Originally posted by g.ram+January 02, 2007 06:58 am--> (g.ram @ January 02, 2007 06:58 am) Whether you like it or not we are all in Class War.And to win in this war we need to be better than our enemies. And if time demands unfortunately yes we need to kill our enemies.[/b]
No, we are in a struggle against stupidity. Our own in many cases.
As Pogo said, "we have met the enemy, and he is is."
The division of wealth is a mathematical fact, not a political choice. Even the rich try to correct the system through philanthropy, but they cannot. The problem isn't people's will to create a better world (with or without violence) but they simply lack a proper understanding of what is occuring economically.
In other words, Marx was wrong. All Marx did was re-write what Adam Smith said, except instead of calling the primitives "savages" he called the business owner a savage. That is a difference of political opinion, not a difference of economic theory. Marx believed that the marketplace functioned the same way that Adam Smith did, and therin lies one of his errors. Following Marx down his rabbit holes leaves you in a hole, and the prescription for violence just makes it worse.
Adam Smith, in turn, was simply rewriting something that Ben Franklin had written 50 years ealier. But where Franklin took a page to say it, Adam Smith took 500 pages.
What did Franklin say? He said that paper currency was needed. And he got his wish 50 years later with the adoption of the Constitution and the creation of a central bank that issued paper currency. This put America at a huge advantage, and is why the dollar managed to rule the world for some 200+ years. Undoubtedly Ceasars image had the same power 2000 years ago. He who controls the currency controls the world. NOT THE PURSE STRINGS! It is the creation of currency itself that is powerful. Political change (the workers taking over) only accomplishes having a new person in charge of the purse strings, so it doesn't actually change anything. There is a new face in charge, but it is the same old system. This is obvious not only in the communist revolutions but also in the Islamist revolutions, like in Iran.
But what is currency? It is just an intellectual agreement. Or as Charles Osgood says on a video that the Federal Reserve puts out, "it is just a piece of paper."
Watch for yourself (http://www.squeegeegraphics.com/plugins/fedclip1.mov)
Of course, the importance of that statement is lost on just about everybody, including the Fed itself. (I know, I've tried to talk to them.)
Marx's theory of Capital is fundamentally flawed. He uses M-C-M+, but the correct theory is C=M+L Capital = Money + Labor. For a guy who spent so much time talking about labor, it is amazing that it is not in his equation of capital. Labor is relative to technology and whatever is being made, but money is the result of the accounting system itself, and the value of money is determined by the value of C, which means the equation is turning in on itself, like a paradox. Nevertheless, that is an accurate description of Capital. Money is used to buy the Capital that somebody else creates, then labor is added, and that creates a new capital (good) that can be sold. (Perhaps the equation should be C=M+L=C) Capital is essentially just goods, and the divide between rich and poor is a divide in capital. When dowries were common, that was an attempt to give a new couple enough capital (goods) to survive. The creation of paper currency, however, changed things dramatically. An economy based on specie (gold and silver) was limited by the amount of gold and silver that existed (which is why so much time was spent trying to turn lead into gold,) but an economy based on numbers (paper) has no limits. All you have to do is write down a number, and suddenly the money "exists." 2+2=5.
But that still isn't the whole story. People use money as a commodity itself, which changes the value of the money, which inturn changes the value of the goods: Presto! Inflation. The best way to outrun inflation is to engage in the same behavior that created the inflation originally: 2+2=6 But for 2+2=5 or 6 to exist, then somewhere 5=2+2 and 6=2+2, which explains the cycles of boom and bust. It is the price of capital fluctuating and changing hands. One mans profit is another mans overhead. And so the cycle continues, until people think killing each other is the only solution.
Marx was right about the importance of financial desperation guiding peoples political choices. Of course, Christ had said the same thing: The love of money is the root of all evil. But Marx was simply another victim of the thinking he described. He never quite realized that money isn't "real" it is just a piece of paper. Similarly, people sitting in the dirt panning for gold, like they did in California in 1849, is just another example of the insanity that people have about money. It should be no surpise that the Civil war followed shortly after. They dig the dirt out of the ground, simply to lock it into a vault at Fort Knox, and guard it forever, at taxpayer expense. It would have made more sense to just leave the colored dirt in the ground. But this behavior is not new. It has been going on for thousands of years. The ruins in Greece were essentially the old Fort Knox of their time. People hoard colored dirt. Talk about a stupid intellectual agreement! Money is an intellectual farce. Why would you kill somebody over money? You would only do so if you were insane. (There are a lot of insane people in the world.) Flying planes into banks is just another step in this continuum of insanity.
[email protected] 02, 2007 06:58 am
Violence is always a dead-end strategy. And even if the rebel wins, he is simply as big a moron as the person who was overthrown. You trade one ruthless leader for another. Why would anybody want to live under a ruthless person?
I am confused by this argument.Some one else have to refute this argument.
Think about it. If somebody is willing to kill your neighbor because of what they possess, then why wouldn't they kill you for what you possess? They demand obedience, and have an appetite that cannot be satisfied. Some people value wealth, others value power. Most leaders value both, which is why people follow them. They value those things, too. But then they discover that they are being treated in the same way that they treated others. We all reap what we sow, for good or ill.
If you want peace then you have to act peacefully. If you want others to share then you must be willing to share. Robin Hood was a moron. He would steal from the rich, and so the rich would steal from the poor.
But as I explained, what is making people rich and poor is the currency system itself. It is just like the game Monopoly, which is based on the economic ideas of Henry George. Everybody makes the same amount of money:$200 for passing GO. It should be the communist ideal, but eventually all the money ends up in the hands of one person, and the board is full of hotels and houses that nobody can afford to live in. Everybody started equally, and was paid exactly the same during the course of the game, but the money divided automatically. Winners and losers was strictly by change; nobody controlled their own destiny. It is the game itself that is flawed. Or as I put it, "the system doesn't work." We were all born into the system, nobody actually created it. We can change it, but not if people are too busy hating one another to learn anything, or too proud of morons who claim that killing somebody will solve our problems. If your hero is a moron, then you will be a moron, too. Be careful of who you admire.