Might Makes Right. How to Survive Capitalism.

I believe that TimeTravelet hit what I want to say right on the head. I believe that capitalism is effective at giving us what we deserve. Its a good system that gets us thinking, producing, and advancing our civilization. However, I don't like the reason why billions of people do what they do: MONEY, "MIGHT", INFLUENCE, BRAGGING RIGHTS, MATERIALISM. I believe everyone has a purpose bigger than themselves and that is to help the human race. We musn't compete with eachother, but compete with ourselves. And I can't stress that enough. I find that when I compete against someone else I lose, and I'm depressed. I feel that way because I'm concentrating on that person not myself, not my efforts. Some of you already have the picture of a lion chasing a deer in the African Sahara. Well are we animals? We are, but we are a different kind, with much more advanced abilities. We must work with ourselves. Our currency must be our contributions to the human race, but they must obviously be moral. What's moral you might ask? I'm not going to talk about religion because I don't believe in it! I'm talking about logic. If you create the internet you know it will create communication and transfer of knowledge. When you create a gun you know it will create death. Death isn't good it isn't a happy experience. You don't need GOD to know that. As for GOD, he is your subconcious as many of you I'm sure already found out. Why do we pray for instance? We are talking to our subconcious: "God bless my children, god bless my test today". We are mentally preparing objectives. Thats a whole other topic of discussion. Point is I don't like what is being portrayed on TV of how money solves everything. We must find what we are good at, evaluate it, root out the detrimental aspects of it, and pursue it to the highest degree possible, only then will our world be a successful place. Its sad how parents push their children to become doctors or scientists. And the children listen and don't succeed, and if they do but don't enjoy it, are miserable, and commit evil acts to channel their anger, I've seen it happen. We must open our childrens eyes through the internet and let them find what they like. But parents watch T.V. too so its a vicious cycle. That's my opinion. I wish for it to happen in my lifetime. Just imagine what peoples minds will envision if its filled with science and useful information instead of useless crap like who is Justin Timberlake dating today? or Who is the richest person on the planet?

This I say from my experience. It may seem rosy, but I believe it can happen!:mad:
 
Businesswiz said:
However, I don't like the reason why billions of people do what they do: MONEY, "MIGHT", INFLUENCE, BRAGGING RIGHTS, MATERIALISM. I believe everyone has a purpose bigger than themselves and that is to help the human race. We musn't compete with eachother, but compete with ourselves. And I can't stress that enough. I find that when I compete against someone else I lose, and I'm depressed. I feel that way because I'm concentrating on that person not myself, not my efforts. Some of you already have the picture of a lion chasing a deer in the African Sahara. Well are we animals? We are, but we are a different kind, with much more advanced abilities. We must work with ourselves. Our currency must be our contributions to the human race, but they must obviously be moral. What's moral you might ask? I'm not going to talk about religion because I don't believe in it! I'm talking about logic. If you create the internet you know it will create communication and transfer of knowledge. When you create a gun you know it will create death. Death isn't good it isn't a happy experience.
Click to expand...
Great post. You have barely touched up on something I understand very well. There is much more to this. Unfortunately, capitalism, communism, and most primitive social systems we consider so effective are actually our enemies. None of these systems work. None of them account for real human social development.
 
Thank you. And you are right, I don't know enough about government or w.e. these systems are called. I'm only 18. :D But I think we should be responsible enough to create a system! Any ideas?
 
Yes. Lots in fact. It is the science of community development.
We have to understand human development to understand community develpment.
We ask questions such as what is prosperity and how can we determine what is prosperous?
We also have to question and study ethical rights.
Is it right for one person to have more than another based on divine birthright?
To you and I this may seem like a no-brainer, but many years ago, this was the norm.

Now, things that City Design scientists have come to grips with is that the a great majority of things that we understand to be the norm are completely dysfunctional and unethical. This however is not a no-brainer for most because people are still attatched to primitive paradigms of 2006.

Real city design scientists think in terms of practicality. The existence of ethics, and the relationship between ethics an practicality.

The importance of objectivity. City design scientists do our best not to allow current standards and view points to influence our understanding. We know through history, that the majority view tends to be discovered false. Over the years this global trait has gotten less and less. Or has it? Perhaps we have not progressed that global masses have not progressed that much in terms of understanding reality.

Esotericism tends to mean exclusive knowledge. Either way, there is an enormous amount of understanding that we have about the global community that would probably not occur to a typical individual in a million years. (figuratively). It turns out that much if the standards are very wrong, and ultimately belong in the waste basket of historical failures. As we learn and study more and more through objectivity, we begin to develop better abilities and aptitudes at community city design. The symbiosis between the individual, the community, and nature (animals/environment). The circle of life.

Theories about survival of the fittest need not go beyond self preservation. Survival. Yet the typical individual might apply these ideas beyond survivaland into everyday life as if they know what they are talking about. Unfortunately, his is a huge mistake in thought process. This is just one of many examples of how we supposedly educated people foolishly take things at face value without the consideration of insight.
 
Last edited:
bus. student said:
I also have another question that I am stumped on. This is more of an investment question: How is the purchase of a corporate financial asset really an investment in something that is illiquid?
Click to expand...
How would it not be?
Relative to the owner, it can be liquidated anytime.


bus. student said:
Also, what capitalist institutions depend directly on money to fulfill their purpose? I know instituions such as banks, federal reserves, basically anything that would be considered legal tender.
Click to expand...
None of them essentially depend on money itself.
Money depends on them.
Money has no real value.
Gold is usually a measure of value.

The highest measure of value is influence. More specifically guns. Guns control the planet. Those with the most guns have the most riches. There is nothing our military and CIA does that is not in the best interest of the plutocracy.

The state of the American economy is soleley relative to the plutocracy's profitability. The only question when determining social functionality:
Is this profitable to the plutocracy?

Is providing American's with benefit X profitable to the Plutocracy?
Is denying American's of benefit X profitable to the Plutocracy?

I'll replace the term "money" with "resources".
Denying benefit X would naturally be more profitable because resources may go directly to the rich instead of the poor.

Providing benefit X would only be profitable if denying it would cause catastrophy that is not profitable.


The economy has nothing to do with freedom. This illusion of an economy, what we refer to as capitalism, is only about one thing.
Profitability of the plutocracy.
 
lixluke said:
Do I look like a bloody situationalist? a la Gay and Bored?
Click to expand...

I just came across some of his work. He was an anti-capitalistic who believed that wealth should be shared by all people and no one should be forced to work. It seemed to echo some of the stuff I read in your posts.

CAPITALISM IMPOVERISHES. Profit and competition drive to monopoly and monopoly impoverishes individual members of the bourgeoisie, in open conflict with one another. It eliminates previous means of production though holdovers from these may continue within capitalism so long as they remain marginal (small business, artisans, individual farmers). It impoverishes the proletariat, which, having created the wealth and the conditions for the emergence of higher relations of production, is totally expropriated.
Click to expand...

http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/certain.html
 
samcdkey said:
I just came across some of his work. He was an anti-capitalistic who believed that wealth should be shared by all people and no one should be forced to work. It seemed to echo some of the stuff I read in your posts.



http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/certain.html
Click to expand...

Problem is, that sorta Utopia vision just is not realistic, it's impossible, with these people, with this current population, it's impossible.

Sure some people could actually survive under any system, I mean, it does not make a difference to some if we are capitalist, communist, socialist, or whatever as long as people survive and humanity survives.

I think, whatever we do, we will have a lot more work to do in the future than we have now. We have 6 billion people, but we give all the work to 1-2 billion of them, and we work people for 8 hours a day, sometimes 10, for 5 days a week, theres no real reason for all this work anymore because we have plenty of people.

What do we need to work on? We need to actually work on protecting stuff, like the environment, the planet itself, etc. We need to work on going into space, and on building the space industry. We need to work on technology.

But you see, we are so busy building weapons and fighting ourselves that we arent progressing as quickly as a species as we could, and this is simple, as a species we just arent ready to progress. Some people might be ready, but most arent. Might makes right because humans want to control other humans instead of protect other humans. It's easy to control something, it does not require any love at all, it's simple, you control what it eats and drinks, and where it can travel, and you have control over it, very much like how people control pets, and eventually you domesticate it. Thats control, and thats what humans focus on most. There are good reasons why, like fear and insecurity, but eventually, we will have to decide the fate of our species, because if we fight ourselves forever theres nothing to stop us from fighting ourselves out of existance.

I guess it seems obvious, but other species have gone extinct because they hunted each other out of existance, or because we hunted them out of existance. It's just as easy for us to hunt ourselves out of existance.
 
Some of you people seem as if you don't understand that we have
become life-threatning species. We destroy life while thinking about
capitalism as a best solution we have to settle with!?

I addmit. I can't propose a better system accept small, self-efficient economies. But soon,my pro-capitalism friends, the world will be in such a mess, you wan't even know what hit us. I am a biologist, and numbers are saying the same for decades, and now science community if becoming louder and louder. The mass exploatation must stop.

I don't need Ipod, plasmaTV, Big Brother etc. ... You may think
capitalism, which is obviously reaching it's climax, will work, but
the trees that give you oxigen are being cut, in last 40 years population of tuna fish has troped to 10%, water that
brought life is becoming more acidic and sea food circle is changing.
So, nature doesn't give a damn about capitalism. It will regenerate for milions of years, again, like it did after extinction of dinosaurs, or when big asteroid at the end of Perm almost stoped life. Famine, epidemics, tidal waves, lack of food, bioweapons are crucial words
today..not wars, democracy, peace or freedom - those are just universal.
every sane man knows that there will always be war, unjustice etc....

Those of you who think of capitalism as best solution...
Humans have made the biggest step in social evolution when they
started to cultivate the soil as an adaptation to specific ecosysthem
(leaving the nomadic-alwyas moving way of life). First cultures emerged. By working the soil
we managed to get goods in return. THAT IS REAL EFFICIENCY.
Who saved Europe in days of plague ???! People who brought potato.
And who is responsible for the speciation of modern potato?
South american native people, their culture and way of life.
Potatos or corn didn't just grow to this size because God wanted to
redecorate his garden of Eden. We have to get back to that point.
Think about it. Diversity makes you stronger, more adaptive and
imune...not money in your pocket (supposing you are not self-centered).
 
Last edited:
TT uses typcial Slave Meme arguments such as Utopia in order to perpetuate the slave driven nightmare distopia we live in.

No war, not poverty, no violent crimes, no oppression, feedom of speech, and freedom activity. These are all the rights of humans on earth whether you like it or not. Freedom to go where you want to go and do what you want to do without hinderance by others. Social freedom is the lack of freedom to intefere witht he rights of humans.

Did you ever notice how slaves are programmed to hate utopia, and consider that realism? It's called cynicism. Realism is the belief that reality is independent of perception. Using "utopia" in a negative connotation is a loaded statement of the Slave Meme mentality. It's impossible. I'm a realist. Boo hoo. It's all programmed slave meme concepts with no basis in realism, and by far not reaslit or realistic.
 
I'm a little confused, doesn't it make sense that wars are really useless, if everyone worked together for a common goal then we'd get alot more done then when beating eachother up over materials?! What would make that not true?
 
Yes they are useless unless you are the master of slaves. Therefore, you convince the slaves that wars are inevitbale. Practical, necessary, and useful even. Then they defend the inevitability and necessity of war with all of their might. The same goes for poverty, crime, etc. They are brainwashed into perpetuating these things instead of eliminating them.
 
lixluke said:
Yes they are useless unless you are the master of slaves. Therefore, you convince the slaves that wars are inevitbale. Practical, necessary, and useful even. Then they defend the inevitability and necessity of war with all of their might. The same goes for poverty, crime, etc. They are brainwashed into perpetuating these things instead of eliminating them.
Click to expand...

"The War to End All Wars" seems too popular a concept for any of the above to be reasonable. Sometimes I wonder if George Orwell taught you world history. Or rather his writing -- I wouldn't want to belittle the man himself like that.
 
sderenzi said:
I'm a little confused, doesn't it make sense that wars are really useless, if everyone worked together for a common goal...
Click to expand...

And how do you expect to get billions of people to agree on ANY common goal? I mean, damn, have you ever tried to get people to agree on, say, waht to order on a pizza??? It's almost impossible!

You're livin' in a dreamworld that has no connection to reality.

Baron Max
 
lixluke said:
Yes they are useless unless you are the master of slaves. Therefore, you convince the slaves that wars are inevitbale. Practical, necessary, and useful even. Then they defend the inevitability and necessity of war with all of their might. The same goes for poverty, crime, etc. They are brainwashed into perpetuating these things instead of eliminating them.
Click to expand...

It is the oscillation of war and peace-periods that is constant.
The face of war may change, but not the concept. It's universal.
The war will allways be in various forms and in future,even more hidious ones.
Mental warfare, or, it will always be present in forms of games...You can't ban it.
Some preacefull nations were able to develop because they won The War,
or they managed to defend themselves.There is no creating without destroying something.
But greed driven economy is the main reason we have so many conflicts today,
not the nature of war itself.
 
Last edited:
The basis for war is competition, Stephen. Your "greed driven economy" is only another facet of that aspect of man. Humans are mammals. We compete.

It is amusing to think of these whiny little products of modern civilisation being placed in an environment where the very system they rail against no longer exists to provide them with a relatively comfortable and secure life from which they could freely do so.
 
Fenris Wolf said:
The basis for war is competition, Stephen. Your "greed driven economy" is only another facet of that aspect of man. Humans are mammals. We compete.

It is amusing to think of these whiny little products of modern civilisation being placed in an environment where the very system they rail against no longer exists to provide them with a relatively comfortable and secure life from which they could freely do so.
Click to expand...


I agree, we compete. But competition as a form of interspecies relation
is about competing for essential resources. When we croos the line of
"ok, that's enough", which is common in nature, the size of population after
"golden age" begins to drop exponentially. We are near that point.
So greed is making us more unhuman, it's is our human-derivated facet.
I really doubt that we will be dominant species ever again.

Greed is unhuman, it's unlogical and will become evolutionary relict if we
manage to warn future civilisation of it's "potential". But some nations
are warning us all the time. Mayan people, N. American red people..
They have oral heredity that goes way back to the last ice-age, and
even further.
 
So yes, we compete. But we were not parasites.
By greed, we became parasites. So the humas that
Fight humas, but respect their place in nature, are
of one kind. And of other, are those who accumulate,
exploit, and sell things + dictate their values. Those
have no natural enemy, and are so are specialized that they
droped out of natural compentiton circle and are doomed to extinction.
Every parasite has copmetition in host's body, but if the infection is
too strong, the whole system will collapse.

I don't want to be parasitic humanoid. Maybe we are
witnessing division into new species.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top