that kind of theory will only yield a practice that reproduces our self-domination all the more. An argument from necessity, however, is much stronger and allows us to see the freedom capitalism is creating alongside its injustice. Freedom and injustice go hand-in-hand in capitalism, and that is precisely the core of the problem. Overcoming this requires a sensibility to history, not morality.
Don't forget the Billionaire's IOC games that poor countries are conned into believing that hosting the Olympics will bring them fortunes from tourism.
That's a LIE.
Just another example of the Global corruption and Empiricism between competing Billionaires.
Crushing Capitalism is definitely Our ONLY option.
Labeling is a valuable tool like all cognitive shortcuts. But in a dysfunctional mind — one we identify with, that is compulsive and can’t switch off— cognitive shortcuts can distort our perception of reality... and others can and do take advantage of this as well.
So we keep it simple and true.... unlike other species humans need more protection for their bodies. This means food, water, clothing and shelter and health care are obligatory.
And our minds need protection from their own and others’ compulsive tendencies and from the Manipulative/ deceptive/ hierarchical/ dominating tendencies of our own and other people’s survival brains.
We need to evolve , to viscerally become aware that we are awareness itself so our sharing/caring/loving side is no longer suppressed by our primitive survival/ tribe-in-crisis side. We are wired for learning, exploration, creativity and needing social interaction to help us self regulate and evolve.
So conscious education, play, rest and the formation of healthy social bonds are also obligatory.
Once we set the truthful parameters of what is obligatory....o b l i g a t o r y for Homo sapien survival and self actualization then the parameters for debate and discussion are also reset.
The loading of labels by the narrative is intentional I believe, to do just what you describe. Polarize them to prime reactive fighting and simultaneously remove their usefulness in real discussion. I definitely avoid labeling myself these days for the same reasons. Way easier to focus on the important things without defending broad labels.
"I might stop using -ist and -ism words altogether, or use them sparingly, and just talk about the actual concepts without having to rely on any label which tries to capture them all."
Actually I disagree with the term 'capitalism' as the great evil. Honest capitalism, mostly local, seems like a fine thing. Who's shoes do you like better? Which are the better value?
Yet 'The Corporation' has become the all powerful tool of the old masters of the universe, and we see that globalism, environmental disaster and so many other ills derive from the juggernaut of money, the Corporation...
Tempting, but unfortunately one cannot separate main street from wall street. Capital is capital!
Oh, contraire Wes. Capitalism is a barter system. Corporations are legal entities with all sorts of ridiculous rights first initiated by British royalty (actually Danish, soon supplanted by Great Britain). Of course as they've grown in power and influence, they've done just what a mindless system for making money would do - screw up everything to achieve their prime directive. Corporations and healthy cultures cannot coexist. I don't find the same true for capitalism...
I think a better understanding what Capitalism is, can be found in the book by ~Ellen Meiksins Wood~ known as "The Origin Of Capitalism--a longer view".
For me it is the defining source for understanding Capitalism, in my opinion.
Just check it out quickly Rick, but I would offer the same complaint. Corporatism and capitalism can't be confused...
"Capitalism is not a natural and inevitable consequence of human nature, nor simply an extension of age-old practices of trade and commerce. Rather, it is a late and localized product of very specific historical conditions, which required great transformations in social relations and in the relationship between humans and nature."
I define capitalism as that age-old practice of trade and commerce. It was and is the corporate model that 'required our subjugation and the ruined relationship between humans and nature.'
Agree. Corporatism has blanked the old definition of Capitalism AND has insisted on a corrupt US Congress to write legislation that benefits Corporations, Billionaires and ultimately Wall St.
John Perkins referred to it as a "Corporatocracy" that is intertwined with the Military Industrial (& Intelligence) Complex that insists on establishing ~600 military bases around the world to protect US corporate interests in this countries. That's spells I m p e r i a l i s m.
That is what Capitalism has become..a mutant of it's former form and established definition.
This corporatocracy has been operating since WWII ended.
It began it's climb to power during Truman's Admin. and escalated during Eisenhower's Admin.
Whatever democracy we had in 1945, it began to metastasize after 1947 and the National Security Act of 1947.
We gradually lost the power to regulate corporatism, over a 2 decade period.
Remember what Eisenhower said in his January 17th 1961 "Exit interview" with the American people, on network TV:
~"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.."~
Yes. It' possible to abolish corporations without abolishing all private property owned by individuals. One of the keys is limited liability. Any enterprise on which no individual or small partnership is willing to risk their entire net worth, should be owned by society at large -- the state. The financial owners of all private enterprises must be held personally responsible for any debt or tort generated by the enterprise to the point of personal bankruptcy, including environmental externalities. No such individual or group would be willing to risk their entire personal fortune(s) on a nuclear power plant. If the state decides to build a nuclear power plant, then all benefits of that enterprise must be shared equally by all citizens. If it melts down, the state must fully compensate all losses from that meltdown.
Not sure how we get there from here, but a first step is to establish a system where corporations do not have the rights of "persons," where money is not "speech," where any private financial contributions to government must be made to the general treasury and not to specific executive agencies and where individual government employees do not receive royalties or profit sharing for inventions or enterprises in which they participate.
I suspect the species will survive but the civilization will not. I think most people fear of losing the amenities of Western life, but we know we can survive without all that. I propose we relearn how to live simpler, less technologically enhanced lives, aligned with our true animal nature.
They do fear losing what they got, and it's one of the reason I try to avoid shaming the rich, or news commentators with multi-million dollar contracts.
Maybe some of us would remain centered & aware. But once the lifestyle has taken hold & become a habit, I'm pretty sure I would accept & use the standard rationalizations for being an agent of inequality.
I'm not just talking about the rich. I'm talking about everyone living within Western cultural frameworks. We're all terrified of death and discomfort. Giving up the "gains" of Western tech and the "security" of Western society is absolutely necessary but is like asking an NRA member to give up their weapons.
I am one of many disciples of this truth speech.
The vets coming home, mating, then spreading the trauma throughout generations. Damn.
Thought-provoking and well-written! Though to argue from the injustices of capitalism toward a post-capitalist world is outdated and unnecessary. We can argue about justice all day long, but even if we do agree that capitalism is unjust (which it is), that kind of theory will only yield a practice that reproduces our self-domination all the more. An argument from necessity, however, is much stronger and allows us to see the freedom capitalism is creating alongside its injustice. Freedom and injustice go hand-in-hand in capitalism, and that is precisely the core of the problem. Overcoming this requires a sensibility to history, not morality.
Don't forget the Billionaire's IOC games that poor countries are conned into believing that hosting the Olympics will bring them fortunes from tourism.
That's a LIE.
Just another example of the Global corruption and Empiricism between competing Billionaires.
Crushing Capitalism is definitely Our ONLY option.
Thank you Caitlin.
Rick White
@humanbeinz1968-Twitter
https://www.quora.com/What-specific-reasons-do-those-who-oppose-the-Olympics-have
Labeling is a valuable tool like all cognitive shortcuts. But in a dysfunctional mind — one we identify with, that is compulsive and can’t switch off— cognitive shortcuts can distort our perception of reality... and others can and do take advantage of this as well.
So we keep it simple and true.... unlike other species humans need more protection for their bodies. This means food, water, clothing and shelter and health care are obligatory.
And our minds need protection from their own and others’ compulsive tendencies and from the Manipulative/ deceptive/ hierarchical/ dominating tendencies of our own and other people’s survival brains.
We need to evolve , to viscerally become aware that we are awareness itself so our sharing/caring/loving side is no longer suppressed by our primitive survival/ tribe-in-crisis side. We are wired for learning, exploration, creativity and needing social interaction to help us self regulate and evolve.
So conscious education, play, rest and the formation of healthy social bonds are also obligatory.
Once we set the truthful parameters of what is obligatory....o b l i g a t o r y for Homo sapien survival and self actualization then the parameters for debate and discussion are also reset.
"There's nothing more enraging than a system which treats the homeless like the problem rather than homelessness."
Yep. That does stand out as insanity from the vantage point of any other era.
The loading of labels by the narrative is intentional I believe, to do just what you describe. Polarize them to prime reactive fighting and simultaneously remove their usefulness in real discussion. I definitely avoid labeling myself these days for the same reasons. Way easier to focus on the important things without defending broad labels.
"I might stop using -ist and -ism words altogether, or use them sparingly, and just talk about the actual concepts without having to rely on any label which tries to capture them all."
SOMEBODY is having an epiphany.
This article trash