"Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!" ----Marley's Ghost (A Christmas Carol)
For the past one-hundred years, the West has been influenced by the notion that selfishness is a virtue. No one more conspicuous than Libertarian ideologues Ayn Rand, Margaret Thatcher, and Ronald Reagan. But it doesn't take just one "intellectual" to steer the course of a nation's history into a different direction. It takes a concerted effort. It requires coordination from the vast houses of "expert" opinion. Academia, Psychology, Media, and the corporations that fund them for their own selfish and often times destructive gain.
A highly insightful documentary, "The Century of the Self," chronicles the rise of this Selfishness-is-Virtue notion. That human beings are ends in and of themselves and that satisfying their inner desires is that end. Big Business has capitalized on this for decades, bringing forth products that they claim identifies with a person's character (i.e cars, clothes, house), preying on people's inner longings for something more than things with....you guessed it---things.
The late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, herself another "Libertarian", proclaimed that there was no such thing as society. Ayn Rand said the less fortunate don't deserve any love. Ronald Reagan said government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem. These individuals were a microcosm of the true mind and intentions of the reactionary ruling class that dictated them. Many articles too numerous to count have been published about the inconvenience of government, and that basically the individual's desires and personal ambition is threatened or hampered by the state. By the "individual" of course they mean the rich.
The mental degradation that the West has suffered from precedes people the likes of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan however. This degradation is deeply rooted in the idea that in that government only hurts society when it intervenes. That rain or shine, society must left to its devices, free of state intervention. It goes back hundred of years when the Venetian Oligarchy almost helped destroy Western civilization.
One gets a glimpse of this by seeing the rise of Hitler and Mussolini. The lack of Statesmanship in Europe during its economic depression led to the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, and in turn WWII as we have known it, and indirectly with the creation of the Zionist Regime in Israel.
Marley's Ghost from the Charles Dickens classic A Christmas Carol, " stated, "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"
For decades the true ideal of statesmanship has been under attack from very powerful forces. No one knew this more than President Franklin D. Roosevelt when he implemented the New Deal and envisioned a country where the shackles of poverty and destitution would one day be removed. The opposition he faced was so tremendous and cancerous, that it still exists to this day. And though his legacy continues to outlive any president after him, this legacy is being rapidly undermined by this cancer that has managed to outlive him. An attack against Statesmanship has been going on for decades without much resistance. There are many names for this cancer: Oligarchy, Ruling Class, Reactionary, Fascist, Authoritarian, etc. Any of these terms will suffice.
The main engines of the modern nation-state: The social safety net, infrastructure, public education, manufacturing, and national banking have all been undermined, coming apart at the seams, not because of their inherent flaws as the reactionaries in power and institutions of "higher learning" would have you believe, but because they have been victims of covert and overt onslaughts. Whether it be COLA re-adjustments (like the chained CPI) to starve these programs, denial of funding, or brazen recklessness in allocations of funds from the coffers of these programs.
What is a Statesman/woman
A statesman/woman is any citizen with the desire and will to help leave society better than they found it. Mankind is their business. It doesn't matter what occupation they have, whether it be garbage collector, plumber, doctor, head of state, bus driver, administrative employee. A citizen's highest duty is to make or keep society better when they leave it for their children. This is known as societal trusteeship, where the living inherited from the dead what they must pass on to unborn generations. The The golden biblical rule, Love your neighbor as much as you love yourself, is key to this concept. This principle drives us to be more than what society simply expects (depending on which society one lives in). It can bring virtues out of us we never thought we had. After all, corporate executives and other members of the ruling class have children too.
The Problem with the Virtue of Selfishness
If every citizen decided to chase the so-called ideal of fulfilling their inner desires, society would be ravaged in all aspects of the word. It is a self-defeating position, because human desires can never be satisfied. We are told that it is best for the state to sit down and twiddle its thumbs and allow the "individual" to do as they please, because for whatever reason their desires are rational and when they benefit, all of society benefits. By individuals of course, they mean the rich and the corporations they run. What's more depressing is the fact that even after this idea has unraveled where Corporations do as they please and so does poverty (which is continually on the rise all over the world), and the world is facing incremental unrest and misery partly caused by this notion (evident in institutions like the IMF and World Bank), they still insist on this concept.
The culture of selfishness and corporate greed is so pervasive in Western Culture especially American, that poverty has exploded, bridges and roads and such are crumbling, wages have declined and unemployment is on the rise, despite what Wall Street and their politicians along with media mouthpieces would have you believe. Yet these same individuals who tout that the state is not to intervene domestically in aid of ailing citizens and institutions, are the same individuals who say that the state should be granted limitless amounts of money to wage war on other countries, and not to have its funds cut. As if the institutions of war are not part of the state (fascism is the likely term for this).
As liberal news show host Rachel Maddow pointed out in a Lean Forward commercial on MSNBC, that a corporation would not build a bridge. It doesn't profit from such a venture and so will decline to do so. Same goes for housing for the poor, for revitalization of roads and tunnels, investment in education and schools, and so forth. And if a corporation or an individual will not build it, then who?
A statesman understands that his job is merely a little piece of the big picture. Ultimately the heart of statesmanship is about people, not the state as some may aver. And once the main objective of statesmanship (which is the betterment of the human condition) is undermined, society will be begin to unravel.
The decline of the West is in large part due to the death of the Western Statesman. The lack of vision and love for countrymen in public officials and policy (foreign or domestic) which have been preceded by vulture capitalist interest, and the passive and/or witless approval of citizens to continue to see this perpetuation of degradation in the western body politic are two unequivocal culprits.
You can contact Lawrence at Killerteddybear666@gmail.com
Monday, May 27, 2013
Sunday, May 19, 2013
An Untold Story in Syria?
There could be an unconventional rising intelligence campaign that is helping Assad's Syrian military make the significant gains it is making right now, leaving the terrorists in tremendous disarray. It's important to note that once the terrorists in Syria capture a town, their rule is so medieval, so incompetent, and so oppressive, that the locals they attempt to subjugate rapidly reject them.
Why is this important to note? Because of the swift advances by the Syrian troops in retaking the towns. This may indicate that the Syrian Army is receiving cooperation from locals in towns they are re-capturing, which could quite possibly explain why the Syrian military moves through neighborhoods to decimate terrorists cells with efficiency, causing them heavy losses.Perhaps the people of Syria are helping the Army locate the exact position of terrorist gatherings in the towns they capture.
One of the primary principles of war, according to Suz Tzu, is the moral support of the sovereign ruler. In other words, if the people do not support the ruler, he is doomed to forfeit his ultimate victory. This could help explain why the Syrian army is making huge gains against the terrorist factions, among many factors.
Who knows?
Thursday, May 9, 2013
What We Can Learn From the Rich and Powerful
Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me --F Scott Fitzgerald.
Indeed, they are. In all our contempt towards the rich and powerful, our condemnation of their arrogance and profligacy, disgust at their manipulative behavior, anger against their corruption, and fear of their systematically psychotic behavior, we forget that there are certain things we can learn from them.
The ruling class have a different perspective than just the average commoner of society (you and me). It is their ability to see the broad spectrum of things that we as commoners often overlook, instead busy with the menial tasks of everyday life, too caught up in our own little little worlds to notice that the rich and powerful have much influence over even that as well.
Take for example the case of economic ideology. The rich and powerful know what benefits them. While they carefully devised schools of thought and "think tanks" that preached opposites ("Free Market" Vs. "Keynesian-ism") in order to divide the populace and control the national discussion on economic policy either way, they themselves did not adhere to these mere things as principle, while fooling us to go against our own self-interest.
While the American majority was busy adhering to the ideas of economics like doctrines, the rich and powerful could not care less. They operated on one principle......if it benefits you, employ its devices. Is it so surprising then that when one looks at the historical archives, one can find that the rich and powerful of the world funded (and even to a large extent created) Communism (an ideology that threatened to strip them of their wealth) and Nazism? And continues to fund extreme movements around the world for their sinister goals?
Why? Because they didn't see economic or political systems as doctrines, but rather as tools. And they employed them wherever they saw fit. When the so-called "Free Market" benefited them, they employed it everywhere they saw fit. Whether it was to rob workers of their pay in the late 19th century Western world, or to extract the natural/national resources of poorer continents/countries in the early 20th century and beyond (and in so doing keeping them poor), they did so.
In the wake of the global banking crisis that led to the World economic depression beginning in 2007-08, the very same supporters of "Free Marketeer-ism," who the very system they praised would see to it that they collapse on their own greed, all of sudden became the biggest proponents of government intervention in the economy, or as they like to term it, "socialism." Having always hated the poor and middle class and decrying people for accepting social services from the government agencies that those people have every right to, they instead became the biggest "welfare recipients" in the history of mankind.
When they were done using a tool, they put it back in the box. And when done using another, so the same. Still the citizens of the world (including me) did not catch up to this.
Another example is when the U.S.A and the rest of the Western ruling class members devise secret operations to overthrow democratically elected governments, replacing them with repressive regimes, all while paradoxically justifying it in the name of "freedom" and "democracy," and decrying "dictatorships," the very same political system they claim to be against.
The rich and powerful know that in order to keep in power, and to justify their lunatic behavior, certain structures must be kept in place; such as laws, systems, administrations, bureaucracy, and courts that all rule in their favor.
What can we learn from all of this?
Number one: systems are there for us, not the other way around. The other way around discourages human freedom and individuality, promoting false collectivism and in turn eventually an identity crisis. All these factor into the reason for the lack of resistance against the oppressive state the rich eventually create.
As systems are tools, they are to be used appropriately. Giving them names like "Socialism/Communism," "Capitalism/Free Market," which caused wedges between people is counter-productive. In either systems, you will find that there are rich and powerful people, which further enforces the point. One kind of system may work very well for one situation, but not perform the same in another. Also, to take one idea and try to stretch it beyond its limits is the tragedy of the human endeavor. We must view systems as what they are: human creations that can be applied accordingly and in bits and pieces to wherever it is appropriate.
It is not good enough just winning a battle against social, economic injustice. A framework must be put in place in order to secure the victory. Once a city is captured, the wise general fortifies it against further incursion. That is what we must learn. Once the interests of oligarchy takes over a system like a cancer, then begins the process of consolidating this take-over. We too, can learn from that on path to victory.
It is time to broaden our horizons. It is time to see things the way the rich and powerful do. Because if we don't, things will not change for the better.
Indeed, they are. In all our contempt towards the rich and powerful, our condemnation of their arrogance and profligacy, disgust at their manipulative behavior, anger against their corruption, and fear of their systematically psychotic behavior, we forget that there are certain things we can learn from them.
The ruling class have a different perspective than just the average commoner of society (you and me). It is their ability to see the broad spectrum of things that we as commoners often overlook, instead busy with the menial tasks of everyday life, too caught up in our own little little worlds to notice that the rich and powerful have much influence over even that as well.
Take for example the case of economic ideology. The rich and powerful know what benefits them. While they carefully devised schools of thought and "think tanks" that preached opposites ("Free Market" Vs. "Keynesian-ism") in order to divide the populace and control the national discussion on economic policy either way, they themselves did not adhere to these mere things as principle, while fooling us to go against our own self-interest.
While the American majority was busy adhering to the ideas of economics like doctrines, the rich and powerful could not care less. They operated on one principle......if it benefits you, employ its devices. Is it so surprising then that when one looks at the historical archives, one can find that the rich and powerful of the world funded (and even to a large extent created) Communism (an ideology that threatened to strip them of their wealth) and Nazism? And continues to fund extreme movements around the world for their sinister goals?
Why? Because they didn't see economic or political systems as doctrines, but rather as tools. And they employed them wherever they saw fit. When the so-called "Free Market" benefited them, they employed it everywhere they saw fit. Whether it was to rob workers of their pay in the late 19th century Western world, or to extract the natural/national resources of poorer continents/countries in the early 20th century and beyond (and in so doing keeping them poor), they did so.
In the wake of the global banking crisis that led to the World economic depression beginning in 2007-08, the very same supporters of "Free Marketeer-ism," who the very system they praised would see to it that they collapse on their own greed, all of sudden became the biggest proponents of government intervention in the economy, or as they like to term it, "socialism." Having always hated the poor and middle class and decrying people for accepting social services from the government agencies that those people have every right to, they instead became the biggest "welfare recipients" in the history of mankind.
When they were done using a tool, they put it back in the box. And when done using another, so the same. Still the citizens of the world (including me) did not catch up to this.
Another example is when the U.S.A and the rest of the Western ruling class members devise secret operations to overthrow democratically elected governments, replacing them with repressive regimes, all while paradoxically justifying it in the name of "freedom" and "democracy," and decrying "dictatorships," the very same political system they claim to be against.
The rich and powerful know that in order to keep in power, and to justify their lunatic behavior, certain structures must be kept in place; such as laws, systems, administrations, bureaucracy, and courts that all rule in their favor.
What can we learn from all of this?
Number one: systems are there for us, not the other way around. The other way around discourages human freedom and individuality, promoting false collectivism and in turn eventually an identity crisis. All these factor into the reason for the lack of resistance against the oppressive state the rich eventually create.
As systems are tools, they are to be used appropriately. Giving them names like "Socialism/Communism," "Capitalism/Free Market," which caused wedges between people is counter-productive. In either systems, you will find that there are rich and powerful people, which further enforces the point. One kind of system may work very well for one situation, but not perform the same in another. Also, to take one idea and try to stretch it beyond its limits is the tragedy of the human endeavor. We must view systems as what they are: human creations that can be applied accordingly and in bits and pieces to wherever it is appropriate.
It is not good enough just winning a battle against social, economic injustice. A framework must be put in place in order to secure the victory. Once a city is captured, the wise general fortifies it against further incursion. That is what we must learn. Once the interests of oligarchy takes over a system like a cancer, then begins the process of consolidating this take-over. We too, can learn from that on path to victory.
It is time to broaden our horizons. It is time to see things the way the rich and powerful do. Because if we don't, things will not change for the better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)