Discussion:
Socialism breeds mediocrity, crime and Democrats.
(too old to reply)
John Going
2018-05-12 16:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.

Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.

"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.

Your money and property are not yours.

Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.

There is no democracy.

Independence is discouraged.

Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.

Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
 
dolf
2018-05-12 21:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-- IF VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS TO PROPERLY CONFORM TO MARXIST IDEALISM, HE WOULD
NOT STOP ISRAEL FROM ATTACKING SYRIA

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 12 May 2018

“Het doel van Iran is om zes miljoen Joden uit te roeien. Dit beweerde
Israëls premier Benjamin Netanyahu tijdens zijn bezoek aan Rusland deze
week, bericht Bloomberg.

Deze week bezocht de Israëlische premier, Benjamin Netanyahu, Rusland om de
president van het land, Vladimir Poetin, te overtuigen Israël niet te
stoppen met het aanvallen van Syrië.”

<https://fenixx.org/2018/05/11/netanyahu-tegen-poetin-iran-wil-6-miljoen-joden-uitroeien/>

Shall I spell it out for you?

And I am doing so spontaneously...

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels proposed that Hegel's dialectic is too
abstract: ... In contradiction to Hegelian idealism, Marx presented his own
dialectic method, which he claims to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's
method: My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is
its direct opposite.

The dialect which HEGEL proposes is:

#1 - THESIS
#2 - ANTI-THESIS
#3 - SYNTHESIS
#4 - PROGRESSION

Dialectical materialism adapts the Hegelian dialectic for traditional
materialism, which examines the subjects of the world in relation to each
other within a dynamic, evolutionary environment, in contrast to
metaphysical materialism, which examines parts of the world within a
static, isolated environment.

Dialectical materialism accepts the evolution of the natural world and the
emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution. As Z. A.
Jordan notes, "Engels made constant use of the metaphysical insight that
the higher level of existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower;
that the higher level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible
laws; and that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of
development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a
whole'."

Dialectical materialism is an aspect of the broader subject of materialism,
which asserts the primacy of the material world: in short, matter precedes
thought. Materialism is a realist philosophy of science,[13] which holds
that the world is material; that all phenomena in the universe consist of
"matter in motion," wherein all things are interdependent and
interconnected and develop according to natural law; that the world exists
outside us and independently of our perception of it; that thought is a
reflection of the material world in the brain, and that the world is in
principle knowable.

I QUOTE: "In the third chapter of the "Analytic of Principles," on
phenomena and noumena, Kant in Critique of Pure Reason (1781 and second
edition 1787) emphasizes that because the categories must always be applied
to data provided by sensibility in order to provide cognition, and because
the data of sensibility are structured by the transcenden­tally ideal forms
of intuition, the categories give us knowledge only of things as they
appear with sensibility ("phenomena," literally "that which appears").

Although through pure understanding (nous in Greek) we may think of objects
independently of their being given in sensibil­ity, we can never cognize
them as such non-sensible entities ("noumena," literally "that which is
thought" as a subject of some 112 mentions). The meaning of Kant's use of
the term "phenomena" is self-evident, but the meaning of "noumena" is not,
since it literally means not "things as they are in­ dependently of
appearing to us" but something more like "things as they are understood by
pure thought." Yet Kant appears to deny that the human understanding can
comprehend things in the latter way."

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf>

*THUS* *I* *AM* *PROFFERING* *AN* *INFORMED* *AND* *REASONED* *OPINION*
*AS* *THAT* *WHICH* *IMMANUEL* *KANT* *STATES* *IS* *AN* *IMPOSSIBILITY*
*FOR* *A* *HUMAN* *BEING* *TO* *ACCOMPLISH* *BY* *TRANSCENDENT*
*SAPIENTIAL* *THOUGHT* *AND* *CAPABLY* *DEMONSTRATE* *IT'S* *TEMPORAL*
*CONGRUENCE* *AS* *COHERENCE* *BY* *A* *MATHEMATICAL* *THEORETICAL*
*NOUMENON* *AS* *AN* *INTELLECTUAL* *PROPERTY* *WHICH* *IMMANUEL* *KANT*
*HIMSELF* *CALLS* *NOUMENA* *AS* *THE* *PROOF* *OF* *A* *VALID* *AND*
*RATIONAL* *CONCEPT* *ATTAINED* *BY* *PURE* *THOUGHT*.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Here is a poem written at 0857 hours that is directly associated by
temporal relativity to the noumena conveying two explicit CATEGORIES OF
UNDERSTANDING that whilst linguistically HEBREW / GREEK {ie. 24 x 7 x 13 =
#2,184 / #364 = 6D as ‘OTH being a cosmological anthropic principle
defining ratiocination: 22 / 7} operate as an equivalent of electronic STEM
cells by which DYNAMIC NATURAL ASSOCIATIONS occur as fostering of IDEAS
with other media types.

That the CATEGORIES are then redacted to their bifurcation of male / feme
pairing so as to ascertain the GNOMIC IMPERATIVE instruction set substrata
relationship and its OSMOSIS intersection points to the noumena operation
of MIND by the dialectic of INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTUS:

— FINE AND DANDY —

“MY HAIR IS NEVER A MESS.
JUST NUMBER TWO WAHL.
I LOVE 💕 WASH AND WEAR.
IT’S SO EASY TO BARBER.

AND I MUST CONFESS.
THERE’S NO EYES KOHL.
BEING BLONDE ‘N FAIR.
THE LOOK TO HARBOUR.”

H1548@{
   #1: Sup: 5; Ego: 5,
   #2: Sup: 81; Ego: 76,
   #3: Sup: 3; Ego: 3,
   #4: Sup: 33; Ego: 30,
   #5: Sup: 41; Ego: 8,
   #6: Sup: 47; Ego: 6,
   Male: #210; Feme: #128
} // #452

#452 as [#5, #400, #3, #30, #8, #6] = galach (H1548): {#2 as #41} 1) to
poll, shave, shave off, be bald; 1a) (Piel); 1a1) to shave; 1a2) to shave
off; 1a3) (figurative of devastation); 1b) (Pual) to be shaven; 1c)
(Hithpael) to shave oneself;

G3659@{
   #1: Sup: 70; Ego: 70,
   #2: Sup: 29; Ego: 40,
   #3: Sup: 69; Ego: 40,
   #4: Sup: 70; Ego: 1,
   #5: Sup: 46; Ego: 57,
   #6: Sup: 47; Ego: 1,
   Male: #331; Feme: #209
} // #452

#452 as [#70, #40, #40, #1, #300, #1] = omma (G3659): {#15 as #151} 1) an
eye;

Transformative Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#344 / #452} / HETEROS {#326 / #443}

0857HOURS: 4.4.5.31.0@{
#1: Sup: 45; Ego: 45,
#2: Sup: 25; Ego: 61,
#3: Sup: 46; Ego: 21,
#4: Sup: 77; Ego: 31,
#5: Sup: 33; Ego: 37,
#6: Sup: 11; Ego: 59,
#7: Sup: 11; Ego: 81,
#8: Sup: 49; Ego: 38,
#9: Sup: 47; Ego: 79,
Male: 344; Feme: 452
}

<http://www.grapple369.com/?time:8.57>

***@zen: 4, row: 4, col: 5, nous: 31 [Super: #344 / #77 - Natural
Guide, Heaven's Reason; I-Ching: H12 - Obstruction, Standstill
(stagnation), Selfish persons; Tetra: 57 - Guardedness, Ego: #452 / #31 -
Military Stratagem, Quelling War; I-Ching: H32 - Perseverance, Endurance,
Duration, Constancy; Tetra: 51 - Constancy]

Marx criticized classical materialism as another idealist
philosophy—idealist because of its transhistorical understanding of
material contexts. The Young Hegelian Ludwig Feuerbach had rejected Hegel's
idealistic philosophy and advocated materialism. Despite being strongly
influenced by Feuerbach, Marx rejected Feuerbach's version of materialism
as inconsistent. The writings of Engels, especially Anti-Dühring (1878) and
Dialectics of Nature (1875–82), were the source of the main doctrines of
dialectical materialism.

Marx's own writings are almost exclusively concerned with understanding
human history in terms of systemic processes, based on modes of production
(broadly speaking, the ways in which societies are organized to employ
their technological powers to interact with their material surroundings).
This is called historical materialism. More narrowly, within the framework
of this general theory of history, most of Marx's writing is devoted to an
analysis of the specific structure and development of the capitalist
economy.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism>

FATHOMING #72 - ANTHROPIC PROTOTYPE (ECONOMY) DIALECTIC OF PYTHAGORAS
HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER AS BEING EQUIVALENT TO THE CHINESE I-CHING BINARY
RATHER THAN TERNARY APPARATUS:

48 8 64
56 40 24
16 72 32 = #120 / #360 {#EIGHT}

#8 (9) - KHATEL (Seraphim-Angels) = #8
#16 (8) - HAQMYAH (Cherubim-Angels) = #24
#24 (7) - HAHOUYAH (Throne-Angels) = #48
#32 (6) - OUSHRYAH (Dominion-Angels) = #80
#40 (5) - YEIZEL (Powers-Angels) = #120 <--- [*HITLER'S* *TABLE* *TALK*
IDEA @120 ON 24TH JANUARY 1942 (A FUTURE REFORMER OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM):
One day the English will realise that they've nothing to gain in Europe...
*IF* *THEY* *WANT* *TO* *SAVE* *NEW* *ZEALAND* *AND* *AUSTRALIA*, they
can't let India go.

The English have two possibilities : either to give up Europe and hold on
to the East, or vice versa. They can't bet on both tables. When it's a
matter of the richest country in the world (from the capitalist point of
view), one understands the importance of such a *DILEMMA* (NOTE: SEE ON
RELATIONSHIP TO A LEGAL LOGICAL SYLLOGISM AN EXPLANATION GIVEN WITHIN:

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Pinocchio.pdf>

). It would be enough for them to be aware of it for everything to be
changed.

PAGE #609 (REVISITING BATTLEFIELDS): The *SOLDIER* *HAS* *A* *BOUNDLESS*
*AFFECTION* *FOR* *THE* *GROUND* *ON* *WHICH* *HE* *HAS* *SHED* *HIS*
*BLOOD*. IF WE COULD ARRANGE THE TRANSPORT, WE *SHOULD* *HAVE* *A*
*MILLION* *PEOPLE* *POURING* *INTO* *FRANCE* *TO* *REVISIT* *THE* *SCENES*
*OF* *THEIR* *FORMER* [*BOER* / *ANZAC*] *STRUGGLE*. [HITLER'S TABLE TALK
IDEA @120 / PAGE #609 (REVISITING BATTLEFIELDS)]

#48 (4) - MIHEL (Virtues-Angels) = #168
#56 (3) - PHOHEL (Principalities-Angels) = #224 {*MENS* *REA*: #334 as
[#40, #4, #200, #20, #10, #20, #40] = derek (H1870): {#1 as #224} 1) way,
road, distance, journey, manner; 1a) road, way, path; 1b) journey; 1c)
direction; 1d) manner, habit, way; 1e) of course of life (figurative); 1f)
of moral character (figurative)}



<Loading Image...>

[IMAGE: By week ending Saturday 8 April 2018 I had received one of these
special 1000 minted "TRUMP JEWISH TEMPLE" half shekel coins.

It is my intellectual property associated with the letters patent to the
Australian commonwealth which makes that entirely possible]

#224 as [#4, #70, #20, #10, #40, #70, #10] = dokimos (G1384): {#61 as #224}
1) accepted, particularly of coins and money; 2) accepted, pleasing,
acceptable

#64 (2) - MEHIEL (Archangels-Angels) = #288 as ANTI-SEMITISM: #364 as [#10,
#8, #200, #80, #6, #50, #10] = charaph (H2778): {#1 as #288 *INTERFERENCE*
*AS* *EVIDENCE* *OF* *ANTI*-*SEMITISM*} 1) to reproach, taunt, *BLASPHEME*,
defy, jeopardise, rail, upbraid; 2) (Qal) to *WINTER*, spend harvest time,
remain in harvest time; 3) (Niphal) to acquire, *BE* *BETROTHED*; 1a) (Qal)
*TO* *REPROACH*; 1b) (Piel) *TO* *REPROACH*, *DEFY*, *TAUNT*;

*BEERSHEBA* {*BEER* {a *WELL*: AUM #288 as [#8, #80, #200] = To cut in,
dig; to search out, *TO* *SPY*; to turn red (with shame); to be ashamed; a
hole; n. Blushing, Pit or *WELL*} *SHEBA* {*CAPTIVITY*; *OLD* *MAN*;
*REPOSE*; *OATH*}

#72 (1) - MOUMYAH (Angels-Angels) = #360

For his part, Engels applies a "dialectical" approach to the natural world
in general, arguing that contemporary science is increasingly recognizing
the necessity of viewing natural processes in terms of interconnectedness,
development, and transformation. Some scholars have doubted that Engels's
"dialectics of nature" is a legitimate extension of Marx's approach to
social processes.

Other scholars have argued that despite Marx's insistence that humans are
natural beings in an evolving, mutual relationship with the rest of nature,
Marx's own writings pay inadequate attention to the ways in which human
agency is constrained by such factors as biology, geography, and ecology.

However the HOMOIOS ternary conception of NUMBER of which Immanuel Kant is
cognisant of within his Critique of Pure Reason deploys a dialectic:

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law}
+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}
+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}
+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE
H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

However when this trinomial HOMOIOS {#81 bits} conception of #NUMBER
deploys a binomial encapsulation a logical contradiction of its deployment
as HETEROS {@1 - GENDER {MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE} conception of
#NUMBER:



<Loading Image...>

The Limitless (wuji) produces the delimited (youji), and this demarcation
is equivalent to the Absolute (taiji) or in Kabbalist language as the
Infinite Void /Nothingness (AIN SOF - Infinite Being) as The Primordial
Source.

The Taiji (the two opposing forces in embryonic form) produces two forms,
named yin-yang which are called Liangyi (the manifested opposing forces).

Yin (Passive/Female Principle) and Yang (Active/Male Principle)

These two forms produce four phenomena (Sìxiàng):

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )
THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also refers
to the Sun)

These four phenomena (Sìxiàng) act on the eight trigrams (Bagua) which are
used within Daoist cosmology to represent the fundamental principles of
reality, seen as a range of eight interrelated concepts associated only to
nature’s process of PHUSIS as growth (by germination or expansion), that
is, (by implication) natural production (lineal descent); by extension a
genus or sort; figuratively native disposition, constitution or
usage:—([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]).

You’ll notice from the Kabbalist notion of the #VOWELS which I have just
summarily conveyed above, that they may well conform to our RATIOCINATION
paradigm and thusly given the #231 / #351 inclusions within this
INDESTRUCTIBLE THOUGHT ATOM it then provides the best natural defence
against any religious extremist ideology: @1 / @5.

GIVEN THE *MAJOR* *PREMISE* {YANG/FATHER/HEAVEN/MALE/FORM - Formula of
Universal Law} of circa 1550 BCE, which contains the law of that will: 7 x
24 *COURSES* *OF* *PRIESTLY* *DIVISIONS* x 13 = 2184 days of the 'oth cycle
= 6D or 6 x 364 associated to the 'constant sequence of sun and moon' as
354 x 3 + 30 day intercalation = 1092 days x 2 = 2184 days

<— RATIONAL PI AS THE BASIS FOR RATIOCINATION IS IMPLICIT WITHIN THIS
COSMOLOGICAL COMPREHENSION

We ought then to be able to deploy Hebrew (22) / Greek (24) Categories of
Understanding interchangeably and we also can use English.

BECAUSE THE ENGLISH VOWELS: A-E-I-O-U APPEAR TO BE DERIVED FROM THE HEBREW:

#A (#1) = {Inner?} - #SOUTH
#E (#5) = {Totality?} - #CENTRE
#I (#9) = {Sphere?} - #NORTH
#O (#60) = {Polarity?} - #WEST? {#SAMEK as the 15th Hebrew Letter}
#U (#300) = {Harmony?} - #EAST {ie. determined as such by Pythagorean
redaction method using the Greco-Roman magic square as frame of reference}

And just like the Hebrew final form letters these start at the
chronological plane as the 4th - Nature amended in it Nature:





<Loading Image...>

[IMAGE: NATURE’S METHODOLOGY AS PROCESS OF THE GREEK NOTION OF PHUSIS:
growth (by germination or expansion), that is, (by implication) natural
production (lineal descent); by extension a genus or sort; figuratively
native disposition, constitution or usage:—([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]) AS
NOT ASSOCIATED TO ANY GOD]

THUS AS BINOMIAL HEXAGRAM (64 bit) ENCAPSULATION A LOGICAL CONTRADICTION OF
ITS DEPLOYMENT AS HETEROS {@1 - GENDER {MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE}
CONCEPTION OF #NUMBER:

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
+ 0, H27, H54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal
Law}

SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)
+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )
+ 0, H3, H6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}

THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also refers
to the Sun)
+ H1, H2, H3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

Dialectic or dialectics (Greek: διαλεκτική, dialektikḗ; related to
dialogue), also known as the dialectical method, is at base a discourse
between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject
but wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments. Dialectic
resembles debate, but shorn of subjective elements such as emotional appeal
and the modern pejorative sense of rhetoric. It may be contrasted with the
didactic method where one side of the conversation teaches the other.

Within Hegelianism, dialectic acquires a specialised meaning of a
contradiction of ideas that serves as the determining factor in their
interaction; comprising three stages of development: a thesis, giving rise
to its reaction; an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis;
and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.

Dialectical materialism, built mainly by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,
adapted the Hegelian dialectic into traditional materialism.

Dialectic tends to imply a process of evolution, and so does not naturally
fit within formal logic; see logic and dialectic. This is particularly
marked in Hegelian and even more Marxist dialectic which may rely on the
time-evolution of ideas in the real world; Dialectical logic attempts to
address this.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Hegelian_dialectic>

That if this trinomial HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER a priori as PARADIGM
already has a conception of an INTELLECTUAL TETRAD {#8 - Transformation
Prototype} which as CANON OF SUPREME MYSTERY was associated to a LUNAR
event upon the midnight solstice of 21 December 103 BCE and published in 4
BCE is equivalent to the later implementation of PYTHAGOREAN binomial
HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER as the basis for the Julian calendar and the
subsequent Roman Empire Governance (and that of religionists):

VIRTUE as MIND: {#1 + #2 = #3} is PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West /
Autumn / Metal)

TOOLS as SCIENCE: {#3 + #4 = #7} is SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North /
Winter / Water and which also refers to the Moon)

POSITION as OPINION: {#5 + #6 = #11 as Collegium of Pontiffs from 510 BCE
as AS PONTIFICATED DEIFIED IGNORANCE BEING NARCISSISM} is ANTI-THESIS:
Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )

TIME as SENSE: {#7 + #8 = #15} is THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South /
Summer / Fire and which also refers to the Sun)

= #36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law +
H9 - System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity)

6x6 = #36 / #111 / #666 {#FIVE AS #CENTRE VALUE TO THE GNOME}

45 5 61
53 37 21
13 69 29

= #111 / #333 {#FIVE}

Whilst it may continue to function as an acceptable METHODOLOGY {ARCH KAI
TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10} with an encapsulated sphere of
operation {

41 1 57
49 33 17
9 65 25 = #99 / #297 {#ONE}

42 2 58
50 34 18
10 66 26 = #102 / #306 {#TWO}

43 3 59
51 35 19
11 67 27 = #105 / #315 {#THREE}

#419 as [#9, #2, #8, #400] = tabach (H2873): {#2 as #19 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH* / *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #THREE: #105 / #315} 1) to slaughter, slay, butcher, kill
ruthlessly; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to slaughter, butcher; 1a2) to slay, kill
ruthlessly (figurative);

44 4 60
52 36 20
12 68 28 = #108 / #324 {#FOUR}

#419 as [#2, #1, #6, #400, #10] = 'avvah (H185): {#0 as #12 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH*/ *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #FOUR: #108 / #324} 1) desire, lust, will (not necessarily
evil);

49 9 65
57 41 25
17 73 33 = #123 / #369 {#NINE} AS IT'S NATURAL PROGRESSION {#1 / #73
SUBSTITUTION}

74 81 76
79 77 75
78 73 80 = #231 - #108 = #123 / #693 - #369 = #324 {#TEN} AS RETURN TO
GRECO-ROMAN MAGIC SQUARE BEING ITSELF

}, it is entirely a specious notion to declare it is the root and causal
basis of the perennialist philosophical tradition.

My objection has always been ROMAN CATHOLICS / FREEMASONRY imposing {#17 /
#33 - #INR / #65 - SOLDIER} a @5 - substituted HETEROS ethic upon our {#390
/ #288 / #419} war dead and usurping the @1 - SOVEREIGNTY of the #391 -
HOMOIOS basis to our Commonwealth’s Governance which is defined as a
PRINCIPLE that is circumscribed {#13 / #21 / #37} by Queen Victoria’s
Letters Patent of 17 September 1900 as the instrumentation of Federation
into a nation.

MY BELIEF THAT THE QUINTESSENTIAL DIALECTIC ISSUE BETWEEN HEGEL AND MARX IS
THEN A QUESTION OF INVENTION AND CARRYING OUT POLITICAL CONSTITUTIONS
INDEPENDENTLY OF RELIGION FOR WHICH A DIALECTIC IS REQUISITE:

Hegel states the hypothesis: “Another and opposite folly which we meet with
in our time is that of pretending to invent and carry out political
constitutions independently of religion. The Catholic confession, although
sharing the Christian name with the Protestant, does not concede to the
State an inherent Justice and Morality, – a concession which in the
Protestant principle is fundamental. This tearing away of the political
morality of the Constitution from its natural connection, is necessary to
the genius of that religion, inasmuch as it does not recognise Justice and
Morality as independent and substantial. But thus excluded from intrinsic
worth, – torn away from their last refuge – the sanctuary of conscience –
the calm retreat where religion has its abode, – the principles and
institutions of political legislation are destitute of a real centre, to
the same decree as they are compelled to remain abstract and indefinite.

Summing up what has been said of the State, we find that we have been led
to call its vital principle, as actuating the individuals who compose it, –
Morality. The State, its laws, its arrangements, constitute the rights of
its members; its natural features, its mountains, air, and waters, are
their country, their fatherland, their outward material property; the
history of this State, their deeds; what their ancestors have produced,
belongs to them and lives in their memory. All is their possession, just as
they are possessed by it; for it constitutes their existence, their being.

Their imagination is occupied with the ideas thus presented, while the
adoption of these laws, and of a fatherland so conditioned is the
expression of their will. It is this matured totality which thus
constitutes one Being, the spirit of one People. To it the individual
members belong; each unit is the Son of his Nation, and at the same time –
in as far as the State to which he belongs is undergoing development – the
Son of his Age. None remains behind it, still less advances beyond it. This
spiritual Being (the Spirit of his Time) is his; he is a representative of
it; it is that in which he originated, and in which he lives.

MY SUGGESTION IS TO UTILISE THE VOLUNTĀTIS / NOLUNTĀTIS NOTION OF WILL as
the DIALECTIC and you'll note that the first line "NOW WAIT A TICK. {#1}"
to our POEM uses the dialectic: #1 - POSITION {#558} which as a GNOMIC
IMPERATIVE instruction set then EQUATES to MALE: #435; FEME: #315 and is
equivalent to the SUM of the #THREE MAGIC SQUARE within the Pythagorean
HETEROS schematic:

43 3 59
51 35 19
11 67 27 = #105 / #315 {#THREE}

#419 as [#9, #2, #8, #400] = tabach (H2873): {#2 as #19 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH* / *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #THREE: #105 / #315} 1) to slaughter, slay, butcher, kill
ruthlessly; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to slaughter, butcher; 1a2) to slay, kill
ruthlessly (figurative);

And you ought to note that we now have a technical capability to further
redefine the granularity of our hypothetical proposition: 'AUTONOMOUS
HYPOTHETICAL FLUIDITY THEORY' which was articulated some months ago. And
that is the capability of reducing each conceptual word of our functional
dialectic by which one can readily cognize a poem or propose into its own
sub-dialectic semantical stratum and obtain thereby the GNOMIC IMPERATIVE
instruction set.

For example our first dialectic element is:

#1 = Position {#558}

And if written thusly:

[P, o, s, i, t, i, o, n]

Then is numerically as gematria equivalent to:

[70, 60, 100, 9, 200, 9, 60, 50] = #558

But as a GNOMIC IMPERATIVE instruction set it is expressed as:

Event: POSITION@{
#1: Sup: 70; Ego: 70,
#2: Sup: 49; Ego: 60,
#3: Sup: 68; Ego: 19,
#4: Sup: 77; Ego: 9,
#5: Sup: 34; Ego: 38,
#6: Sup: 43; Ego: 9,
#7: Sup: 22; Ego: 60,
#8: Sup: 72; Ego: 50,
Male: #435; Feme: #315
}

#315 as [#5, #300, #10] = eti (G2089): {#14 as #315} 1) yet, still; 1a) of
time; 1a1) of a thing which went on formerly, whereas now a different state
of things exists or has begun to exist; 1a2) of a thing which continues at
present; 1a2a) even, now; 1a3) with negatives; 1a3a) no longer, no more;
1b) of degree and increase; 1b1) even, yet; 1b2) besides, more, further;

— AUTONOMOUS HYPOTHETICAL FLUIDITY THEORY —
{APPLIES EQUALLY TO GENDER IDENTITY}

{ie. *SANDGLASS* AND WHY AUSTRALIA'S PARLIAMENT USES IT WHEN THERE'S A
DIVISION IN THE HOUSE}

#1 = Position {#558} as MENTALISM [VIRTUE]: #1 - Will, free will, choice /
Remember the Sabbath Day
#2 = Poise {#244} / Pause {#476} as CORRESPONDENCE [TOOL]: #2 - desire,
inclination / Honour Parents
#3 = Purpose {#695} as VIBRATION [POSITION]: #3 - disposition towards
(something or someone) / Do Not Kill
#4 = Process {#428} as POLARITY [TIME / CENTRE]: #4 - favour, affection /
Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid Heteronomy Against Autonomy)
#5 = Pairing {#236} / DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE) of RHYTHM or
CANON: #5 - last will, testament / Do Not Steal
#6 = Perspicacity {#1260} / BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS) as CAUSE AND
EFFECT [IMPLEMENTATION]: #6 - goal, object, purpose, intention / Do Not
Bear False Witness
#7 = Probability {#1173} / Prosperous {945} / MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA
DENUNTIANS) as as ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE [LIMIT]: #7 - signification,
import / Do Not Covet [LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

#8 = Propriety {#1294} / TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE as PROTOCOL SELECTION: #1
- unwillingness
#9 = Persona {#376} / AUTONOMOUS PARADIGM as MIRRORED AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE
OF EACH OTHER'S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY: #2 - ill will, negative disposition
(toward something) [LATIN definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

YOUTUBE: "Om 108 Times - Music for Yoga & Meditation"



#10 / #10 = Totality of Nature {#7 - Engendering Nature} / SOVEREIGNTY
#11 / #8 = Transforming Nature {DOUBLE: #4 - Nature Amended in it's Nature
{#7 - Engendering Nature}) / GOVERNMENT & NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS
#12 / #9 = Autonomous Nature / GENERAL POPULACE

— RACHEL {WETHERED SHEEP} MAKES A PLEA —

"NOW WAIT A TICK. {#1}
YOU'RE DRIBBLING. {#2}
WHY THE SHTICK. {#3}
ENDLESS QUIBBLING. {#4}

O'ER THE PUERILE. {#5}
IMPISH LIMP STICK. {#6}
PRISSY LOATH'G BILE. {#7}
CEASELESS BRICK. {#8}

INSANE PUSSY CALLS. {#9}
BY A SENILE PRICK. {#10}
WITHOUT ANY BALLS. {#11}
MY FANNY LICK." {#12}

"And Jesus {He is saved/A saviour; a deliverer} of Nazareth {Sovereign; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} answered and said unto
him, Blessed art thou, Simon {that hears; that obeys} Barjona {son of a
Jona; of a dove}: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but
my Father which is in heaven.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter {a rock or stone}, and upon
this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it.

— ESPRIT DE CORPS: 'FLANDERS SOIL' AS EXEMPLAR TRUE #CENTRE OF WILL
{INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS} —

"IN DEAD OF NIGHT. {MENTALISM: 1 x #41 = #41 as #1 - Will, free will,
choice / VIRTUE: 64 meta descriptor prototypes: Omne Datum Optimum {#1 -
Every perfect gift} (1139 CE) / Remember the Sabbath Day}

#2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature: {DOUBLE: #1 - Nature Contains Nature
{#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature}}

I HEAR THE CLARION. {CORRESPONDENCE: 2 x #41 = #82 as #2 - desire,
inclination: Milites Templi {#2 - Soldiers of the Temple} (1144 CE) /
TOOLS: marriage / Honour Parents}

#393 as [#8, #90, #90, #200, #5] = chatsotserah (H2689): {#2 as #399} 1)
trumpet, clarion;

#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature: {DOUBLE: #2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature
{#5 - Act of Nature}}

CALL AWAKE FOR WAR. {VIBRATION: 3 x #41 = #123 as #3 - disposition towards
(something or someone): Militia Dei {#3 - Soldiers of God} (1145 CE) /
POSITION: Soldier / Do Not Kill}

#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature / #1 - Nature Contains Nature: {DOUBLE:
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature {#6 - Form of Nature}}

STEADFAST MIGHT. {POLARITY: 4 x #41 = #164 as #4 - favour, affection:
Pastoralis Praeeminentiae {#4 - Pastoral Pre-eminence to monarchs} (1307
CE) / TIME: #CENTRE and #INR / Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid Heteronomy
Against Autonomy)} [John 5:39-47 (KJV)]

#11 / #8 - Transforming Nature: {DOUBLE: #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature
{#7 - Engendering Nature}}

MARCHING TO SION. {RHYTHM: 5 x #41 = #205 as #5 - last will, testament:
Faciens misericordiam {#5 - Granting forgiveness} (1308 CE) / CANON: RHYTHM
& HARMONY / Do Not Steal} / DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE),

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting, Delay, Attending,
Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back / INNER: #11 - Value and
Function of Non-Existence; I-Ching: H8 - Closeness, Seeking Unity,
Grouping, Holding together, Alliance; Tetra: 33 - Closeness}

V - The Governor General may on Our behalf exercise all powers under the
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900, or otherwise in respect
of the summoning, proroguing, or dissolving the Parliament of Our said
Commonwealth.

POLICE AS #123 - *A* *MEMBER* *OF* *A* *GUILD*, *ORDER*, *CLASS* OR #65 -
SOLDIERS IN THE GARDEN: “Then Simon {that hears; that obeys} Peter {a rock
or stone as euphemism for testicles as opposed to phallus of #CENTRE}
having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off
his right ear {#237 - *USE* *OF* *FORCE* / #277 - *RIGHT* *TO* *PLACE* *A*
*TEST*}. The servant's name was Malchus {my king, kingdom, or counsellor}.”
[John 18:10 (KJV)]

AGAINST THIS WHORE. {CAUSE AND EFFECT: 6 x #41 = #246 as #6 - goal, object,
purpose, intention: Ad providam {#6 - To Foresee / For Providence} (1312
CE) / IMPLEMENTATION: HETEROS (binomial / bifurcated) THEORY OF NUMBER / Do
Not Bear False Witness} / BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS),

#20 / #8 - Transforming Nature {DOUBLE: #6 - Form of Nature {#9 -
Autonomous Nature} [#505 / #1 - Nature Contains Nature]

IMPLEMENTATION: {GRAVITAS: ASSISTING (#RESH to #TAU)} / DEFINE THE @1
SOVEREIGN PRINCIPLE CHARACTERISTIC HERE

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#19 - Argument for Ethical Anarchism, Returning to Simplicity; I-Ching: H57
- Compliance, Gentle Penetration/Wind, Ground, Calculations; Tetra: 58 -
Gathering In / INNER: #13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting,
Delay, Attending, Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back}

VIII - And We do hereby REQUIRE and COMMAND ALL OUR OFFICERS AND MINISTERS,
CIVIL AND MILITARY, AND ALL OTHER THE INHABITANTS of Our said Commonwealth
TO BE OBEDIENT, AIDING, AND ASSISTING unto Our said Governor General, or,
in the event of his death, INCAPACITY, or absence, to such person or
persons as may, FROM TIME TO TIME, under the PROVISIONS OF THESE OUR
LETTERS PATENT, ADMINISTER THE GOVERNMENT of Our said Commonwealth.

ARREST THE BLIGHT." {ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE: 7 x #41 = #287 as #7 -
signification, import: Vox in excelso {#7 - The voice on high} (1312 CE) /
LIMIT: #INR AS TERNIO ANAGRAM / Do Not Covet} MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA
DENUNTIANS). [LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

7 x #41 = #287 as [#1, #50, #1, #3, #20, #1, #10, #1, #200] = anagkaios
(G316): {#9 as #356} 1) necessary; 1a) what one can not do without,
indispensable; 1b) connected by bonds of nature or friendship; 1c) what
ought according to the law of duty be done, what is required by the
circumstances;

#22 / #10 - Totality of Nature {DOUBLE: #7 - Engendering Nature {#10 -
Totality of Nature}} [#870 / #6 - Form of Nature]

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#60 - Skill Rulership, Maintain One's Place; I-Ching: H15 - Modesty,
Humbling; Tetra: 5 - Keeping Small / INNER: #9 - Inconstancy of
Achievement, Practicing Placidity; I-Ching: H7 - The Army, Leading, Troops;
Tetra: 32 - Legion}

X - And We do further direct and enjoin that these Our Letters Patent shall
be read and proclaimed at such place or places as Our said Governor General
shall think fit within Our said Commonwealth of Australia.

[In witness whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent
Witness Ourself at Westminster the 29th October, 1900: 64th year of Our
reign (Queen Victoria)]



<Loading Image...>

[IMAGE: LETTERS PATENT TO THE FEDERATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
OF 1901 Represented by a Theoretical Mathematical Trinomial Noumenon as
Intellectual Property]

8 x #41 = % #328 as #INNER {FEMALE (EGO)} / TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE as
PROTOCOL SELECTION: #1 - unwillingness
9 x #41 = % #369 as #INNER {FEMALE (EGO)} / AUTONOMOUS PARADIGM as MIRRORED
AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE OF EACH OTHER'S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY: #2 - ill will,
negative disposition (toward something) [LATIN definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

<http://www.grapple369.com?idea:{41}&idea:{82}&idea:{123}&idea:{164}&idea:{205}&idea:{246}&idea:{287}&idea:{328}&idea:{369}>

*VOLUNTY* (noun):
[ETYMOLOGY]: coined by Robert Fludd (17 January 1574 – 8 September 1637)
from Latin voluntās f (genitive voluntātis).
- (obsolete) The positive aspect of God, encompassing light, love,
creation, etc.
- *YANG*: From early romanizations of Chinese 陽/阳 (yáng), originally in
reference to the sunny side of areas {*IT* *IS* *NOT* *GEMATRIA*} such as
mountains and dwellings.
- (philosophy) A principle in Chinese and related East Asian philosophies
associated with bright, hot, masculine, etc. elements of the natural world.


*NOLUNTY* (noun):
[ETYMOLOGY]: coined by Robert Fludd (17 January 1574 – 8 September 1637)
from Latin nōluntās f (genitive nōluntātis).
- (obsolete) The negative aspect of God, encompassing darkness, cold,
destruction, etc.
- *YIN*: From early romanizations of Chinese 陰/阴 (yīn), originally used in
reference to shaded areas {*IT* *IS* *NOT* *UMBRA* *AS* *GEMATRIA*
*MORPHOLOGICAL* *SUBSTITUTION*}, as of a mountain or home.
- (philosophy) A principle in Chinese and related East Asian philosophies
associated with dark, cool, female, etc. elements of the natural world.
- Robert Fludd was born at Milgate House, Bearsted and was the son of Sir
Thomas Fludd, a high-ranking governmental official (Queen Elizabeth I’s
treasurer for war in Europe), and Member of Parliament.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [Matthew 16:17-19 (KJV)]

Thus I define a 22 level DIALECTIC FORMULATION which is required for the
human process of RATIOCINATION and that deploys META-PRINCIPLES as
principles of NATURE which apply to the VOLUNTĀTIS / NOLUNTĀTIS NOTION OF
WILL as the simple DIALECTIC (with its complex DOUBLE TWINING traditional
understanding of the HEBREW LETTERS):

#1 - Nature Contains Nature
#2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature
#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature
#5 - Act of Nature
#6 - Form of Nature
#7 - Engendering of Nature
#8 - Transforming Nature
#9 - Autonomous Nature
#10 - Totality of Nature

I ought to add that the binomial HETEROS methodology may continue to
adequately function {ie. with #288 - UMBRA compliance} between SOVEREIGN
STATES {9x9x9 = #729 / #364.5} which conform their governance regime to a
HOMOIOS paradigm.

In the historical sense the mechanism of EQUILIBRIUM which is essential for
OSMOSIS {ie. the process of gradual or unconscious assimilation of ideas,
knowledge, etc} can occur by the protocol notion of HRUMACHIS - #330 - 'The
Holy Spirit of Truth and Justice'.

For yet again notice that the Key Letter of the Change from the First to
the Second Order is Aleph (#1 - vOrange), and the changed letters in the
Third Order are He (#5 - vBronze), Resh (#200 - vPurple), Vau (#6 - vRed),
Mem (#40 - vBlue), Cheth (#8), Yod (#10 - vGreen), Sameck (#60 - vYellow),
so that in all we (the adherents to the Cult of ATEN) have the one Secret
Name: HRUMACHIS - #330 - 'The Holy Spirit of Truth and Justice'." [Frater
Achad, Q.B.L. or The Bride's Reception]

But I would augment this with the Lamed (#30 - vCyan) and Tsade {#80 -
vCoral) as we can determine a reprise point for rational PI as 22 / 7 from
the New Moon / Equinox cycle of Wed 20 March 1996 / #0 = Thu 21 March 1996
as New Moon.

AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE TRANSLATION:
Iran's goal is to eradicate six million Jews. This was claimed by Israel's
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Russia this week,
Bloomberg reports.

This week, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, visited Russia
to persuade the country's president, Vladimir Putin, not to stop Israel
from attacking Syria.

THUS IN CONSIDERATION OF THE QUINTESSENTIAL DIALECTIC ISSUE BETWEEN HEGEL
AND MARX AS A QUESTION OF THE INVENTION AND CARRYING OUT POLITICAL
CONSTITUTIONS INDEPENDENTLY OF RELIGION FOR WHICH A HOMOIOS RATHER THAN
HETEROS DIALECTIC OF {22 HEBREW LETTERS OF RATIONAL PI: 22 / 7 -
VOLUNTĀTUS} RATIOCINATION IS PREREQUISITE.

THEREFORE IF VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS TO PROPERLY CONFORM TO MARXIST IDEALISM, HE
WOULD NOT STOP ISRAEL FROM ATTACKING SYRIA.

That was a brief outline to contribute to fostering an Intellectual
discussion.

SEE ALSO: “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ON CAUSE CÉLÈBRE JINGOISTIC BEHAVIOUR AS BEING
BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION BY RACIAL, RELIGIOUS AND PSYCHO-SEXUAL HATRED”

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/419-Slaughter.pdf>

- dolf

Initial Post: 12 May 2018
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Your money and property are not yours.
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
There is no democracy.
Independence is discouraged.
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
 
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"



SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTATIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
Anonymous
2018-05-12 22:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-- IF
Flush.
Byker
2018-05-13 21:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-- IF

MattB
2018-05-13 21:55:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 13 May 2018 00:23:07 +0200, Anonymous
Post by Anonymous
-- IF
Flush.
Careful the idiot will start forging you and filling your e-mail with
his trash.
Anonymous
2018-05-13 23:56:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MattB
On Sun, 13 May 2018 00:23:07 +0200, Anonymous
Post by Anonymous
-- IF
Flush.
Careful the idiot will start forging you and filling your e-mail with
his trash.
He'll fail, no doubt.
MattB
2018-05-14 02:46:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anonymous
Post by MattB
On Sun, 13 May 2018 00:23:07 +0200, Anonymous
Post by Anonymous
-- IF
Flush.
Careful the idiot will start forging you and filling your e-mail with
his trash.
He'll fail, no doubt.
He isn't to bright. Reminds me of a San Francisco liberal.
dolf
2018-05-12 23:04:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
-- IF VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS TO PROPERLY CONFORM TO MARXIST IDEALISM, HE WOULD
NOT STOP ISRAEL FROM ATTACKING SYRIA

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 12 May 2018

“Het doel van Iran is om zes miljoen Joden uit te roeien. Dit beweerde
Israëls premier Benjamin Netanyahu tijdens zijn bezoek aan Rusland deze
week, bericht Bloomberg.

Deze week bezocht de Israëlische premier, Benjamin Netanyahu, Rusland om de
president van het land, Vladimir Poetin, te overtuigen Israël niet te
stoppen met het aanvallen van Syrië.”

<https://fenixx.org/2018/05/11/netanyahu-tegen-poetin-iran-wil-6-miljoen-joden-uitroeien/>

Shall I spell it out for you?

And I am doing so spontaneously...

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels proposed that Hegel's dialectic is too
abstract: ... In contradiction to Hegelian idealism, Marx presented his own
dialectic method, which he claims to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's
method: My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is
its direct opposite.

The dialect which HEGEL proposes is:

#1 - THESIS
#2 - ANTI-THESIS
#3 - SYNTHESIS
#4 - PROGRESSION

Dialectical materialism adapts the Hegelian dialectic for traditional
materialism, which examines the subjects of the world in relation to each
other within a dynamic, evolutionary environment, in contrast to
metaphysical materialism, which examines parts of the world within a
static, isolated environment.

Dialectical materialism accepts the evolution of the natural world and the
emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution. As Z. A.
Jordan notes, "Engels made constant use of the metaphysical insight that
the higher level of existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower;
that the higher level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible
laws; and that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of
development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a
whole'."

Dialectical materialism is an aspect of the broader subject of materialism,
which asserts the primacy of the material world: in short, matter precedes
thought. Materialism is a realist philosophy of science,[13] which holds
that the world is material; that all phenomena in the universe consist of
"matter in motion," wherein all things are interdependent and
interconnected and develop according to natural law; that the world exists
outside us and independently of our perception of it; that thought is a
reflection of the material world in the brain, and that the world is in
principle knowable.

I QUOTE: "In the third chapter of the "Analytic of Principles," on
phenomena and noumena, Kant in Critique of Pure Reason (1781 and second
edition 1787) emphasizes that because the categories must always be applied
to data provided by sensibility in order to provide cognition, and because
the data of sensibility are structured by the transcenden­tally ideal forms
of intuition, the categories give us knowledge only of things as they
appear with sensibility ("phenomena," literally "that which appears").

Although through pure understanding (nous in Greek) we may think of objects
independently of their being given in sensibil­ity, we can never cognize
them as such non-sensible entities ("noumena," literally "that which is
thought" as a subject of some 112 mentions). The meaning of Kant's use of
the term "phenomena" is self-evident, but the meaning of "noumena" is not,
since it literally means not "things as they are in­ dependently of
appearing to us" but something more like "things as they are understood by
pure thought." Yet Kant appears to deny that the human understanding can
comprehend things in the latter way."

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf>

*THUS* *I* *AM* *PROFFERING* *AN* *INFORMED* *AND* *REASONED* *OPINION*
*AS* *THAT* *WHICH* *IMMANUEL* *KANT* *STATES* *IS* *AN* *IMPOSSIBILITY*
*FOR* *A* *HUMAN* *BEING* *TO* *ACCOMPLISH* *BY* *TRANSCENDENT*
*SAPIENTIAL* *THOUGHT* *AND* *CAPABLY* *DEMONSTRATE* *IT'S* *TEMPORAL*
*CONGRUENCE* *AS* *COHERENCE* *BY* *A* *MATHEMATICAL* *THEORETICAL*
*NOUMENON* *AS* *AN* *INTELLECTUAL* *PROPERTY* *WHICH* *IMMANUEL* *KANT*
*HIMSELF* *CALLS* *NOUMENA* *AS* *THE* *PROOF* *OF* *A* *VALID* *AND*
*RATIONAL* *CONCEPT* *ATTAINED* *BY* *PURE* *THOUGHT*.

FOR EXAMPLE:

Here is a poem written at 0857 hours that is directly associated by
temporal relativity to the noumena conveying two explicit CATEGORIES OF
UNDERSTANDING that whilst linguistically HEBREW / GREEK {ie. 24 x 7 x 13 =
#2,184 / #364 = 6D as ‘OTH being a cosmological anthropic principle
defining ratiocination: 22 / 7} operate as an equivalent of electronic STEM
cells by which DYNAMIC NATURAL ASSOCIATIONS occur as fostering of IDEAS
with other media types.

That the CATEGORIES are then redacted to their bifurcation of male / feme
pairing so as to ascertain the GNOMIC IMPERATIVE instruction set substrata
relationship and its OSMOSIS intersection points to the noumena operation
of MIND by the dialectic of INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTUS:

— FINE AND DANDY —

“MY HAIR IS NEVER A MESS.
JUST NUMBER TWO WAHL.
I LOVE 💕 WASH AND WEAR.
IT’S SO EASY TO BARBER.

AND I MUST CONFESS.
THERE’S NO EYES KOHL.
BEING BLONDE ‘N FAIR.
THE LOOK TO HARBOUR.”

H1548@{
   #1: Sup: 5; Ego: 5,
   #2: Sup: 81; Ego: 76,
   #3: Sup: 3; Ego: 3,
   #4: Sup: 33; Ego: 30,
   #5: Sup: 41; Ego: 8,
   #6: Sup: 47; Ego: 6,
   Male: #210; Feme: #128
} // #452

#452 as [#5, #400, #3, #30, #8, #6] = galach (H1548): {#2 as #41} 1) to
poll, shave, shave off, be bald; 1a) (Piel); 1a1) to shave; 1a2) to shave
off; 1a3) (figurative of devastation); 1b) (Pual) to be shaven; 1c)
(Hithpael) to shave oneself;

G3659@{
   #1: Sup: 70; Ego: 70,
   #2: Sup: 29; Ego: 40,
   #3: Sup: 69; Ego: 40,
   #4: Sup: 70; Ego: 1,
   #5: Sup: 46; Ego: 57,
   #6: Sup: 47; Ego: 1,
   Male: #331; Feme: #209
} // #452

#452 as [#70, #40, #40, #1, #300, #1] = omma (G3659): {#15 as #151} 1) an
eye;

Transformative Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#344 / #452} / HETEROS {#326 / #443}

0857HOURS: 4.4.5.31.0@{
#1: Sup: 45; Ego: 45,
#2: Sup: 25; Ego: 61,
#3: Sup: 46; Ego: 21,
#4: Sup: 77; Ego: 31,
#5: Sup: 33; Ego: 37,
#6: Sup: 11; Ego: 59,
#7: Sup: 11; Ego: 81,
#8: Sup: 49; Ego: 38,
#9: Sup: 47; Ego: 79,
Male: 344; Feme: 452
}

<http://www.grapple369.com/?time:8.57>

***@zen: 4, row: 4, col: 5, nous: 31 [Super: #344 / #77 - Natural
Guide, Heaven's Reason; I-Ching: H12 - Obstruction, Standstill
(stagnation), Selfish persons; Tetra: 57 - Guardedness, Ego: #452 / #31 -
Military Stratagem, Quelling War; I-Ching: H32 - Perseverance, Endurance,
Duration, Constancy; Tetra: 51 - Constancy]

Marx criticized classical materialism as another idealist
philosophy—idealist because of its transhistorical understanding of
material contexts. The Young Hegelian Ludwig Feuerbach had rejected Hegel's
idealistic philosophy and advocated materialism. Despite being strongly
influenced by Feuerbach, Marx rejected Feuerbach's version of materialism
as inconsistent. The writings of Engels, especially Anti-Dühring (1878) and
Dialectics of Nature (1875–82), were the source of the main doctrines of
dialectical materialism.

Marx's own writings are almost exclusively concerned with understanding
human history in terms of systemic processes, based on modes of production
(broadly speaking, the ways in which societies are organized to employ
their technological powers to interact with their material surroundings).
This is called historical materialism. More narrowly, within the framework
of this general theory of history, most of Marx's writing is devoted to an
analysis of the specific structure and development of the capitalist
economy.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism>

FATHOMING #72 - ANTHROPIC PROTOTYPE (ECONOMY) DIALECTIC OF PYTHAGORAS
HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER AS BEING EQUIVALENT TO THE CHINESE I-CHING BINARY
RATHER THAN TERNARY APPARATUS:

48 8 64
56 40 24
16 72 32 = #120 / #360 {#EIGHT}

#8 (9) - KHATEL (Seraphim-Angels) = #8
#16 (8) - HAQMYAH (Cherubim-Angels) = #24
#24 (7) - HAHOUYAH (Throne-Angels) = #48
#32 (6) - OUSHRYAH (Dominion-Angels) = #80
#40 (5) - YEIZEL (Powers-Angels) = #120 <--- [*HITLER'S* *TABLE* *TALK*
IDEA @120 ON 24TH JANUARY 1942 (A FUTURE REFORMER OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM):
One day the English will realise that they've nothing to gain in Europe...
*IF* *THEY* *WANT* *TO* *SAVE* *NEW* *ZEALAND* *AND* *AUSTRALIA*, they
can't let India go.

The English have two possibilities : either to give up Europe and hold on
to the East, or vice versa. They can't bet on both tables. When it's a
matter of the richest country in the world (from the capitalist point of
view), one understands the importance of such a *DILEMMA* (NOTE: SEE ON
RELATIONSHIP TO A LEGAL LOGICAL SYLLOGISM AN EXPLANATION GIVEN WITHIN:

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Pinocchio.pdf>

). It would be enough for them to be aware of it for everything to be
changed.

PAGE #609 (REVISITING BATTLEFIELDS): The *SOLDIER* *HAS* *A* *BOUNDLESS*
*AFFECTION* *FOR* *THE* *GROUND* *ON* *WHICH* *HE* *HAS* *SHED* *HIS*
*BLOOD*. IF WE COULD ARRANGE THE TRANSPORT, WE *SHOULD* *HAVE* *A*
*MILLION* *PEOPLE* *POURING* *INTO* *FRANCE* *TO* *REVISIT* *THE* *SCENES*
*OF* *THEIR* *FORMER* [*BOER* / *ANZAC*] *STRUGGLE*. [HITLER'S TABLE TALK
IDEA @120 / PAGE #609 (REVISITING BATTLEFIELDS)]

#48 (4) - MIHEL (Virtues-Angels) = #168
#56 (3) - PHOHEL (Principalities-Angels) = #224 {*MENS* *REA*: #334 as
[#40, #4, #200, #20, #10, #20, #40] = derek (H1870): {#1 as #224} 1) way,
road, distance, journey, manner; 1a) road, way, path; 1b) journey; 1c)
direction; 1d) manner, habit, way; 1e) of course of life (figurative); 1f)
of moral character (figurative)}



<http://www.grapple369.com/images/TempleCoin.jpg>

[IMAGE: By week ending Saturday 8 April 2018 I had received one of these
special 1000 minted "TRUMP JEWISH TEMPLE" half shekel coins.

It is my intellectual property associated with the letters patent to the
Australian commonwealth which makes that entirely possible]

#224 as [#4, #70, #20, #10, #40, #70, #10] = dokimos (G1384): {#61 as #224}
1) accepted, particularly of coins and money; 2) accepted, pleasing,
acceptable

#64 (2) - MEHIEL (Archangels-Angels) = #288 as ANTI-SEMITISM: #364 as [#10,
#8, #200, #80, #6, #50, #10] = charaph (H2778): {#1 as #288 *INTERFERENCE*
*AS* *EVIDENCE* *OF* *ANTI*-*SEMITISM*} 1) to reproach, taunt, *BLASPHEME*,
defy, jeopardise, rail, upbraid; 2) (Qal) to *WINTER*, spend harvest time,
remain in harvest time; 3) (Niphal) to acquire, *BE* *BETROTHED*; 1a) (Qal)
*TO* *REPROACH*; 1b) (Piel) *TO* *REPROACH*, *DEFY*, *TAUNT*;

*BEERSHEBA* {*BEER* {a *WELL*: AUM #288 as [#8, #80, #200] = To cut in,
dig; to search out, *TO* *SPY*; to turn red (with shame); to be ashamed; a
hole; n. Blushing, Pit or *WELL*} *SHEBA* {*CAPTIVITY*; *OLD* *MAN*;
*REPOSE*; *OATH*}

#72 (1) - MOUMYAH (Angels-Angels) = #360

For his part, Engels applies a "dialectical" approach to the natural world
in general, arguing that contemporary science is increasingly recognizing
the necessity of viewing natural processes in terms of interconnectedness,
development, and transformation. Some scholars have doubted that Engels's
"dialectics of nature" is a legitimate extension of Marx's approach to
social processes.

Other scholars have argued that despite Marx's insistence that humans are
natural beings in an evolving, mutual relationship with the rest of nature,
Marx's own writings pay inadequate attention to the ways in which human
agency is constrained by such factors as biology, geography, and ecology.

However the HOMOIOS ternary conception of NUMBER of which Immanuel Kant is
cognisant of within his Critique of Pure Reason deploys a dialectic:

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law}
+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}
+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}
+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE
H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

However when this trinomial HOMOIOS {#81 bits} conception of #NUMBER
deploys a binomial encapsulation a logical contradiction of its deployment
as HETEROS {@1 - GENDER {MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE} conception of
#NUMBER:



<http://www.grapple369.com/images/yinyang.gif>

The Limitless (wuji) produces the delimited (youji), and this demarcation
is equivalent to the Absolute (taiji) or in Kabbalist language as the
Infinite Void /Nothingness (AIN SOF - Infinite Being) as The Primordial
Source.

The Taiji (the two opposing forces in embryonic form) produces two forms,
named yin-yang which are called Liangyi (the manifested opposing forces).

Yin (Passive/Female Principle) and Yang (Active/Male Principle)

These two forms produce four phenomena (Sìxiàng):

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )
THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also refers
to the Sun)

These four phenomena (Sìxiàng) act on the eight trigrams (Bagua) which are
used within Daoist cosmology to represent the fundamental principles of
reality, seen as a range of eight interrelated concepts associated only to
nature’s process of PHUSIS as growth (by germination or expansion), that
is, (by implication) natural production (lineal descent); by extension a
genus or sort; figuratively native disposition, constitution or
usage:—([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]).

You’ll notice from the Kabbalist notion of the #VOWELS which I have just
summarily conveyed above, that they may well conform to our RATIOCINATION
paradigm and thusly given the #231 / #351 inclusions within this
INDESTRUCTIBLE THOUGHT ATOM it then provides the best natural defence
against any religious extremist ideology: @1 / @5.

GIVEN THE *MAJOR* *PREMISE* {YANG/FATHER/HEAVEN/MALE/FORM - Formula of
Universal Law} of circa 1550 BCE, which contains the law of that will: 7 x
24 *COURSES* *OF* *PRIESTLY* *DIVISIONS* x 13 = 2184 days of the 'oth cycle
= 6D or 6 x 364 associated to the 'constant sequence of sun and moon' as
354 x 3 + 30 day intercalation = 1092 days x 2 = 2184 days

<— RATIONAL PI AS THE BASIS FOR RATIOCINATION IS IMPLICIT WITHIN THIS
COSMOLOGICAL COMPREHENSION

We ought then to be able to deploy Hebrew (22) / Greek (24) Categories of
Understanding interchangeably and we also can use English.

BECAUSE THE ENGLISH VOWELS: A-E-I-O-U APPEAR TO BE DERIVED FROM THE HEBREW:

#A (#1) = {Inner?} - #SOUTH
#E (#5) = {Totality?} - #CENTRE
#I (#9) = {Sphere?} - #NORTH
#O (#60) = {Polarity?} - #WEST? {#SAMEK as the 15th Hebrew Letter}
#U (#300) = {Harmony?} - #EAST {ie. determined as such by Pythagorean
redaction method using the Greco-Roman magic square as frame of reference}

And just like the Hebrew final form letters these start at the
chronological plane as the 4th - Nature amended in it Nature:





<http://www.grapple369.com/images/YinYangHeirarchy.gif>

[IMAGE: NATURE’S METHODOLOGY AS PROCESS OF THE GREEK NOTION OF PHUSIS:
growth (by germination or expansion), that is, (by implication) natural
production (lineal descent); by extension a genus or sort; figuratively
native disposition, constitution or usage:—([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]) AS
NOT ASSOCIATED TO ANY GOD]

THUS AS BINOMIAL HEXAGRAM (64 bit) ENCAPSULATION A LOGICAL CONTRADICTION OF
ITS DEPLOYMENT AS HETEROS {@1 - GENDER {MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE}
CONCEPTION OF #NUMBER:

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
+ 0, H27, H54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal
Law}

SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)
+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )
+ 0, H3, H6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}

THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also refers
to the Sun)
+ H1, H2, H3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

Dialectic or dialectics (Greek: διαλεκτική, dialektikḗ; related to
dialogue), also known as the dialectical method, is at base a discourse
between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject
but wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments. Dialectic
resembles debate, but shorn of subjective elements such as emotional appeal
and the modern pejorative sense of rhetoric. It may be contrasted with the
didactic method where one side of the conversation teaches the other.

Within Hegelianism, dialectic acquires a specialised meaning of a
contradiction of ideas that serves as the determining factor in their
interaction; comprising three stages of development: a thesis, giving rise
to its reaction; an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis;
and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.

Dialectical materialism, built mainly by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,
adapted the Hegelian dialectic into traditional materialism.

Dialectic tends to imply a process of evolution, and so does not naturally
fit within formal logic; see logic and dialectic. This is particularly
marked in Hegelian and even more Marxist dialectic which may rely on the
time-evolution of ideas in the real world; Dialectical logic attempts to
address this.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Hegelian_dialectic>

That if this trinomial HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER a priori as PARADIGM
already has a conception of an INTELLECTUAL TETRAD {#8 - Transformation
Prototype} which as CANON OF SUPREME MYSTERY was associated to a LUNAR
event upon the midnight solstice of 21 December 103 BCE and published in 4
BCE is equivalent to the later implementation of PYTHAGOREAN binomial
HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER as the basis for the Julian calendar and the
subsequent Roman Empire Governance (and that of religionists):

VIRTUE as MIND: {#1 + #2 = #3} is PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West /
Autumn / Metal)

TOOLS as SCIENCE: {#3 + #4 = #7} is SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North /
Winter / Water and which also refers to the Moon)

POSITION as OPINION: {#5 + #6 = #11 as Collegium of Pontiffs from 510 BCE
as AS PONTIFICATED DEIFIED IGNORANCE BEING NARCISSISM} is ANTI-THESIS:
Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood )

TIME as SENSE: {#7 + #8 = #15} is THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South /
Summer / Fire and which also refers to the Sun)

= #36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law +
H9 - System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity)

6x6 = #36 / #111 / #666 {#FIVE AS #CENTRE VALUE TO THE GNOME}

45 5 61
53 37 21
13 69 29

= #111 / #333 {#FIVE}

Whilst it may continue to function as an acceptable METHODOLOGY {ARCH KAI
TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10} with an encapsulated sphere of
operation {

41 1 57
49 33 17
9 65 25 = #99 / #297 {#ONE}

42 2 58
50 34 18
10 66 26 = #102 / #306 {#TWO}

43 3 59
51 35 19
11 67 27 = #105 / #315 {#THREE}

#419 as [#9, #2, #8, #400] = tabach (H2873): {#2 as #19 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH* / *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #THREE: #105 / #315} 1) to slaughter, slay, butcher, kill
ruthlessly; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to slaughter, butcher; 1a2) to slay, kill
ruthlessly (figurative);

44 4 60
52 36 20
12 68 28 = #108 / #324 {#FOUR}

#419 as [#2, #1, #6, #400, #10] = 'avvah (H185): {#0 as #12 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH*/ *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #FOUR: #108 / #324} 1) desire, lust, will (not necessarily
evil);

49 9 65
57 41 25
17 73 33 = #123 / #369 {#NINE} AS IT'S NATURAL PROGRESSION {#1 / #73
SUBSTITUTION}

74 81 76
79 77 75
78 73 80 = #231 - #108 = #123 / #693 - #369 = #324 {#TEN} AS RETURN TO
GRECO-ROMAN MAGIC SQUARE BEING ITSELF

}, it is entirely a specious notion to declare it is the root and causal
basis of the perennialist philosophical tradition.

My objection has always been ROMAN CATHOLICS / FREEMASONRY imposing {#17 /
#33 - #INR / #65 - SOLDIER} a @5 - substituted HETEROS ethic upon our {#390
/ #288 / #419} war dead and usurping the @1 - SOVEREIGNTY of the #391 -
HOMOIOS basis to our Commonwealth’s Governance which is defined as a
PRINCIPLE that is circumscribed {#13 / #21 / #37} by Queen Victoria’s
Letters Patent of 17 September 1900 as the instrumentation of Federation
into a nation.

MY BELIEF THAT THE QUINTESSENTIAL DIALECTIC ISSUE BETWEEN HEGEL AND MARX IS
THEN A QUESTION OF INVENTION AND CARRYING OUT POLITICAL CONSTITUTIONS
INDEPENDENTLY OF RELIGION FOR WHICH A DIALECTIC IS REQUISITE:

Hegel states the hypothesis: “Another and opposite folly which we meet with
in our time is that of pretending to invent and carry out political
constitutions independently of religion. The Catholic confession, although
sharing the Christian name with the Protestant, does not concede to the
State an inherent Justice and Morality, – a concession which in the
Protestant principle is fundamental. This tearing away of the political
morality of the Constitution from its natural connection, is necessary to
the genius of that religion, inasmuch as it does not recognise Justice and
Morality as independent and substantial. But thus excluded from intrinsic
worth, – torn away from their last refuge – the sanctuary of conscience –
the calm retreat where religion has its abode, – the principles and
institutions of political legislation are destitute of a real centre, to
the same decree as they are compelled to remain abstract and indefinite.

Summing up what has been said of the State, we find that we have been led
to call its vital principle, as actuating the individuals who compose it, –
Morality. The State, its laws, its arrangements, constitute the rights of
its members; its natural features, its mountains, air, and waters, are
their country, their fatherland, their outward material property; the
history of this State, their deeds; what their ancestors have produced,
belongs to them and lives in their memory. All is their possession, just as
they are possessed by it; for it constitutes their existence, their being.

Their imagination is occupied with the ideas thus presented, while the
adoption of these laws, and of a fatherland so conditioned is the
expression of their will. It is this matured totality which thus
constitutes one Being, the spirit of one People. To it the individual
members belong; each unit is the Son of his Nation, and at the same time –
in as far as the State to which he belongs is undergoing development – the
Son of his Age. None remains behind it, still less advances beyond it. This
spiritual Being (the Spirit of his Time) is his; he is a representative of
it; it is that in which he originated, and in which he lives.

MY SUGGESTION IS TO UTILISE THE VOLUNTĀTIS / NOLUNTĀTIS NOTION OF WILL as
the DIALECTIC and you'll note that the first line "NOW WAIT A TICK. {#1}"
to our POEM uses the dialectic: #1 - POSITION {#558} which as a GNOMIC
IMPERATIVE instruction set then EQUATES to MALE: #435; FEME: #315 and is
equivalent to the SUM of the #THREE MAGIC SQUARE within the Pythagorean
HETEROS schematic:

43 3 59
51 35 19
11 67 27 = #105 / #315 {#THREE}

#419 as [#9, #2, #8, #400] = tabach (H2873): {#2 as #19 *INTERFERENCE*
*MAPPED* *TO* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH* / *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*
*PROTOTYPE* #THREE: #105 / #315} 1) to slaughter, slay, butcher, kill
ruthlessly; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to slaughter, butcher; 1a2) to slay, kill
ruthlessly (figurative);

And you ought to note that we now have a technical capability to further
redefine the granularity of our hypothetical proposition: 'AUTONOMOUS
HYPOTHETICAL FLUIDITY THEORY' which was articulated some months ago. And
that is the capability of reducing each conceptual word of our functional
dialectic by which one can readily cognize a poem or propose into its own
sub-dialectic semantical stratum and obtain thereby the GNOMIC IMPERATIVE
instruction set.

For example our first dialectic element is:

#1 = Position {#558}

And if written thusly:

[P, o, s, i, t, i, o, n]

Then is numerically as gematria equivalent to:

[70, 60, 100, 9, 200, 9, 60, 50] = #558

But as a GNOMIC IMPERATIVE instruction set it is expressed as:

Event: POSITION@{
#1: Sup: 70; Ego: 70,
#2: Sup: 49; Ego: 60,
#3: Sup: 68; Ego: 19,
#4: Sup: 77; Ego: 9,
#5: Sup: 34; Ego: 38,
#6: Sup: 43; Ego: 9,
#7: Sup: 22; Ego: 60,
#8: Sup: 72; Ego: 50,
Male: #435; Feme: #315
}

#315 as [#5, #300, #10] = eti (G2089): {#14 as #315} 1) yet, still; 1a) of
time; 1a1) of a thing which went on formerly, whereas now a different state
of things exists or has begun to exist; 1a2) of a thing which continues at
present; 1a2a) even, now; 1a3) with negatives; 1a3a) no longer, no more;
1b) of degree and increase; 1b1) even, yet; 1b2) besides, more, further;

— AUTONOMOUS HYPOTHETICAL FLUIDITY THEORY —
{APPLIES EQUALLY TO GENDER IDENTITY}

{ie. *SANDGLASS* AND WHY AUSTRALIA'S PARLIAMENT USES IT WHEN THERE'S A
DIVISION IN THE HOUSE}

#1 = Position {#558} as MENTALISM [VIRTUE]: #1 - Will, free will, choice /
Remember the Sabbath Day
#2 = Poise {#244} / Pause {#476} as CORRESPONDENCE [TOOL]: #2 - desire,
inclination / Honour Parents
#3 = Purpose {#695} as VIBRATION [POSITION]: #3 - disposition towards
(something or someone) / Do Not Kill
#4 = Process {#428} as POLARITY [TIME / CENTRE]: #4 - favour, affection /
Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid Heteronomy Against Autonomy)
#5 = Pairing {#236} / DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE) of RHYTHM or
CANON: #5 - last will, testament / Do Not Steal
#6 = Perspicacity {#1260} / BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS) as CAUSE AND
EFFECT [IMPLEMENTATION]: #6 - goal, object, purpose, intention / Do Not
Bear False Witness
#7 = Probability {#1173} / Prosperous {945} / MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA
DENUNTIANS) as as ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE [LIMIT]: #7 - signification,
import / Do Not Covet [LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

#8 = Propriety {#1294} / TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE as PROTOCOL SELECTION: #1
- unwillingness
#9 = Persona {#376} / AUTONOMOUS PARADIGM as MIRRORED AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE
OF EACH OTHER'S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY: #2 - ill will, negative disposition
(toward something) [LATIN definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

YOUTUBE: "Om 108 Times - Music for Yoga & Meditation"

http://youtu.be/a29jzOHwwq0

#10 / #10 = Totality of Nature {#7 - Engendering Nature} / SOVEREIGNTY
#11 / #8 = Transforming Nature {DOUBLE: #4 - Nature Amended in it's Nature
{#7 - Engendering Nature}) / GOVERNMENT & NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS
#12 / #9 = Autonomous Nature / GENERAL POPULACE

— RACHEL {WETHERED SHEEP} MAKES A PLEA —

"NOW WAIT A TICK. {#1}
YOU'RE DRIBBLING. {#2}
WHY THE SHTICK. {#3}
ENDLESS QUIBBLING. {#4}

O'ER THE PUERILE. {#5}
IMPISH LIMP STICK. {#6}
PRISSY LOATH'G BILE. {#7}
CEASELESS BRICK. {#8}

INSANE PUSSY CALLS. {#9}
BY A SENILE PRICK. {#10}
WITHOUT ANY BALLS. {#11}
MY FANNY LICK." {#12}

YOUTUBE: "Netta - TOY - Israel - Official Music Video (Eurovision 2018)”



"And Jesus {He is saved/A saviour; a deliverer} of Nazareth {Sovereign; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} answered and said unto
him, Blessed art thou, Simon {that hears; that obeys} Barjona {son of a
Jona; of a dove}: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but
my Father which is in heaven.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter {a rock or stone}, and upon
this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it.

— ESPRIT DE CORPS: 'FLANDERS SOIL' AS EXEMPLAR TRUE #CENTRE OF WILL
{INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS} —

"IN DEAD OF NIGHT. {MENTALISM: 1 x #41 = #41 as #1 - Will, free will,
choice / VIRTUE: 64 meta descriptor prototypes: Omne Datum Optimum {#1 -
Every perfect gift} (1139 CE) / Remember the Sabbath Day}

#2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature: {DOUBLE: #1 - Nature Contains Nature
{#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature}}

I HEAR THE CLARION. {CORRESPONDENCE: 2 x #41 = #82 as #2 - desire,
inclination: Milites Templi {#2 - Soldiers of the Temple} (1144 CE) /
TOOLS: marriage / Honour Parents}

#393 as [#8, #90, #90, #200, #5] = chatsotserah (H2689): {#2 as #399} 1)
trumpet, clarion;

#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature: {DOUBLE: #2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature
{#5 - Act of Nature}}

CALL AWAKE FOR WAR. {VIBRATION: 3 x #41 = #123 as #3 - disposition towards
(something or someone): Militia Dei {#3 - Soldiers of God} (1145 CE) /
POSITION: Soldier / Do Not Kill}

#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature / #1 - Nature Contains Nature: {DOUBLE:
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature {#6 - Form of Nature}}

STEADFAST MIGHT. {POLARITY: 4 x #41 = #164 as #4 - favour, affection:
Pastoralis Praeeminentiae {#4 - Pastoral Pre-eminence to monarchs} (1307
CE) / TIME: #CENTRE and #INR / Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid Heteronomy
Against Autonomy)} [John 5:39-47 (KJV)]

#11 / #8 - Transforming Nature: {DOUBLE: #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature
{#7 - Engendering Nature}}

MARCHING TO SION. {RHYTHM: 5 x #41 = #205 as #5 - last will, testament:
Faciens misericordiam {#5 - Granting forgiveness} (1308 CE) / CANON: RHYTHM
& HARMONY / Do Not Steal} / DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE),

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting, Delay, Attending,
Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back / INNER: #11 - Value and
Function of Non-Existence; I-Ching: H8 - Closeness, Seeking Unity,
Grouping, Holding together, Alliance; Tetra: 33 - Closeness}

V - The Governor General may on Our behalf exercise all powers under the
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900, or otherwise in respect
of the summoning, proroguing, or dissolving the Parliament of Our said
Commonwealth.

POLICE AS #123 - *A* *MEMBER* *OF* *A* *GUILD*, *ORDER*, *CLASS* OR #65 -
SOLDIERS IN THE GARDEN: “Then Simon {that hears; that obeys} Peter {a rock
or stone as euphemism for testicles as opposed to phallus of #CENTRE}
having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off
his right ear {#237 - *USE* *OF* *FORCE* / #277 - *RIGHT* *TO* *PLACE* *A*
*TEST*}. The servant's name was Malchus {my king, kingdom, or counsellor}.”
[John 18:10 (KJV)]

AGAINST THIS WHORE. {CAUSE AND EFFECT: 6 x #41 = #246 as #6 - goal, object,
purpose, intention: Ad providam {#6 - To Foresee / For Providence} (1312
CE) / IMPLEMENTATION: HETEROS (binomial / bifurcated) THEORY OF NUMBER / Do
Not Bear False Witness} / BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS),

#20 / #8 - Transforming Nature {DOUBLE: #6 - Form of Nature {#9 -
Autonomous Nature} [#505 / #1 - Nature Contains Nature]

IMPLEMENTATION: {GRAVITAS: ASSISTING (#RESH to #TAU)} / DEFINE THE @1
SOVEREIGN PRINCIPLE CHARACTERISTIC HERE

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#19 - Argument for Ethical Anarchism, Returning to Simplicity; I-Ching: H57
- Compliance, Gentle Penetration/Wind, Ground, Calculations; Tetra: 58 -
Gathering In / INNER: #13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting,
Delay, Attending, Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back}

VIII - And We do hereby REQUIRE and COMMAND ALL OUR OFFICERS AND MINISTERS,
CIVIL AND MILITARY, AND ALL OTHER THE INHABITANTS of Our said Commonwealth
TO BE OBEDIENT, AIDING, AND ASSISTING unto Our said Governor General, or,
in the event of his death, INCAPACITY, or absence, to such person or
persons as may, FROM TIME TO TIME, under the PROVISIONS OF THESE OUR
LETTERS PATENT, ADMINISTER THE GOVERNMENT of Our said Commonwealth.

ARREST THE BLIGHT." {ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE: 7 x #41 = #287 as #7 -
signification, import: Vox in excelso {#7 - The voice on high} (1312 CE) /
LIMIT: #INR AS TERNIO ANAGRAM / Do Not Covet} MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA
DENUNTIANS). [LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

7 x #41 = #287 as [#1, #50, #1, #3, #20, #1, #10, #1, #200] = anagkaios
(G316): {#9 as #356} 1) necessary; 1a) what one can not do without,
indispensable; 1b) connected by bonds of nature or friendship; 1c) what
ought according to the law of duty be done, what is required by the
circumstances;

#22 / #10 - Totality of Nature {DOUBLE: #7 - Engendering Nature {#10 -
Totality of Nature}} [#870 / #6 - Form of Nature]

SUPER (MALE) / EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER:
#60 - Skill Rulership, Maintain One's Place; I-Ching: H15 - Modesty,
Humbling; Tetra: 5 - Keeping Small / INNER: #9 - Inconstancy of
Achievement, Practicing Placidity; I-Ching: H7 - The Army, Leading, Troops;
Tetra: 32 - Legion}

X - And We do further direct and enjoin that these Our Letters Patent shall
be read and proclaimed at such place or places as Our said Governor General
shall think fit within Our said Commonwealth of Australia.

[In witness whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent
Witness Ourself at Westminster the 29th October, 1900: 64th year of Our
reign (Queen Victoria)]



<http://www.grapple369.com/images/DIALECT-FORMULATION.jpg>

[IMAGE: LETTERS PATENT TO THE FEDERATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
OF 1901 Represented by a Theoretical Mathematical Trinomial Noumenon as
Intellectual Property]

8 x #41 = % #328 as #INNER {FEMALE (EGO)} / TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE as
PROTOCOL SELECTION: #1 - unwillingness
9 x #41 = % #369 as #INNER {FEMALE (EGO)} / AUTONOMOUS PARADIGM as MIRRORED
AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE OF EACH OTHER'S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY: #2 - ill will,
negative disposition (toward something) [LATIN definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

<http://www.grapple369.com?idea:{41}&idea:{82}&idea:{123}&idea:{164}&idea:{205}&idea:{246}&idea:{287}&idea:{328}&idea:{369}>

*VOLUNTY* (noun):
[ETYMOLOGY]: coined by Robert Fludd (17 January 1574 – 8 September 1637)
from Latin voluntās f (genitive voluntātis).
- (obsolete) The positive aspect of God, encompassing light, love,
creation, etc.
- *YANG*: From early romanizations of Chinese 陽/阳 (yáng), originally in
reference to the sunny side of areas {*IT* *IS* *NOT* *GEMATRIA*} such as
mountains and dwellings.
- (philosophy) A principle in Chinese and related East Asian philosophies
associated with bright, hot, masculine, etc. elements of the natural world.


*NOLUNTY* (noun):
[ETYMOLOGY]: coined by Robert Fludd (17 January 1574 – 8 September 1637)
from Latin nōluntās f (genitive nōluntātis).
- (obsolete) The negative aspect of God, encompassing darkness, cold,
destruction, etc.
- *YIN*: From early romanizations of Chinese 陰/阴 (yīn), originally used in
reference to shaded areas {*IT* *IS* *NOT* *UMBRA* *AS* *GEMATRIA*
*MORPHOLOGICAL* *SUBSTITUTION*}, as of a mountain or home.
- (philosophy) A principle in Chinese and related East Asian philosophies
associated with dark, cool, female, etc. elements of the natural world.
- Robert Fludd was born at Milgate House, Bearsted and was the son of Sir
Thomas Fludd, a high-ranking governmental official (Queen Elizabeth I’s
treasurer for war in Europe), and Member of Parliament.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [Matthew 16:17-19 (KJV)]

Thus I define a 22 level DIALECTIC FORMULATION which is required for the
human process of RATIOCINATION and that deploys META-PRINCIPLES as
principles of NATURE which apply to the VOLUNTĀTIS / NOLUNTĀTIS NOTION OF
WILL as the simple DIALECTIC (with its complex DOUBLE TWINING traditional
understanding of the HEBREW LETTERS):

#1 - Nature Contains Nature
#2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature
#4 - Nature Amended in its Nature
#5 - Act of Nature
#6 - Form of Nature
#7 - Engendering of Nature
#8 - Transforming Nature
#9 - Autonomous Nature
#10 - Totality of Nature

I ought to add that the binomial HETEROS methodology may continue to
adequately function {ie. with #288 - UMBRA compliance} between SOVEREIGN
STATES {9x9x9 = #729 / #364.5} which conform their governance regime to a
HOMOIOS paradigm.

In the historical sense the mechanism of EQUILIBRIUM which is essential for
OSMOSIS {ie. the process of gradual or unconscious assimilation of ideas,
knowledge, etc} can occur by the protocol notion of HRUMACHIS - #330 - 'The
Holy Spirit of Truth and Justice'.

For yet again notice that the Key Letter of the Change from the First to
the Second Order is Aleph (#1 - vOrange), and the changed letters in the
Third Order are He (#5 - vBronze), Resh (#200 - vPurple), Vau (#6 - vRed),
Mem (#40 - vBlue), Cheth (#8), Yod (#10 - vGreen), Sameck (#60 - vYellow),
so that in all we (the adherents to the Cult of ATEN) have the one Secret
Name: HRUMACHIS - #330 - 'The Holy Spirit of Truth and Justice'." [Frater
Achad, Q.B.L. or The Bride's Reception]

But I would augment this with the Lamed (#30 - vCyan) and Tsade {#80 -
vCoral) as we can determine a reprise point for rational PI as 22 / 7 from
the New Moon / Equinox cycle of Wed 20 March 1996 / #0 = Thu 21 March 1996
as New Moon.

AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE TRANSLATION:
Iran's goal is to eradicate six million Jews. This was claimed by Israel's
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit to Russia this week,
Bloomberg reports.

This week, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, visited Russia
to persuade the country's president, Vladimir Putin, not to stop Israel
from attacking Syria.

THUS IN CONSIDERATION OF THE QUINTESSENTIAL DIALECTIC ISSUE BETWEEN HEGEL
AND MARX AS A QUESTION OF THE INVENTION AND CARRYING OUT POLITICAL
CONSTITUTIONS INDEPENDENTLY OF RELIGION FOR WHICH A HOMOIOS RATHER THAN
HETEROS DIALECTIC OF {22 HEBREW LETTERS OF RATIONAL PI: 22 / 7 -
VOLUNTĀTUS} RATIOCINATION IS PREREQUISITE.

THEREFORE IF VLADIMIR PUTIN WAS TO PROPERLY CONFORM TO MARXIST IDEALISM, HE
WOULD NOT STOP ISRAEL FROM ATTACKING SYRIA.

That was a brief outline to contribute to fostering an Intellectual
discussion.

SEE ALSO: “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ON CAUSE CÉLÈBRE JINGOISTIC BEHAVIOUR AS BEING
BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION BY RACIAL, RELIGIOUS AND PSYCHO-SEXUAL HATRED”

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/419-Slaughter.pdf>

- dolf

Initial Post: 12 May 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTATIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Your money and property are not yours.
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
There is no democracy.
Independence is discouraged.
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
 
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTATIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
D***@teikyopost.edu
2018-05-12 22:34:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
The worldwide influence of German Social Democracy was truly
profound. Its advance, following the 1912 German Federal Election,
was stunted by the outbreak of World War I.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_1912
Fran
2018-05-12 23:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
(snip)
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers,
Jesus wept. Another dimwit who doesn't know the difference between
socialism and fascism.
Byker
2018-05-13 18:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.

Jos Boersema
2018-05-16 17:31:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got
to eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to
do. If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter
of weeks from starvation, as it should be.

Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow
others to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so
is your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel
or monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans
which destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.

Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power
in Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in
Yugoslavia ? You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist
gangsters at the Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets
deployed by them: American presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and
far right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as
so ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order
is outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build
that bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back
by creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such
as Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.

It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything depends
on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident. Communism
is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the control of
the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These mechanisms go back
to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical Empires with their
god King and god Queen at the center of everything, including the markets
(that is a very long time ago, around the eastern medditeranian sea).
This is at least what I have tried to understand of things in the past,
from the historians / archeologists.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-05-16 18:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got
to eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to
do. If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter
of weeks from starvation, as it should be.
Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow
others to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so
is your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel
or monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans
which destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
What countries currently use this 'Market socialism' as it seems to be
a mix between capitalism and socialism.
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power
in Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in
Yugoslavia ? You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist
gangsters at the Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets
deployed by them: American presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and
far right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as
so ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order
is outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build
that bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back
by creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such
as Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.
It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything depends
on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident. Communism
is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the control of
the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These mechanisms go back
to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical Empires with their
god King and god Queen at the center of everything, including the markets
(that is a very long time ago, around the eastern medditeranian sea).
This is at least what I have tried to understand of things in the past,
from the historians / archeologists.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-17 17:20:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got
to eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to
do. If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter
of weeks from starvation, as it should be.
Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow
others to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so
is your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel
or monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans
which destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
What countries currently use this 'Market socialism' as it seems to be
a mix between capitalism and socialism.
None to my knowledge use the system as I proposed it in detail (which
is a lot of detail indeed), as you probably have guessed.

In a loose sense, I have seen on some documentary a story
about middle American Injuns, who still are able to live to a degree
by their own common knowledge (where most Injuns are repressed by
the white man), and thus they allow their own people a portion of free
land if they want to use it. Their rule was that if you do not make use
of your land for 3 years, it returns to the pot, so to say. They have
an interesting system of Governance also, where positions are earned
by people who do many jobs for the common good first. It worked for
them.

I do not know how they handle dictatorial businesses, or cartels
and monopolies, or insane levels of wealth concentration. I suspect
these aspects are unknown in their culture, or at least unknown now,
and therefore they may not need laws, however it would be interesting
to ask them their opinion.

I found a remarkably similar system of economics in the Torah (Jewish
law). It follows the same principles similar on the points of land
ownership, and law against for profit loans, but implements these
principles rather differently. For example in the Torah, people get
their right to land restored in a single common year (the 50th year),
whereas in my system you can retreive your land from a loan quicker
(Chapter 9 of proposed Constitution https://market.socialism.nl/law).
Whereas the Torah has a maximum on land rent fee of the value of the
coming harvests up to the next 50th year ("Jubilee"), in my model
I also found it necessary (prudent) to set a land rent maximum, however
I leave it for the Government to define it.

A few things in a functioning economy are essential. Without doing
those things correctly, you will not have a working system, and you
will have not understood what markets are for. The most important
thing is that natural resources are free to access for all, limited
by the right of others to do the same, and limited not to destroy
from overuse (obviously, some common sense and law will help). Second
would be to prevent the accumulation of infinite wealth, which turns
the market into a centralized dictatorship (planned economy). In
this department it is important to deal with money games such as
loans and the rest of it. Modern western economics laughs at these
important issues, and therefore the economy is always in the news:
it is not working, and spiraling out of control, as usual, and into
war ...

Obviously this is all my opinion. It also depends on how well behaved
people are, and how much they want to use their brain, as to what kind
of a system of society they are able to handle. It depends on what
people want: do they want war or peace, do they want to talk to each
other as adults or vent their frustrations and emotions by shouting
others down, etc. In any case however, I belief it will be a good thing
if there is at least a minority group who gets things right a little
more then most ideologies originating in western culture. It can inspire
a good thing here or there, I hope.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power
in Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in
Yugoslavia ? You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist
gangsters at the Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets
deployed by them: American presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and
far right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as
so ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order
is outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build
that bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back
by creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such
as Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.
It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything depends
on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident. Communism
is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the control of
the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These mechanisms go back
to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical Empires with their
god King and god Queen at the center of everything, including the markets
(that is a very long time ago, around the eastern medditeranian sea).
This is at least what I have tried to understand of things in the past,
from the historians / archeologists.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-05-17 19:43:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got
to eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to
do. If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter
of weeks from starvation, as it should be.
Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow
others to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not
learned through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so
is your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel
or monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans
which destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
What countries currently use this 'Market socialism' as it seems to be
a mix between capitalism and socialism.
None to my knowledge use the system as I proposed it in detail (which
is a lot of detail indeed), as you probably have guessed.
In a loose sense, I have seen on some documentary a story
about middle American Injuns, who still are able to live to a degree
by their own common knowledge (where most Injuns are repressed by
the white man), and thus they allow their own people a portion of free
land if they want to use it. Their rule was that if you do not make use
of your land for 3 years, it returns to the pot, so to say. They have
an interesting system of Governance also, where positions are earned
by people who do many jobs for the common good first. It worked for
them.
I do not know how they handle dictatorial businesses, or cartels
and monopolies, or insane levels of wealth concentration. I suspect
these aspects are unknown in their culture, or at least unknown now,
and therefore they may not need laws, however it would be interesting
to ask them their opinion.
I found a remarkably similar system of economics in the Torah (Jewish
law). It follows the same principles similar on the points of land
ownership, and law against for profit loans, but implements these
principles rather differently. For example in the Torah, people get
their right to land restored in a single common year (the 50th year),
whereas in my system you can retreive your land from a loan quicker
(Chapter 9 of proposed Constitution https://market.socialism.nl/law).
Whereas the Torah has a maximum on land rent fee of the value of the
coming harvests up to the next 50th year ("Jubilee"), in my model
I also found it necessary (prudent) to set a land rent maximum, however
I leave it for the Government to define it.
A few things in a functioning economy are essential. Without doing
those things correctly, you will not have a working system, and you
will have not understood what markets are for. The most important
thing is that natural resources are free to access for all, limited
by the right of others to do the same, and limited not to destroy
from overuse (obviously, some common sense and law will help). Second
would be to prevent the accumulation of infinite wealth, which turns
the market into a centralized dictatorship (planned economy). In
this department it is important to deal with money games such as
loans and the rest of it. Modern western economics laughs at these
it is not working, and spiraling out of control, as usual, and into
war ...
Obviously this is all my opinion. It also depends on how well behaved
people are, and how much they want to use their brain, as to what kind
of a system of society they are able to handle. It depends on what
people want: do they want war or peace, do they want to talk to each
other as adults or vent their frustrations and emotions by shouting
others down, etc. In any case however, I belief it will be a good thing
if there is at least a minority group who gets things right a little
more then most ideologies originating in western culture. It can inspire
a good thing here or there, I hope.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from
you in the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power
in Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in
Yugoslavia ? You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist
gangsters at the Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets
deployed by them: American presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and
far right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and
survive independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as
so ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order
is outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build
that bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of
socialist tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back
by creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such
as Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.
It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything depends
on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident. Communism
is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the control of
the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These mechanisms go back
to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical Empires with their
god King and god Queen at the center of everything, including the markets
(that is a very long time ago, around the eastern medditeranian sea).
This is at least what I have tried to understand of things in the past,
from the historians / archeologists.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-22 16:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.

They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.

I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.

Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.

I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.

Its just a theory, of course. If anyone has a better one, let me know.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-05-22 20:07:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.
They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.
I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." – -Jefferson 1802

“Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.” – John Adams

Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Hillary was just for her liberal elite.
Post by Jos Boersema
Its just a theory, of course. If anyone has a better one, let me know.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-24 13:54:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.
They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.
I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." – -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
Post by MattB
“Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.” – John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'

Who says that Bernie is on the side of a more social society ? He said
it, I guess. I saw him say that he wanted war with Iran (Iran can not
have the atom bomb under any circumstances, which means he has declared
war on Iran and he isn't even elected yet), and he caved in to Hillary
like a good little vote catcher. Good carreer move ? Dog and pony show ?
Lot of money involved. Who really knows Bernie ? I never met him.
Post by MattB
Hillary was just for her liberal elite.
Ok, but who cares about those sock puppets anyway, right ? What matters
is how should we structure society, and then how are we going to get
there. The only politician who won't betray you, is the one with your
knife on its neck. Bernie betrayed his followers, and Trump betrayed his
followers too. Its all the same old same old. Nobody really knows these
politicians, because the voter groups behind them are much too large.
There is no human contact, and this 'caucus' game in America is not
going to fix that, neither is the impeachment law in the USA. Those are
games in the circus, the real ordinary masses have no control over it.
How long does it take a human being to get to know someone ? Weeks ?
Months ? The few who meet a candidate in a caucus, know just about
nothing about the candidate either. It is a show, it is superficial, and
where are you once the candidate is sworn in to TV ? Can you hold them
to account for their betrayel ? No. It is all a game, it has no
substance. It is similar in most countries. We really do not know who
we vote for, we are only supposed to think we do. Then they betray us,
and there is nothing we can do about that, until the damage is already
inflicted upon society in the coming years.

We should organize ourselves in such a way, that we have a proverbial
(of course not physically real) knife on their throat, every single
second of their election term. That can be done by electing politicians
by small enough groups (I propose 50 persons). We can then depose them
at will, for whatever reason, and replace them by a new one. Groups of 50
people are small enough to have that mean something, if at least a people
care. They will care more, the more they are abused by the politicians
(and the ultra-rich whom they serve), and hence there is something of
a self balancing effect there.

How this works from 50 people to a whole Nation is an important problem,
the best possible solution I have tried to work out on my website. Keep
in mind that it will only be as good as the Nation its people are good.
The idea of democracy is more or less that the people get what they
deserve, according to their own wisdom and stupidity. No small clique is
going to foist a hell on the people anymore, for their own gain. If the
people are wise, the Government will be wise, if the people are stupid,
the Government will be stupid.

We can just start doing all these things, so long as the Fascists have
not undermined the freedom of association yet, which they are probably
planning on to do with war as their cover (as usual). That doesn't mean
we have to be as simplistic as the 'occupy wallstreet' crew, rather we
can learn something from their failure. It is not a Revolution or
Sovereign initiative, when you are with a tiny minority. However you can
try to organize a useful group and try to do something constructive and
reasonable, such as writing a periodical, being a political party, and
living out some of these things for ourselves because we think they are
good things, regardless of whether it would eventually win the day
Nationally, or when that day might be.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-05-24 20:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.
They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.
I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." ? -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
I own my property are you saying people should not own property?
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
?Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.? ? John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
?To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.? ? Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
Look at how it was formed, like Venezuela it started out as a promise
of socialism and ended up as tyranny. Most countries that take the
socialist line seem to end up that way and fall apart after they run
out of things to steal.
Post by Jos Boersema
Who says that Bernie is on the side of a more social society ? He said
it, I guess. I saw him say that he wanted war with Iran (Iran can not
have the atom bomb under any circumstances, which means he has declared
war on Iran and he isn't even elected yet), and he caved in to Hillary
like a good little vote catcher. Good carreer move ? Dog and pony show ?
Lot of money involved. Who really knows Bernie ? I never met him.
Post by MattB
Hillary was just for her liberal elite.
Ok, but who cares about those sock puppets anyway, right ? What matters
is how should we structure society, and then how are we going to get
there. The only politician who won't betray you, is the one with your
knife on its neck. Bernie betrayed his followers, and Trump betrayed his
followers too. Its all the same old same old. Nobody really knows these
politicians, because the voter groups behind them are much too large.
There is no human contact, and this 'caucus' game in America is not
going to fix that, neither is the impeachment law in the USA. Those are
games in the circus, the real ordinary masses have no control over it.
How long does it take a human being to get to know someone ? Weeks ?
Months ? The few who meet a candidate in a caucus, know just about
nothing about the candidate either. It is a show, it is superficial, and
where are you once the candidate is sworn in to TV ? Can you hold them
to account for their betrayel ? No. It is all a game, it has no
substance. It is similar in most countries. We really do not know who
we vote for, we are only supposed to think we do. Then they betray us,
and there is nothing we can do about that, until the damage is already
inflicted upon society in the coming years.
We should organize ourselves in such a way, that we have a proverbial
(of course not physically real) knife on their throat, every single
second of their election term. That can be done by electing politicians
by small enough groups (I propose 50 persons). We can then depose them
at will, for whatever reason, and replace them by a new one. Groups of 50
people are small enough to have that mean something, if at least a people
care. They will care more, the more they are abused by the politicians
(and the ultra-rich whom they serve), and hence there is something of
a self balancing effect there.
How this works from 50 people to a whole Nation is an important problem,
the best possible solution I have tried to work out on my website. Keep
in mind that it will only be as good as the Nation its people are good.
The idea of democracy is more or less that the people get what they
deserve, according to their own wisdom and stupidity. No small clique is
going to foist a hell on the people anymore, for their own gain. If the
people are wise, the Government will be wise, if the people are stupid,
the Government will be stupid.
We can just start doing all these things, so long as the Fascists have
not undermined the freedom of association yet, which they are probably
planning on to do with war as their cover (as usual). That doesn't mean
we have to be as simplistic as the 'occupy wallstreet' crew, rather we
can learn something from their failure. It is not a Revolution or
Sovereign initiative, when you are with a tiny minority. However you can
try to organize a useful group and try to do something constructive and
reasonable, such as writing a periodical, being a political party, and
living out some of these things for ourselves because we think they are
good things, regardless of whether it would eventually win the day
Nationally, or when that day might be.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-28 16:40:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.
They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.
I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." ? -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
I own my property are you saying people should not own property?
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).

Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.

To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.

In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
?Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.? ? John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
?To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.? ? Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
Look at how it was formed, like Venezuela it started out as a promise
of socialism and ended up as tyranny. Most countries that take the
socialist line seem to end up that way and fall apart after they run
out of things to steal.
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.

The anger and motivation to do something about the failure that is
Capitalism comes from somewhere, it is not coming out of nowhere. Usually
this 'Socialism' is also a failure, which is why I propose something very
different then a plan-economy or the usual ad-hoc day-to-day flipping
around without much of a strategic or ideological idea, but "being the
good guys."

Venezuela certainly did not what I think they may have wanted to do, and
which I tried to propose to them. They create fake economic processes
with the oil money, which has been diverted from building palaces for
the ultra rich and filling the coffers of gangsters around the world,
to doing social programs for the very poor. Unfortunately those social
programs are not productive. It is not productive to have healthy
young people doing "art" or music on a mass scale with refocussed oil
money. That is just as much wasting money as it was under the Capitalists,
although probably a bit less wastefull since at least it is going to
non-criminals and ordinary citizens, many of whom are deprived. But it
is not a question of morality only, it is also a question of what works
and what will become stable and good. It would have been productive to
reform land ownership, or at least make some start with it, so that
people get their land for free and can become free people. They can then
work and produce for themselves and the market. That is an economic
productive process, upon which you can build a culture. A culture that
also will have music and art, to the degree people wish to buy such
items and services, from their self earned money.

You do realize the intense theft of natural resources that takes place
in Capitalist Venezuela, for the benefit of their Fascistic ultra-rich,
before there was a Revolution there ? At least both sides are to blame.

Do you see the tyranny you describe when you speak about Scandinavia,
or the Netherlands ? That was the topic, remember ? Americans call
Scandivania socialist, then where is the tyranny you are talking about ?
It isn't there, in fact it is one of the more free places on Earth,
where they combine a capitalist system with the most socialist measures
anywhere in the world (FWIK). That way they have a free market (which is
good), they have the failures of Capitalism too (such as markets in
land, in companies probably and many other of the usual vices), and they
curb some of those vices with ad-hoc measures. It is not overall a good
system, or let's say it can be improved and needs to be improved
(looking at it systematically from an economics standpoint), but at
least they do a lot of things better then most countries, *because* they
add more socialism and left wing ideas, *and* because they do not have a
centrally planned economy either (which is the most radical form of
Capitalism, which is Communism: all Capital centralized.)
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-05-28 21:17:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Wall Street?
What do you imply ?
OK When a company is privately owned or owned by a few but not part
of the Stock Market they can make decisions based on a more moral and
personal line, when a company goes public they must place profit for
the stock holders before all.
Good point, that is certainly a vice in the economy. The financiers
seem to gain the upper hand in the end, even able to change the law, so
that their interests are put above all others, by law. I think that
financiers, especially professional ones, represent a parasitic class in
society, who warp the market and have an unpleasant ability to pick
winners and loosers. A company which has maximum profit for them, will
always be their choice.
They often do not even know what goes on in the company. They are a
bit like the American helicopter crews who bombed villages in Vietnam,
which was an extraordinary nightmare, behavior similar to the Nazis. The
Americans are as brutal as the Nazis, but it did not seem so bad because
they where at a distance. The bombs explode behind the moving helicopter.
Many people ignore all the businesses that are destroyed by financiers,
because all of a sudden there is new cut-throat deep pocketed
competition, ready for price wars (and dirty tricks, the money to buy
politicians, etc). An amount of financier money has criminal origins.
What percentage that is, is unknown to me, but it probably is a
devastating amount considering the overall profitability of organized
crime.
I think that financiers also favor dictatorial businesses, over
democratic ones, and that this is one reason we see so few democratic
businesses. It is just easier to make a deal with a business dictator,
to suck the slaves dry. To prevent these problems, I belief that we
should greatly reduce and mostly outlaw for profit (professional)
investing in the economy. That should not in principle hurt normal people,
because if they invest in the economy, they only become parasites on
their own working lives and wages, which pay for the investment profits.
We could probably still allow crowd funding type finance in the economy,
to give genuine upstarts more abilities, while keeping overall finance
capital low.
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." ? -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
I own my property are you saying people should not own property?
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
That sounds to a degree to how the Native Americans at one time lived.
Post by Jos Boersema
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
We would need population control. Though I believe over population is
in part the cause for global warming.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
?Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.? ? John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
?To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.? ? Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
Look at how it was formed, like Venezuela it started out as a promise
of socialism and ended up as tyranny. Most countries that take the
socialist line seem to end up that way and fall apart after they run
out of things to steal.
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.
Will have to disagree with you here you said Capitalist fall apart
quicker, name one socialist country that has lasted as long as the
USA.
Post by Jos Boersema
The anger and motivation to do something about the failure that is
Capitalism comes from somewhere, it is not coming out of nowhere. Usually
this 'Socialism' is also a failure, which is why I propose something very
different then a plan-economy or the usual ad-hoc day-to-day flipping
around without much of a strategic or ideological idea, but "being the
good guys."
In the USA it is coming from liberals that want everything free and
yet the only way to pay for what they want is to talk from those
willing to work.
Post by Jos Boersema
Venezuela certainly did not what I think they may have wanted to do, and
which I tried to propose to them. They create fake economic processes
with the oil money, which has been diverted from building palaces for
the ultra rich and filling the coffers of gangsters around the world,
to doing social programs for the very poor. Unfortunately those social
programs are not productive. It is not productive to have healthy
young people doing "art" or music on a mass scale with refocussed oil
money. That is just as much wasting money as it was under the Capitalists,
although probably a bit less wastefull since at least it is going to
non-criminals and ordinary citizens, many of whom are deprived. But it
is not a question of morality only, it is also a question of what works
and what will become stable and good. It would have been productive to
reform land ownership, or at least make some start with it, so that
people get their land for free and can become free people. They can then
work and produce for themselves and the market. That is an economic
productive process, upon which you can build a culture. A culture that
also will have music and art, to the degree people wish to buy such
items and services, from their self earned money.
People in Venezuela can't even get toilet Paper in a store. Socialist
took over the oil business and output keeps dropping. Pure capitalism
might not work but socialism never has in human history.
Post by Jos Boersema
You do realize the intense theft of natural resources that takes place
in Capitalist Venezuela, for the benefit of their Fascistic ultra-rich,
before there was a Revolution there ? At least both sides are to blame.
Do you see the tyranny you describe when you speak about Scandinavia,
or the Netherlands ?
They are not socialist been there.
They are a mixture of Capitalism and socialism.
Post by Jos Boersema
That was the topic, remember ? Americans call
Scandivania socialist, then where is the tyranny you are talking about ?
You mean the Far right calls them Socialist. The far right lacks
education as much as the liberals lack common sense here.
Post by Jos Boersema
It isn't there, in fact it is one of the more free places on Earth,
where they combine a capitalist system with the most socialist measures
anywhere in the world (FWIK). That way they have a free market (which is
good), they have the failures of Capitalism too (such as markets in
land, in companies probably and many other of the usual vices), and they
curb some of those vices with ad-hoc measures. It is not overall a good
system, or let's say it can be improved and needs to be improved
(looking at it systematically from an economics standpoint), but at
least they do a lot of things better then most countries, *because* they
add more socialism and left wing ideas, *and* because they do not have a
centrally planned economy either (which is the most radical form of
Capitalism, which is Communism: all Capital centralized.)
Can't respond to that.

The USA has to many people that think they are entitled to a free ride
without effort. Liberal colleges teach that and produce people who
think they can offend you but you dare not offend them.

Also sometime look at Berkeley riots and their cause. Liberals no
longer believe in freedom of speech.
Jos Boersema
2018-06-01 15:21:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." ? -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
I own my property are you saying people should not own property?
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
That sounds to a degree to how the Native Americans at one time lived.
That is correct, they know these things, and are still speaking about it.
Unfortunately the white man does not listen.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
We would need population control. Though I believe over population is
in part the cause for global warming.
What do you mean with 'population control' ? If it implies a law
dictating who can have children and how many, in my opinion taht is a
grave infringement on our natural rights, for specious reasons, which is
easy to abuse by the ruling class. Eugenics did not work out well in the
past. My way of population "control" would be peace and prosperity on
Earth, with a decent technological culture, taking advantage of the
proven fact that well ordered and prosperous countries see their
birthrate even drop below the replacement rate, which is what you would
want.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
?Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.? ? John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
?To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.? ? Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
Look at how it was formed, like Venezuela it started out as a promise
of socialism and ended up as tyranny. Most countries that take the
socialist line seem to end up that way and fall apart after they run
out of things to steal.
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.
Will have to disagree with you here you said Capitalist fall apart
quicker, name one socialist country that has lasted as long as the
USA.
The USA itself started as a socialist country, with free land for all.
Corporations where illegal in the USA, until the Rockefellers ruined
that law. USA was quite advanced, enlightened and socialist in the
beginning, certainly compared to feudal Europe. It may not have been
calling itself "socialist" because that name came about later then the
start of USA. USA was quite radical in giving the population the vote
and the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of speech, and other such
measures, including free land. USA started as a (say) social initiative,
in quite a few ways. I belief that this is the reason it lasted so long.

The reason that countries like the Netherlands and Germany are not in
chaos every few decades is because of the larger amount of social law,
keeping populations that work - particularly on the low end of the wage
scale - in better conditions: wealthier, happier, healthier, less prone
to Revolution. Such measures are comparatively low in the USA, which is
why it is now become a Fascist State under Donald "torture works" Trump.

Why is the Netherlands still functioning as an identifyable unit and
culture ? It was likewise an attempt at a more social society, by the
overthrow of Spain and the Catholics in 1566. We can insult our flag all
we want, nobody acres. In Spain you can go to jail for that, or so I was
informed by someone in Spain. Spain had their era under the Fascist
dictator Franco, I don't recall the Netherlands having a domestic tyrant
in power.

Is free land for all part of your "Capitalism" ? It is part of my
"Socialism," and we find it at the root of the USA in the beginning. The
deeper reality seems to be: when a Nation tries to do something a lot
better then before, and really takes some good steps, it can have a
lasting effect over centuries. USA is an example of that, although it is
now extremely corrupted and has confused itself, is remaking itself in a
Fascist image.

(By the way, I wonder how Americans feel that they are being accused of
being evil on the Internet so much. This is what you get for allowing
Trump. It will get worse and can end up causing serious concequences for
trade and wealth in the USA, or worse. All sane people in the world hate
Trump, who is the boss in the USA. That will have some impact. This is
why the USA has created the propaganda for the US audience that "they
hate us for our freedoms". They knew the world would vomit Trump out,
and the USA with it. So they inoculated you with a new propaganda strain
and react back with anger and hatred, rather then with introspection and
correction against your evil ruling class. So the wheel of history turns,
greesed along the "slippery slope" by the masters of lies.)
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
The anger and motivation to do something about the failure that is
Capitalism comes from somewhere, it is not coming out of nowhere. Usually
this 'Socialism' is also a failure, which is why I propose something very
different then a plan-economy or the usual ad-hoc day-to-day flipping
around without much of a strategic or ideological idea, but "being the
good guys."
In the USA it is coming from liberals that want everything free and
yet the only way to pay for what they want is to talk from those
willing to work.
There is a sector on the left who is like that, and who are a problem.
Most on the left think everyone should work and that there should be
some relation to how hard you work and what you earn. Capitalism does
not allow for that suffeciently, except in their propaganda version of
reality. It does allow for that to a degree, but it is not good enough,
for good reason: it allows too many power positions to be abused against
the people who work, such as owning endless amounts of land and
resources, hereditary ownership of vast production semi-slave groups,
corrupt politics, cartels, monopolies and patents warping the market,
etc.

A correct economic process will provide for more earning what you worked
for. In such an economy natural resources are free to work at and given as
a right. A raw piece of Earth is not "getting something for free" that
isn't already yours, a raw piece of Earth is an invitation to get to work.
The Earth itself is a given, it is not a manufactured good, and thus
should not be traded in the economy. It is a simple economics first year
academic mistake to trade the Earth itself, because trade is about human
effort. That lie will cost humanity dearly, and has always cost humanity
dearly. All I am saying is: stop lying for a chance, and get serious
with what our economy and our culture is and should be.

No amount of lying can change the deeper reality, or the concequences of
the lies. These may not eb lies to dumb people, but those who know
their economics ought to know better and I should assume they do, and
for them it is lies they are spreading. Religous people of the Jewish
and Jesus-fraud system bend are also liars, because of what the law of
Moshe Rabbeinu says, which they know full well what it says: all have a
right to their share of the Earth, for free.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Venezuela certainly did not what I think they may have wanted to do, and
which I tried to propose to them. They create fake economic processes
with the oil money, which has been diverted from building palaces for
the ultra rich and filling the coffers of gangsters around the world,
to doing social programs for the very poor. Unfortunately those social
programs are not productive. It is not productive to have healthy
young people doing "art" or music on a mass scale with refocussed oil
money. That is just as much wasting money as it was under the Capitalists,
although probably a bit less wastefull since at least it is going to
non-criminals and ordinary citizens, many of whom are deprived. But it
is not a question of morality only, it is also a question of what works
and what will become stable and good. It would have been productive to
reform land ownership, or at least make some start with it, so that
people get their land for free and can become free people. They can then
work and produce for themselves and the market. That is an economic
productive process, upon which you can build a culture. A culture that
also will have music and art, to the degree people wish to buy such
items and services, from their self earned money.
People in Venezuela can't even get toilet Paper in a store. Socialist
took over the oil business and output keeps dropping. Pure capitalism
might not work but socialism never has in human history.
What socialism ? You are not writing to a propagandized American. I do
not agree with the policy in Venezuela, as written in earlier posts.
Reportedly some Capitalist businesses in Venezuela have stopped
producing toilet paper, so that this can be exploited in the propaganda.
Assuming that is correct, I see it as a sign of incompetence that the
Venezuelan Government cannot get a toilet paper factory in operation -
public, private, or a co-operative - to address the problem.

A major issue in Venezuela seems to be that there are radical socialists
in power on the one hand (whose program is certainly nothing like my
proposed 'market socialism' program, and hence I have no reason to
defend their activities), and on the other there are radical capitalists
who are Fascist mobs driven by the USA and their own greed and obsession
with control. It would not surprise me if the USA is trying to bring
this situation to a civil war.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
You do realize the intense theft of natural resources that takes place
in Capitalist Venezuela, for the benefit of their Fascistic ultra-rich,
before there was a Revolution there ? At least both sides are to blame.
Do you see the tyranny you describe when you speak about Scandinavia,
or the Netherlands ?
They are not socialist been there.
They are a mixture of Capitalism and socialism.
It is a capitalist system core with social laws to lessen the impacts of
a system that cannot ultimately function. It is not a system of a free
market where prices eventually dynamically adjust themselves to
reasonably fair, as an economy should. The most impartant reason is that
soil is traded, secondary reasons are the heavy trade in businesses
themselves and in high capital finance games. To deal with the
situation: the system core should be corrected, and then it will become
easier to deal with the remaining ills.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
That was the topic, remember ? Americans call
Scandivania socialist, then where is the tyranny you are talking about ?
You mean the Far right calls them Socialist. The far right lacks
education as much as the liberals lack common sense here.
Who is a liberal ? Liberals are the right in my country, the
Capitalists. The typical 'liberal' party is VVD, which is strong to the
right: wars, lowering working class protections and incomes, increasing
big business profits, etc.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
It isn't there, in fact it is one of the more free places on Earth,
where they combine a capitalist system with the most socialist measures
anywhere in the world (FWIK). That way they have a free market (which is
good), they have the failures of Capitalism too (such as markets in
land, in companies probably and many other of the usual vices), and they
curb some of those vices with ad-hoc measures. It is not overall a good
system, or let's say it can be improved and needs to be improved
(looking at it systematically from an economics standpoint), but at
least they do a lot of things better then most countries, *because* they
add more socialism and left wing ideas, *and* because they do not have a
centrally planned economy either (which is the most radical form of
Capitalism, which is Communism: all Capital centralized.)
Can't respond to that.
The USA has to many people that think they are entitled to a free ride
without effort. Liberal colleges teach that and produce people who
think they can offend you but you dare not offend them.
Also sometime look at Berkeley riots and their cause. Liberals no
longer believe in freedom of speech.
There is a sector on the radical left, which is payed for by the far
right US ruling class, which is increasingly tyrannical and bizarre.
I see them as a serious problem and attempt to create Divide & Conquer
within the broader left and working class movements / parties.

There are also a lot of people who think they need a free ride, for
example under the banner of 'Basic Income.' Do they realize this plan is
coming straight from the Capitalist top, the big banks, the permanent
enemy of the labor class ? The central banks are reported to write
articles about the idea to not just give freshly minted money to shady
and unknown banking interests to deal with the State Debt implosion
(etc, from 2008), but even give citizens money directly, to stave off an
economic calamity for a little longer. Giving citizens free money
directly is the idea of Basic Income.

In my view, what my attempt at findout out has yielded, is that the
radical left is financed by the radical right of the ruling class, to be
used in certain political games ranging from white washing the NATO
"terror bombing" of Yugoslavia, white washing the Nazi coup in Ukraine,
to causing political demoralization with directionless but highly visible
actions like 'Occupy Wallstreet' tent cities, to the campus riot
escalations you mentioned.

From the other end the ruling class builds up a new Fascist system,
which goes by various names as it is trying to invent itself:
Constitutionalists, then Libertarian then Identitarians, etc. I have
seen footage of a Batallion worth of far right extremists training. In
Donbass these radical right extremist citizens are already in their 4th
year or so, of murdering citizens for their USA Capitalist overlords at
the State department and beyond.

So the game continues, forever round and round it goes, greesed by
money milked from positions of power that should not exist, spun by the
masters of lies, under the cover of a fraudulently "bleeding heart"
mass media. Off to war with the whole lot soon ? It would not surprise
me. That would be standard history on Earth.

Where is the 'real' not astroturfing left, and right, for that matter ?
I do dare say I am a representative of the left in general, and you see
how far I get: nowhere. Usenet, for crying out loud (who cares about
that). So you see that you don't get anywhere with any kind of real
grass roots ideological work, unless the mass media gets in on it, but
they are Capitalist controlled.

That reminds me - sorry to go on about things - that soon on the 6th of
June some video work I did is supposedly going to be shown on Dutch
national TV (!). Maybe that kind of miracle will do something, but I am
not holding my breath on it. It takes a miracle to get through in this
kind of culture, with something that is not sanctioned by organized
crime at the very top. I have seen that before: you can get to a point,
but then you are shut down by the higher ups (see the 'sede - secure
democracy' events at D66 and the United Nations (no less)).

It is all controlled to a large extend, on the left and the right.
They want us at each others throats. A unity around a decent ideal, as I
am proposing (free market + free resources for all and a real democracy
under a reasonable and normal Constitution), is something the ruling
class does not want, because it will cost them their entitlements. It
will cost them their power, it will cost them getting much for little
work. The only way to break through this, is if enough 'normal and real'
people think for themselves and act in useful ways, organize and not
give up. Once we do that, we can have more successes then we hoped
possible, things can end up easier then we feared, but as long as that
does not happen than the chances of any 'real' left or right ideological
movement that is not utterly corrupted by top level organize gangsters
is minimal to zero.

The horror of world war 3 is the next best chance coming up. Propaganda
systems of the enemy might be shut down by the bombing and chaos for long
enough for something real to get through.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
MattB
2018-06-01 23:13:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
[...]
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Free land is the real investment every business can use and build on.
The economy will then grow slower and more secure, based on work and
popularity with the costumers, rather then the shenanigans of many
millions of dollars being pumped into some idea which all of a sudden
causes a great industrial activity to crash into some market, destroying
old grown healthy businesses, etc.
I think the so-called business cycle is also related to this problem.
As the finance capital floods into a market, it acts as a disease,
creating cancerous tumors "businesses". These first destroy an amount
of healthy businesses, by their deep pockets, contacts, etc. Then when
these new fangled 'cancerous' businesses start to fail in many cases
because they where not grown over a longer period with the necessary
skills and secure costumer base, experience, etc, many workers go
unemployed, the spending is not so easy anymore, and then more and more
of these newfangled businesses go under. The finance Capital sees the
problem, and it dries up trying to secure itself, making the problem
worse. Then when all has gone through a purge of a recession or
depression, the natural demand in the markets gives opportunities for
a new wave of cancerous investment. IT then goes up and down infinitely,
perhaps created so on purpose by the big banks, because it acts as a
pump which puts more and more power into their hands. During each bust
phase they can choose which companies they want to save, ruin the
opposition, and during the boom phase they then bring those to
megalomanical sizes, until - so they hope - they will rule the world.
The founders warned us about this
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." ? -Jefferson 1802
They certainly did, but nobody is listening. They also forgot a more
important issue then finance, which in my opinion is land. No land, no
freedom. Americans call their Empire "a free country." Is 'country' free
in the USA ? No, hence it is not a free country. Some parts of the USA
have been free country (for the white man at least), but that is long
gone and forgotten.
I own my property are you saying people should not own property?
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
That sounds to a degree to how the Native Americans at one time lived.
That is correct, they know these things, and are still speaking about it.
Unfortunately the white man does not listen.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
We would need population control. Though I believe over population is
in part the cause for global warming.
What do you mean with 'population control' ? If it implies a law
dictating who can have children and how many, in my opinion taht is a
grave infringement on our natural rights, for specious reasons, which is
easy to abuse by the ruling class. Eugenics did not work out well in the
past. My way of population "control" would be peace and prosperity on
Earth, with a decent technological culture, taking advantage of the
proven fact that well ordered and prosperous countries see their
birthrate even drop below the replacement rate, which is what you would
want.
What if people can't feed themselves? Who will feed them?
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by MattB
?Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility,
prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or
ever will do good.? ? John Adams
I think they erroneously blamed 'banks,' where the bigger and essential
problem is 'the ultra-rich.' Bankers are merely servants to the
ultra-rich. There is a reasonable use for banks, servicing the exchange
of money (though not to coin a fiat money !). Bankers come in sizes.
Small community or farming bankers may not be dangerous at all. Then
there are bankers who deal in the major loot, for criminals and
semi-criminals.
Post by MattB
Yet they also warned us about socialism
'
?To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of
his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who,
or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to
violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee
to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired
by it.? ? Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
There is some truth in that, but it is too superficial. It is assumed
here already that everyone has a free and equal chance in society,
however for htis you at least need your natural right to land restored.
Only then can it become true, that from those who work should not be
stolen to pay for those who refuse to work. The story gets more
convoluted when you have people who want to work, but for whom there
neither is land, nor work, or only work at slavery wages, striking or
even waging Revolution against which is not just a right, it is a duty.
Post by MattB
There must be balance between the two. What I see is we have Trump on
the side of finance and the Bernie types on the side of socialism.
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
Look at how it was formed, like Venezuela it started out as a promise
of socialism and ended up as tyranny. Most countries that take the
socialist line seem to end up that way and fall apart after they run
out of things to steal.
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.
Will have to disagree with you here you said Capitalist fall apart
quicker, name one socialist country that has lasted as long as the
USA.
The USA itself started as a socialist country, with free land for all.
Corporations where illegal in the USA, until the Rockefellers ruined
that law. USA was quite advanced, enlightened and socialist in the
beginning, certainly compared to feudal Europe. It may not have been
calling itself "socialist" because that name came about later then the
start of USA. USA was quite radical in giving the population the vote
and the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of speech, and other such
measures, including free land. USA started as a (say) social initiative,
in quite a few ways. I belief that this is the reason it lasted so long.
The reason that countries like the Netherlands and Germany are not in
chaos every few decades is because of the larger amount of social law,
keeping populations that work - particularly on the low end of the wage
scale - in better conditions: wealthier, happier, healthier, less prone
to Revolution. Such measures are comparatively low in the USA, which is
why it is now become a Fascist State under Donald "torture works" Trump.
Why is the Netherlands still functioning as an identifyable unit and
culture ? It was likewise an attempt at a more social society, by the
overthrow of Spain and the Catholics in 1566. We can insult our flag all
we want, nobody acres. In Spain you can go to jail for that, or so I was
informed by someone in Spain. Spain had their era under the Fascist
dictator Franco, I don't recall the Netherlands having a domestic tyrant
in power.
Is free land for all part of your "Capitalism" ? It is part of my
"Socialism," and we find it at the root of the USA in the beginning. The
deeper reality seems to be: when a Nation tries to do something a lot
better then before, and really takes some good steps, it can have a
lasting effect over centuries. USA is an example of that, although it is
now extremely corrupted and has confused itself, is remaking itself in a
Fascist image.
(By the way, I wonder how Americans feel that they are being accused of
being evil on the Internet so much. This is what you get for allowing
Trump. It will get worse and can end up causing serious concequences for
trade and wealth in the USA, or worse. All sane people in the world hate
Trump, who is the boss in the USA. That will have some impact. This is
why the USA has created the propaganda for the US audience that "they
hate us for our freedoms". They knew the world would vomit Trump out,
and the USA with it. So they inoculated you with a new propaganda strain
and react back with anger and hatred, rather then with introspection and
correction against your evil ruling class. So the wheel of history turns,
greesed along the "slippery slope" by the masters of lies.)
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
The anger and motivation to do something about the failure that is
Capitalism comes from somewhere, it is not coming out of nowhere. Usually
this 'Socialism' is also a failure, which is why I propose something very
different then a plan-economy or the usual ad-hoc day-to-day flipping
around without much of a strategic or ideological idea, but "being the
good guys."
In the USA it is coming from liberals that want everything free and
yet the only way to pay for what they want is to talk from those
willing to work.
There is a sector on the left who is like that, and who are a problem.
Most on the left think everyone should work and that there should be
some relation to how hard you work and what you earn. Capitalism does
not allow for that suffeciently, except in their propaganda version of
reality. It does allow for that to a degree, but it is not good enough,
for good reason: it allows too many power positions to be abused against
the people who work, such as owning endless amounts of land and
resources, hereditary ownership of vast production semi-slave groups,
corrupt politics, cartels, monopolies and patents warping the market,
etc.
A correct economic process will provide for more earning what you worked
for. In such an economy natural resources are free to work at and given as
a right. A raw piece of Earth is not "getting something for free" that
isn't already yours, a raw piece of Earth is an invitation to get to work.
The Earth itself is a given, it is not a manufactured good, and thus
should not be traded in the economy. It is a simple economics first year
academic mistake to trade the Earth itself, because trade is about human
effort. That lie will cost humanity dearly, and has always cost humanity
dearly. All I am saying is: stop lying for a chance, and get serious
with what our economy and our culture is and should be.
No amount of lying can change the deeper reality, or the concequences of
the lies. These may not eb lies to dumb people, but those who know
their economics ought to know better and I should assume they do, and
for them it is lies they are spreading. Religous people of the Jewish
and Jesus-fraud system bend are also liars, because of what the law of
Moshe Rabbeinu says, which they know full well what it says: all have a
right to their share of the Earth, for free.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
Venezuela certainly did not what I think they may have wanted to do, and
which I tried to propose to them. They create fake economic processes
with the oil money, which has been diverted from building palaces for
the ultra rich and filling the coffers of gangsters around the world,
to doing social programs for the very poor. Unfortunately those social
programs are not productive. It is not productive to have healthy
young people doing "art" or music on a mass scale with refocussed oil
money. That is just as much wasting money as it was under the Capitalists,
although probably a bit less wastefull since at least it is going to
non-criminals and ordinary citizens, many of whom are deprived. But it
is not a question of morality only, it is also a question of what works
and what will become stable and good. It would have been productive to
reform land ownership, or at least make some start with it, so that
people get their land for free and can become free people. They can then
work and produce for themselves and the market. That is an economic
productive process, upon which you can build a culture. A culture that
also will have music and art, to the degree people wish to buy such
items and services, from their self earned money.
People in Venezuela can't even get toilet Paper in a store. Socialist
took over the oil business and output keeps dropping. Pure capitalism
might not work but socialism never has in human history.
What socialism ? You are not writing to a propagandized American. I do
not agree with the policy in Venezuela, as written in earlier posts.
Reportedly some Capitalist businesses in Venezuela have stopped
producing toilet paper, so that this can be exploited in the propaganda.
Assuming that is correct, I see it as a sign of incompetence that the
Venezuelan Government cannot get a toilet paper factory in operation -
public, private, or a co-operative - to address the problem.
A major issue in Venezuela seems to be that there are radical socialists
in power on the one hand (whose program is certainly nothing like my
proposed 'market socialism' program, and hence I have no reason to
defend their activities), and on the other there are radical capitalists
who are Fascist mobs driven by the USA and their own greed and obsession
with control. It would not surprise me if the USA is trying to bring
this situation to a civil war.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
You do realize the intense theft of natural resources that takes place
in Capitalist Venezuela, for the benefit of their Fascistic ultra-rich,
before there was a Revolution there ? At least both sides are to blame.
Do you see the tyranny you describe when you speak about Scandinavia,
or the Netherlands ?
They are not socialist been there.
They are a mixture of Capitalism and socialism.
It is a capitalist system core with social laws to lessen the impacts of
a system that cannot ultimately function. It is not a system of a free
market where prices eventually dynamically adjust themselves to
reasonably fair, as an economy should. The most impartant reason is that
soil is traded, secondary reasons are the heavy trade in businesses
themselves and in high capital finance games. To deal with the
situation: the system core should be corrected, and then it will become
easier to deal with the remaining ills.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
That was the topic, remember ? Americans call
Scandivania socialist, then where is the tyranny you are talking about ?
You mean the Far right calls them Socialist. The far right lacks
education as much as the liberals lack common sense here.
Who is a liberal ? Liberals are the right in my country, the
Capitalists. The typical 'liberal' party is VVD, which is strong to the
right: wars, lowering working class protections and incomes, increasing
big business profits, etc.
Post by MattB
Post by Jos Boersema
It isn't there, in fact it is one of the more free places on Earth,
where they combine a capitalist system with the most socialist measures
anywhere in the world (FWIK). That way they have a free market (which is
good), they have the failures of Capitalism too (such as markets in
land, in companies probably and many other of the usual vices), and they
curb some of those vices with ad-hoc measures. It is not overall a good
system, or let's say it can be improved and needs to be improved
(looking at it systematically from an economics standpoint), but at
least they do a lot of things better then most countries, *because* they
add more socialism and left wing ideas, *and* because they do not have a
centrally planned economy either (which is the most radical form of
Capitalism, which is Communism: all Capital centralized.)
Can't respond to that.
The USA has to many people that think they are entitled to a free ride
without effort. Liberal colleges teach that and produce people who
think they can offend you but you dare not offend them.
Also sometime look at Berkeley riots and their cause. Liberals no
longer believe in freedom of speech.
There is a sector on the radical left, which is payed for by the far
right US ruling class, which is increasingly tyrannical and bizarre.
I see them as a serious problem and attempt to create Divide & Conquer
within the broader left and working class movements / parties.
There are also a lot of people who think they need a free ride, for
example under the banner of 'Basic Income.' Do they realize this plan is
coming straight from the Capitalist top, the big banks, the permanent
enemy of the labor class ? The central banks are reported to write
articles about the idea to not just give freshly minted money to shady
and unknown banking interests to deal with the State Debt implosion
(etc, from 2008), but even give citizens money directly, to stave off an
economic calamity for a little longer. Giving citizens free money
directly is the idea of Basic Income.
In my view, what my attempt at findout out has yielded, is that the
radical left is financed by the radical right of the ruling class, to be
used in certain political games ranging from white washing the NATO
"terror bombing" of Yugoslavia, white washing the Nazi coup in Ukraine,
to causing political demoralization with directionless but highly visible
actions like 'Occupy Wallstreet' tent cities, to the campus riot
escalations you mentioned.
From the other end the ruling class builds up a new Fascist system,
Constitutionalists, then Libertarian then Identitarians, etc. I have
seen footage of a Batallion worth of far right extremists training. In
Donbass these radical right extremist citizens are already in their 4th
year or so, of murdering citizens for their USA Capitalist overlords at
the State department and beyond.
So the game continues, forever round and round it goes, greesed by
money milked from positions of power that should not exist, spun by the
masters of lies, under the cover of a fraudulently "bleeding heart"
mass media. Off to war with the whole lot soon ? It would not surprise
me. That would be standard history on Earth.
Where is the 'real' not astroturfing left, and right, for that matter ?
I do dare say I am a representative of the left in general, and you see
how far I get: nowhere. Usenet, for crying out loud (who cares about
that). So you see that you don't get anywhere with any kind of real
grass roots ideological work, unless the mass media gets in on it, but
they are Capitalist controlled.
That reminds me - sorry to go on about things - that soon on the 6th of
June some video work I did is supposedly going to be shown on Dutch
national TV (!). Maybe that kind of miracle will do something, but I am
not holding my breath on it. It takes a miracle to get through in this
kind of culture, with something that is not sanctioned by organized
crime at the very top. I have seen that before: you can get to a point,
but then you are shut down by the higher ups (see the 'sede - secure
democracy' events at D66 and the United Nations (no less)).
It is all controlled to a large extend, on the left and the right.
They want us at each others throats. A unity around a decent ideal, as I
am proposing (free market + free resources for all and a real democracy
under a reasonable and normal Constitution), is something the ruling
class does not want, because it will cost them their entitlements. It
will cost them their power, it will cost them getting much for little
work. The only way to break through this, is if enough 'normal and real'
people think for themselves and act in useful ways, organize and not
give up. Once we do that, we can have more successes then we hoped
possible, things can end up easier then we feared, but as long as that
does not happen than the chances of any 'real' left or right ideological
movement that is not utterly corrupted by top level organize gangsters
is minimal to zero.
The horror of world war 3 is the next best chance coming up. Propaganda
systems of the enemy might be shut down by the bombing and chaos for long
enough for something real to get through.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-06-02 00:03:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
A major issue in Venezuela seems to be that there are radical socialists
in power on the one hand (whose program is certainly nothing like my
proposed 'market socialism' program, and hence I have no reason to
defend their activities), and on the other there are radical capitalists
who are Fascist mobs driven by the USA and their own greed and obsession
with control.
You're delusional. The current problem in Venezuela is the same problem that arises wherever any regime attempts to impose madcap Marxist economic theory.
There is no problem with Capitalism in Venezuela. There is a problem with radical socialism.
Post by Jos Boersema
It is a capitalist system core with social laws to lessen the impacts of
a system that cannot ultimately function. I
Even more delusional. *EVERY* single radical socialist experiment has delivered economic failure and human rights abuses.
Capitalist societies, on the other hand, have proven Marx wrong, over and over again. They don't just *function*, they function well, they deliver wealth and protect citizens' rights and freedoms.
Capitalist societies progress, socialist societies have always regressed to tyranny.
Fran
2018-05-28 22:56:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 29/05/2018 2:40 AM, Jos Boersema wrote:

A most interesting post. Thank you Joe.
Post by Jos Boersema
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
That para makes me think of of the allotment gardens of the UK owned by
Councils but used by those who apply and are allocated one.
Post by Jos Boersema
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.
The anger and motivation to do something about the failure that is
Capitalism comes from somewhere, it is not coming out of nowhere. Usually
this 'Socialism' is also a failure, which is why I propose something very
different then a plan-economy or the usual ad-hoc day-to-day flipping
around without much of a strategic or ideological idea, but "being the
good guys."
Venezuela certainly did not what I think they may have wanted to do, and
which I tried to propose to them. They create fake economic processes
with the oil money, which has been diverted from building palaces for
the ultra rich and filling the coffers of gangsters around the world,
to doing social programs for the very poor. Unfortunately those social
programs are not productive. It is not productive to have healthy
young people doing "art" or music on a mass scale with refocussed oil
money. That is just as much wasting money as it was under the Capitalists,
although probably a bit less wastefull since at least it is going to
non-criminals and ordinary citizens, many of whom are deprived. But it
is not a question of morality only, it is also a question of what works
and what will become stable and good. It would have been productive to
reform land ownership, or at least make some start with it, so that
people get their land for free and can become free people. They can then
work and produce for themselves and the market. That is an economic
productive process, upon which you can build a culture. A culture that
also will have music and art, to the degree people wish to buy such
items and services, from their self earned money.
You do realize the intense theft of natural resources that takes place
in Capitalist Venezuela, for the benefit of their Fascistic ultra-rich,
before there was a Revolution there ? At least both sides are to blame.
Do you see the tyranny you describe when you speak about Scandinavia,
or the Netherlands ? That was the topic, remember ? Americans call
Scandivania socialist, then where is the tyranny you are talking about ?
It isn't there, in fact it is one of the more free places on Earth,
where they combine a capitalist system with the most socialist measures
anywhere in the world (FWIK). That way they have a free market (which is
good), they have the failures of Capitalism too (such as markets in
land, in companies probably and many other of the usual vices), and they
curb some of those vices with ad-hoc measures. It is not overall a good
system, or let's say it can be improved and needs to be improved
(looking at it systematically from an economics standpoint), but at
least they do a lot of things better then most countries, *because* they
add more socialism and left wing ideas, *and* because they do not have a
centrally planned economy either (which is the most radical form of
Capitalism, which is Communism: all Capital centralized.)
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-29 02:10:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fran
Post by Jos Boersema
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
That para makes me think of of the allotment gardens of the UK owned by
Councils but used by those who apply and are allocated one.
Gosh, it's almost as if a Democracy can absorb good ideas and implement new and different policies, without the need for any revolution nor gulags for those who propose change....

We have allotments in Australia too.
https://foragersyear.wordpress.com/2012/09/22/community-gardens-and-allotments-in-australian-cities-the-time-has-come/

https://communitygarden.org.au/acfcgn-directory/

Meanwhile, in Communist countries, the land is all stolen by the Party and rendered non-productive.
Part of the non-productivity of the Party-stolen land is caused by each commune's employees stealing the produce to sell on the black markets out of desperation caused by their completely insufficient state-decreed income.

Also, the Party creates demand on the black market by way of the market failure its communist policies engineer.

In Communist countries, this goes all the way to the top - hospitals don't receive the supplies they need to provide care, and the supplies they do receive are frequently diverted by the hospital employees to sell on the black market because their incomes are low and the state fails to pay them on time.
Jos Boersema
2018-06-01 15:28:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fran
A most interesting post. Thank you Joe.
Thank you !
Post by Fran
Post by Jos Boersema
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
That para makes me think of of the allotment gardens of the UK owned by
Councils but used by those who apply and are allocated one.
We have allotments in the Netherlands as well. I have a 100 square meter
plot, which is a joy. In this supposed "free market," I may however not
sell what I produce. So much for the lying propaganda that we are a free
trade country. I once sold 4 kg of beetroots for 4 euros to an
ecological shop in my city. I have returned the 4 euros to the coffers
of the allotment garden, because of these common laws.

I understand their reasoning: in their minds the markets are a fair
mechanism to acquire land, and thus you should buy it first. Otherwise
it would be false competition on State costs against the farmer
community. However - in my view - the Dutch population is denying everyone
their right to free natural resources (with which I do not imply a zero
taxation rate to be a citizen in the Netherlands !), by which both the
farming community is denied a functioning economic process based on in
part their own land right, augmented by land rental markets which are
dynamic year on year and similar to all farmers, and by which simple
citizens like myself are denied a chance in the markets, however minimal
/ specialized, etc.

25 x 25 meter or so, is a big amount of land to grow a garden on, I would
not dare tackle it at the moment. Allotment gardens are a good step in
the process of free land for all. Given the system as it is now, it is a
generous creation. If one views the systems as needing a fundamental
chance on the issue of productive land ownership, it is too restrictive
and hampers the operation of the market and the necessary freedoms for
people to live and the nation to thrive as a whole.
Post by Fran
Post by Jos Boersema
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Fran
2018-06-02 04:45:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Fran
A most interesting post. Thank you Joe.
Thank you !
Post by Fran
Post by Jos Boersema
No I did not say people should not own property, on the contrary.
I say everyone needs their individual right to enter nature and work
restored (from what it is naturally) and expanded upon in law (to
augment the natural right, with an organized culture and law).
Houses are in my opinion something else, because the house is a product
of effort, and thus fit to be traded in the market. As it is, a house
cannot be divorced from the ground upon which it stands, which therefore
is indirectly included in the sale.
To give you an idea of what this means: in the densely populated
Netherlands, every person has a right to something like 25 x 25 meter
of fertile ground, depending on how it is computed. Additional free
space in industry parks should be available. Everyone should
have that as a right. From there it can be rented out for whom does
not want to use it themselves. There can also be a swap trade market,
although there should also be a sizeable free buffer of land parcels
so that the system easily adapts to people moving around, just wanting
different land, so that can be detected what land is likely undervalued
by the land distribution system, and such issues, including population
growth.
That para makes me think of of the allotment gardens of the UK owned by
Councils but used by those who apply and are allocated one.
We have allotments in the Netherlands as well.
We too have such things even here in Australia in some places. I have
friends who use a community plot even though they own a farm of many
hundreds of hectares. They have the plot as a way of supporting the
local community. I don't have one as I have enough trouble keeping my
own garden under control.

I have a 100 square meter
Post by Jos Boersema
plot, which is a joy. In this supposed "free market," I may however not
sell what I produce. So much for the lying propaganda that we are a free
trade country. I once sold 4 kg of beetroots for 4 euros to an
ecological shop in my city. I have returned the 4 euros to the coffers
of the allotment garden, because of these common laws.
A positive thing to do.
Post by Jos Boersema
I understand their reasoning: in their minds the markets are a fair
mechanism to acquire land, and thus you should buy it first. Otherwise
it would be false competition on State costs against the farmer
community. However - in my view - the Dutch population is denying everyone
their right to free natural resources (with which I do not imply a zero
taxation rate to be a citizen in the Netherlands !), by which both the
farming community is denied a functioning economic process based on in
part their own land right, augmented by land rental markets which are
dynamic year on year and similar to all farmers, and by which simple
citizens like myself are denied a chance in the markets, however minimal
/ specialized, etc.
25 x 25 meter or so, is a big amount of land to grow a garden on, I would
not dare tackle it at the moment.
:-)) It is big plot if it's under intensive hand cultivation by a single
individual.

Allotment gardens are a good step in
Post by Jos Boersema
the process of free land for all. Given the system as it is now, it is a
generous creation. If one views the systems as needing a fundamental
chance on the issue of productive land ownership, it is too restrictive
and hampers the operation of the market and the necessary freedoms for
people to live and the nation to thrive as a whole.
Post by Fran
Post by Jos Boersema
In my opinion, this is the choice between a peaceful prosperous human
culture, or one that will invariable go to hell, and one day will
never return. I hope you will think about this carefully, thank you.
Most people do not.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-29 02:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Capitalist countries also fall apart when they run out of things to
steal, which happens quicker the more extreme they are in their
'free market' Capitalism (such as the USA, which is very radical, and is
now collapsed politically under Trump, and is at the Imperial level run
by organized crime, and has been so for decades at least). Many radical
Capitalist hell holes collapse into war, others in Revolution, some end
up under the banner of 'Socialism' after such a Revolution.
Free market capitalism isn't just universally successful, it is a model embraced by the post-communist world in China, Vietnam and now even North Korea.

The problem with marxists is this:
They believe wealth is a universal and static quantity.
They further believe that this static quantity should be arbitrarily assigned to people, regardless of industry, motivation or merit.

This approach has proven to be a failure, over and over again.
Wealth is *not* a static quantity.
Wealth is generated where resources are free to be exploited and traded.
Wealth diminishes when marxist theory is put into place that removes the ability to exploit and trade resources.

Hence you have Western Europe, where after a couple of centuries of free markets you have a population where even the poor are wealthy; and you have each and every failed effort with communism: minimal productivity, desperate poverty, lack of goods, food queues, and starvation.
Ördög
2018-05-24 21:43:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
It was written by Jos Boersema:

/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
In the USA anyone who isn't willing 100% committed to further the
interest of monopole-capitalism and far right conservatism is labelled as
a socialist/communist, not even in the sense of the underlying ideologies
these words represent, but as intended verbal abuse. It is meant as
something worse than calling someone a matricidal maniac.

In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
Post by Jos Boersema
Who says that Bernie is on the side of a more social society ? He said
it, I guess. I saw him say that he wanted war with Iran (Iran can not
have the atom bomb under any circumstances, which means he has declared
war on Iran and he isn't even elected yet), and he caved in to Hillary
like a good little vote catcher. Good carreer move ? Dog and pony show ?
Lot of money involved. Who really knows Bernie ? I never met him.
Given the nature of the political culture in the USA even if Bernie had
turned out to be a saint and was actually elected as POTUS the likelihood
of him successfully legislating anything really social is near absolute
zero.

As much as I hate the idea of "revolutions" given the social chaos and
excessive bloody violence hurting mostly the innocent I see no chance for
implementing anything progressive in the USA without an actual
revolution. Their oligarchs won't give up their strangle hold on power
over that country without putting up massive resistance.
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what the
majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.

/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
We can just start doing all these things, so long as the Fascists have
not undermined the freedom of association yet, which they are probably
planning on to do with war as their cover (as usual). That doesn't mean
we have to be as simplistic as the 'occupy wallstreet' crew, rather we
can learn something from their failure. It is not a Revolution or
Sovereign initiative, when you are with a tiny minority. However you can
try to organize a useful group and try to do something constructive and
reasonable, such as writing a periodical, being a political party, and
living out some of these things for ourselves because we think they are
good things, regardless of whether it would eventually win the day
Nationally, or when that day might be.
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Pelican
2018-05-24 22:27:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
As much as I hate the idea of "revolutions" given the social chaos and
excessive bloody violence hurting mostly the innocent I see no chance for
implementing anything progressive in the USA without an actual
revolution.
It might improve your view if you took the trouble to read more US
history. For all its problems, the US is still one of the world's great
democracies, and it changed in many ways since European arrived.
Post by Ördög
Their oligarchs won't give up their strangle hold on power
over that country without putting up massive resistance.
The US is still a democracy. The appoint their executive, their
legislature and their judiciary in ways that are breath-taking for other
democracies, and is somewhat in advance of non-democracies. Have a look.

Our executive in Australia is fundamentally an inbred, hereditary
monarchy of another country far away. How stupid is that? In the real
world, it's very different, but it's still a stupid arrangement, even if
a goodly number of Australians watch a wedding on tv with delight.
Post by Ördög
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what the
majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.
Thereby justifying your demand for the revolution you decry. Of course,
you have no other path to suggest. Standard binary bullshit - either
more of the same, or revolution. You are a political bankrupt.
Ördög
2018-05-29 04:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Post by Pelican
Post by Ördög
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what
the majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.
Thereby justifying your demand for the revolution you decry. Of course,
you have no other path to suggest. Standard binary bullshit - either
more of the same, or revolution. You are a political bankrupt.
If you accuse Ördög of that, then you are implying you have an interest
in what another path should be, or if not you are just writing for
effect, correct ?
I know the poster Pelican from its posting activities in aus.politics,
which forced me to killfile him quite a while back.
I strongly suspect that he was mostly writing, as you've well spotted,
for 'effect'.

As far as the US goes it is always paraded by far right and/or
libertarian sycophants as a greatest democracy on the planet ever, even
though and specially now under Trump nothing farther could be from the
truth.

The reason why I say this is because there is a huge difference between
pretending to be something and actually be something.
Just a quick look at the shady election win of Bush Junior, or the Trump
election fiasco proves that point so very well. The proper democratic
processes failed big time. America is a plutocracy ruled by the financial
privileged at their pleasure, for their pleasure using the trappings of
democratic institutions to hide the truth behind a propaganda smoke
screen.

Unfortunately I am hugely pessimistic about the chance for a beneficial
change.
Not unless some unexpected event knocks down the ruling class.
It might not even be a revolution, as for instance a series of dramatic
natural disasters (E.g. a climate collapse due to 'global warming')
accompanied by large scale economic upheaval could have the very same
effect.
And, of course, a very destructive planet wide war could also disrupt the
grand US plutocratic hegemony.
But most likely theses kinds of events might just worsen the political
outcome as the USA could degenerate into a chaotic outright fascism ruled
by gun maniac local mobs and warlords fighting for power, the remaining
wealth and overall dominance.
I offer the following (I shall try to be brief, but it is hard with
something this complex (sigh.))
The goal should be a free market economy with a State under
Constitutional democratic law. A free market implies that all have the
right to productive land for free, and we need to deal with monopolies,
cartels, and other such dangers that close the market from the side of
the ultra-rich and make it into their private plan-economy.
As the method I suggest this, in steps of increasing intensity, and
applies as necessary (especially from number 5) dealing with counter
pressure.
- Propaganda - Buying the kind of services / products from sources in
line with this
ideology, which is fair-trade and the like (it is shocking how few
people engage in fair trade buying, and by that one could suggest all
these people are politically bankrupt if they pretend to be on the
left)
- Start the kind of democratic companies we should want.
- Start political parties to join in the vote, around said ideology, and
with a very strong internal democracy as suggested for the State.
Start multiple parties because they all corrupt fast.
- Start to form a public good cause which is run by those elected by
groups of 50 persons. Those elected form councils. This is the new
proto-State. It can practice itself with donations and do something
good, whatever that might be. It is a Revolutionary Government to be,
but it merely exists as a common good cause, for stray cats and public
litter, or whatever. It will stay that for as long as not enough
people are in the new system to warrant a claim to Sovereignty.
Now for some defensive methods, to deal with to be expected criminality
- We can set up Militias, which defend everyone their right to freedom
of speech and assembly. We do not defend ourselves, but we defend
everyone and especially those we do not politically or economically
agree with. This way it acts as a dampener on all political violence,
so that issues need to be solved by debate and vote rather then by
violence. Cooperation with existing police, army, etc, should be
viewed as a good thing, because the new system would take over those
functions and organizations of State later, if need be and if the
people in general so wish.
- Such Militia struggle - much of which can be done unarmed - can spiral
out of control due to either mistakes or a tyrannical ruling class,
and become an open front war of liberation against tyranny. At that
point it morphes into something more then a sort of a police force
against all political violence. Now it is a full scale war, and it
should be run as that.
- If that is crushed, we are left with a form of low organized
resistance.
- If that is crushed too, all we can do is hide such ideas for a better
generation to take up the struggle against evil, apathy and stupidity.
This is not a binary system, it is a spectrum. It is designed so that
violence will be minimized. Example: a lot of violence comes from
polirization, until political parties start arming themselves for
defense, and then later the parties can go to war on each other. This is
short circuitted as it where, by setting up a common Militia, divorced
from politics, inviting all kinds of people from many ideologies, to
then act as a defence on whomever is threatened with violence. You put a
buffer into the system, an additional one for when the ordinary police
and courts either cannot handle the pressure anymore, or if the ordinary
police and justice system (army) have become a party that is engaged in
tirannical violence themselves; or more realisticly: where such
organizations have powerful cliques inside them which are de-facto above
the law and which need to be dealt with, and against which the political
struggle is deadly. Think of defending good people their lives, such as
journalists, politicians, and of course the name Falcone comes to mind,
the great hero of Italy. He was poorly defended, if at all. A grave
mistake.
etc. See exhaustive detail on my website market.socialism.nl
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-29 06:45:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
[...]
Post by Pelican
Post by Ördög
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what
the majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.
Thereby justifying your demand for the revolution you decry. Of course,
you have no other path to suggest. Standard binary bullshit - either
more of the same, or revolution. You are a political bankrupt.
If you accuse Ördög of that, then you are implying you have an interest
in what another path should be, or if not you are just writing for
effect, correct ?
I know the poster Pelican from its posting activities in aus.politics,
which forced me to killfile him quite a while back.
Heh, a true-red died-in-the-wool communist - approach to dissenting voices is to suppress them so as to protect the fragile and repeatedly proven wrong ideology from the criticism it cannot stand up to.
Annona Muricata
2018-05-30 21:19:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
After a laxative enema New York Libertarians relieved itself all over the
The proper democratic process has failed.
Correct. To varying degrees in different regions of the world.
Scandinavian countries are currently the most democratic.
Switzerland on the other hand has suffocated itself in their version of
"grass roots democracy". Places like the US or the UK are just
"alternative realities" far as real democracy is concerned.
You also fail to understand libertarian notions. They are definitely not
right wing or left wing.
Not at all!
They are free marketeer greedy bastard egotists with a bent for anarchy
masquerading with the trappings of "limitless liberty" to justify their
anti social stance. Whatever they may think about themselves their
"philosophy" makes them inherently part of the contemporary far right
movements which provides a good home for all sorts of sociopath.

Sorry to sound so harsh but there is no need for gilding the lilies.
A society run by libertarians would amount to an utter anarchic chaos
with the majority of the population collapsing into deep poverty and near
slavery. Something along the lines of foxes running the chicken farm.
--
Resolving your mental constipation ASAP.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-31 01:37:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Annona Muricata
A society run by libertarians would amount to an utter anarchic chaos
with the majority of the population collapsing into deep poverty and near
slavery. Something along the lines of foxes running the chicken farm.
I think the movie, The Postman, paints a pretty good picture of how a libertarian society would operate.
Jos Boersema
2018-06-01 14:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
[...]
Post by Pelican
Post by Ördög
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what
the majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.
Thereby justifying your demand for the revolution you decry. Of course,
you have no other path to suggest. Standard binary bullshit - either
more of the same, or revolution. You are a political bankrupt.
If you accuse Ördög of that, then you are implying you have an interest
in what another path should be, or if not you are just writing for
effect, correct ?
I know the poster Pelican from its posting activities in aus.politics,
which forced me to killfile him quite a while back.
I strongly suspect that he was mostly writing, as you've well spotted,
for 'effect'.
As far as the US goes it is always paraded by far right and/or
libertarian sycophants as a greatest democracy on the planet ever, even
though and specially now under Trump nothing farther could be from the
truth.
The reason why I say this is because there is a huge difference between
pretending to be something and actually be something.
Just a quick look at the shady election win of Bush Junior, or the Trump
election fiasco proves that point so very well. The proper democratic
processes failed big time. America is a plutocracy ruled by the financial
privileged at their pleasure, for their pleasure using the trappings of
democratic institutions to hide the truth behind a propaganda smoke
screen.
Indeed. In my opinion one of the greatest problems is the one few people
seem to take much notice off: it is just too big.

A decent size of the Sovereignty seems to be about 5 million on average,
with smaller down to the size of Island, and larger to the size of
Sweden. In theory it could be a bit larger for the same quality, given
a stricter democracy and a fundamentally properly functioning economic
system (as suggested earlier).
Post by Ördög
Unfortunately I am hugely pessimistic about the chance for a beneficial
change.
Of course; all has already been attemted again, in this phase prior to
World War 3. It is game over, and has been for years. When 9/11 was
swallowed by the ignorant and uninformed, it was game over.

When 2008 was swallowed, the People where with their heads in the
historical toilet with no way out. When the Nazi coup in Ukraine in
2014 was accepted in the west as a fest of democracy and human rights,
the populations in the west had their political and moral throats slit.
They didn't even feel it, because they still do not know what happened,
nor do they care to find out. They are happy because icecream is still
affordable for most.

They gave the populations enough crumbs off the high table to keep them
sweet, while laying the noose around their neck. It is not over however,
I think that through World War 3 there are good and improving chances
to turn the struggle around. That is the opportunity that now has to be
taken, because the populations have refused to do things the easy way.
Post by Ördög
Not unless some unexpected event knocks down the ruling class.
It might not even be a revolution, as for instance a series of dramatic
natural disasters (E.g. a climate collapse due to 'global warming')
accompanied by large scale economic upheaval could have the very same
effect.
I agree, it is more then a theoretical possibility.
Post by Ördög
And, of course, a very destructive planet wide war could also disrupt the
grand US plutocratic hegemony.
In my view they are driving this war, planning it, and expecting to
profit from it, however you are right that it can disrupt them.
Personally I think they are overplaying their hand because of their
arrogance.
Post by Ördög
But most likely theses kinds of events might just worsen the political
outcome as the USA could degenerate into a chaotic outright fascism ruled
by gun maniac local mobs and warlords fighting for power, the remaining
wealth and overall dominance.
Obviously, the question would be what would happen after that phase
bleeds itself out. There is some potential for a Revolution, or if they
almost all die out, the Injuns get their lands back. A variety of Mad
Max type movies have prepared the Americans to act like wild and evil
people once "the grid goes down." There is a good chance they will
do as their have been told, as their behavior on the Internet
seems to suggest.

The ruling class seems to be scared that people will band together for
a righteous cause or two, during a breakdown of society. Hence all the
negativity surrounding that topic, the criminality envisioned, the lack
of a positivly organized citizenry taking back their society. "The
hunger games," "Mad Max," and paranoid "doomsday prepping" with the view
of murdering as many of your fellow citizens rebranded as "zombies."
I guess this is how the ruling class is preparing in their own way, for
the possibility of a collapse from whatever cause. With the citizens at
each others throats, they can come in as the new overlords, the same as
the old ones. Another more worrying possibility is that these cultural
expressions accurately portray the attitude of western peoples, in
particularly the Americans (from where all this emanates).
Post by Ördög
I offer the following (I shall try to be brief, but it is hard with
something this complex (sigh.))
The goal should be a free market economy with a State under
Constitutional democratic law. A free market implies that all have the
right to productive land for free, and we need to deal with monopolies,
cartels, and other such dangers that close the market from the side of
the ultra-rich and make it into their private plan-economy.
As the method I suggest this, in steps of increasing intensity, and
applies as necessary (especially from number 5) dealing with counter
pressure.
- Propaganda - Buying the kind of services / products from sources in
line with this
ideology, which is fair-trade and the like (it is shocking how few
people engage in fair trade buying, and by that one could suggest all
these people are politically bankrupt if they pretend to be on the
left)
- Start the kind of democratic companies we should want.
- Start political parties to join in the vote, around said ideology, and
with a very strong internal democracy as suggested for the State.
Start multiple parties because they all corrupt fast.
- Start to form a public good cause which is run by those elected by
groups of 50 persons. Those elected form councils. This is the new
proto-State. It can practice itself with donations and do something
good, whatever that might be. It is a Revolutionary Government to be,
but it merely exists as a common good cause, for stray cats and public
litter, or whatever. It will stay that for as long as not enough
people are in the new system to warrant a claim to Sovereignty.
Now for some defensive methods, to deal with to be expected criminality
- We can set up Militias, which defend everyone their right to freedom
of speech and assembly. We do not defend ourselves, but we defend
everyone and especially those we do not politically or economically
agree with. This way it acts as a dampener on all political violence,
so that issues need to be solved by debate and vote rather then by
violence. Cooperation with existing police, army, etc, should be
viewed as a good thing, because the new system would take over those
functions and organizations of State later, if need be and if the
people in general so wish.
- Such Militia struggle - much of which can be done unarmed - can spiral
out of control due to either mistakes or a tyrannical ruling class,
and become an open front war of liberation against tyranny. At that
point it morphes into something more then a sort of a police force
against all political violence. Now it is a full scale war, and it
should be run as that.
- If that is crushed, we are left with a form of low organized
resistance.
- If that is crushed too, all we can do is hide such ideas for a better
generation to take up the struggle against evil, apathy and stupidity.
This is not a binary system, it is a spectrum. It is designed so that
violence will be minimized. Example: a lot of violence comes from
polirization, until political parties start arming themselves for
defense, and then later the parties can go to war on each other. This is
short circuitted as it where, by setting up a common Militia, divorced
from politics, inviting all kinds of people from many ideologies, to
then act as a defence on whomever is threatened with violence. You put a
buffer into the system, an additional one for when the ordinary police
and courts either cannot handle the pressure anymore, or if the ordinary
police and justice system (army) have become a party that is engaged in
tirannical violence themselves; or more realisticly: where such
organizations have powerful cliques inside them which are de-facto above
the law and which need to be dealt with, and against which the political
struggle is deadly. Think of defending good people their lives, such as
journalists, politicians, and of course the name Falcone comes to mind,
the great hero of Italy. He was poorly defended, if at all. A grave
mistake.
etc. See exhaustive detail on my website market.socialism.nl
What is your opinion on the above ? We can tire ourselves with our
expectations, however we should only do so in order to plot our course
and set ourselves to it, right ?
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Ördög
2018-06-03 03:09:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
I offer the following (I shall try to be brief, but it is hard with
something this complex (sigh.))
The goal should be a free market economy with a State under
Constitutional democratic law. A free market implies that all have the
right to productive land for free, and we need to deal with
monopolies, cartels, and other such dangers that close the market from
the side of the ultra-rich and make it into their private
plan-economy.
Well, what makes you think that there is enough land for all to go
around. After all land is not always land worth using for anything.
And how do you envisage land usage for example in New York City, London
or Hong Kong given the population numbers?

And how do you envisage dealing with the problems of overproduction vs
actual demand, likely waste and occasional shortages in our complex
societies should free marketeering be retained? Markets aren't all that
efficient at self regulation.
As I have indicated to you before I firmly believe that free markets are
mostly governed by the rule of entropy. We live on one small planet but
our way of live demands the resources of at least three or more.
Post by Jos Boersema
As the method I suggest this, in steps of increasing intensity, and
applies as necessary (especially from number 5) dealing with counter
pressure.
- Propaganda - Buying the kind of services / products from sources in
line with this
ideology, which is fair-trade and the like (it is shocking how few
people engage in fair trade buying, and by that one could suggest
all these people are politically bankrupt if they pretend to be on
the left)
- Start the kind of democratic companies we should want.
- Start political parties to join in the vote, around said ideology, and
with a very strong internal democracy as suggested for the State.
Start multiple parties because they all corrupt fast.
- Start to form a public good cause which is run by those elected by
groups of 50 persons. Those elected form councils. This is the new
proto-State. It can practice itself with donations and do something
good, whatever that might be. It is a Revolutionary Government to
be, but it merely exists as a common good cause, for stray cats and
public litter, or whatever. It will stay that for as long as not
enough people are in the new system to warrant a claim to
Sovereignty.
Now for some defensive methods, to deal with to be expected
- We can set up Militias, which defend everyone their right to freedom
of speech and assembly. We do not defend ourselves, but we defend
everyone and especially those we do not politically or economically
agree with. This way it acts as a dampener on all political
violence, so that issues need to be solved by debate and vote rather
then by violence. Cooperation with existing police, army, etc,
should be viewed as a good thing, because the new system would take
over those functions and organizations of State later, if need be
and if the people in general so wish.
- Such Militia struggle - much of which can be done unarmed - can spiral
out of control due to either mistakes or a tyrannical ruling class,
and become an open front war of liberation against tyranny. At that
point it morphes into something more then a sort of a police force
against all political violence. Now it is a full scale war, and it
should be run as that.
- If that is crushed, we are left with a form of low organized
resistance.
- If that is crushed too, all we can do is hide such ideas for a better
generation to take up the struggle against evil, apathy and stupidity.
This is not a binary system, it is a spectrum. It is designed so that
violence will be minimized. Example: a lot of violence comes from
polirization, until political parties start arming themselves for
defense, and then later the parties can go to war on each other. This
is short circuitted as it where, by setting up a common Militia,
divorced from politics, inviting all kinds of people from many
ideologies, to then act as a defence on whomever is threatened with
violence. You put a buffer into the system, an additional one for when
the ordinary police and courts either cannot handle the pressure
anymore, or if the ordinary police and justice system (army) have
become a party that is engaged in tirannical violence themselves; or
more realisticly: where such organizations have powerful cliques
inside them which are de-facto above the law and which need to be
dealt with, and against which the political struggle is deadly. Think
of defending good people their lives, such as journalists,
politicians, and of course the name Falcone comes to mind, the great
hero of Italy. He was poorly defended, if at all. A grave mistake.
etc. See exhaustive detail on my website market.socialism.nl
What is your opinion on the above ? We can tire ourselves with our
expectations, however we should only do so in order to plot our course
and set ourselves to it, right ?
Any talk about militias at this point in time is an absolute no-no.
The current establishment has full control over the means of implementing
Orwellian surveillance technologies. If they get too nervous they just
declare their opponents as terrorists and deal with them in the most
brutal fashion possible while lecturing the unruly masses about their
'superior' version of democracy.

I see absolutely no chance for any political change as long as the
current status quo remains.
But I suppose there are some things we can still do even now:

For instance, by making a serious effort towards conserving leftist
ideological concepts for future generations who will get a chance to
implement effective changes to society when the time is right. We should
fight public misinformation propaganda by the ruling class leading to
utter political confusion amongst the average citizens by educating
anyone who is willing listen telling them that there are alternatives to
the way things are done now.
Educating the next generation the right way is of utter most importance.

Yes, we could also join political parties trying to reform them from the
inside, although that is a very hard thing to do given the mindset of
those ambitious personalities who lead political parties.

And we can help undermining the efforts of the political right every
legal way open to us every step along the way. They may rule us now but
we do not have to make that easy for them.
Yes, I am not afraid to be a political pragmatist and will support anyone
in any form who promises to destabilise or bring down any alt-right
government regardless of their flagship ideologies!
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Ördög
2018-06-03 21:24:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Who wants to be oppressed?
Not the people your ilk is terrorising!
The Left is out of power in most regions around the world. That makes the
far right feel free to do anything they assume the un/undereducated and
politically naive masses tolerate. Sooner than later they'll push their
luck too far.
Being out of power for the political Left does provide an opportunity to
unite the population when the right wing oppression becomes too
intolerable for the working and middle classes. Until then keeping a low
profile and working behind the scenes backstabbing and sabotaging the
political right time and time again is the best tactic available.
Exposing the lies and falsehood assertions your ilk spreads into the
public consciousness is or should be an essential part of the Left's
fight against the current system.
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Jos Boersema
2018-06-05 12:23:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
Who wants to be oppressed?
Not the people your ilk is terrorising!
The Left is out of power in most regions around the world.
Because the left messed it up, as usual. I knew they would because they
supported idiocy like Obama, and never address the hard questions about
war, neither the questions of Capitalism. The right was just waiting to
get in with force after that fiasco. The left is weak, chaotic, lacks
focus, can be bought up fairly easily, etc. That is what i intend to
change with the ideological proposal I made, unfortunately I still need
enough men who want to life or die for what is right. I have not yet
found one.
Post by Ördög
That makes the
far right feel free to do anything they assume the un/undereducated and
politically naive masses tolerate. Sooner than later they'll push their
luck too far.
They will go to war and that's that, hysteria and war propaganda will
take over. The revolutionaries (if that still existst) will be send to the
front to die, forced to fight their brother revolutionaries on the other
end, and most probably never will realize they are killing their own.
Post by Ördög
Being out of power for the political Left does provide an opportunity to
unite the population when the right wing oppression becomes too
intolerable for the working and middle classes.
Exactly, but it needs a direction that is functional, something more
then teh usual "we want more lollypops from you bosses, then we will be
your slaves until eternity."
Post by Ördög
Until then keeping a low
profile and working behind the scenes backstabbing and sabotaging the
political right time and time again is the best tactic available.
I doubt it, although it doesn't hurt to try to foil the Fascists to the
degree reasonable and to the degree it does not just throw oil on the
fire, which is what hysterical youth mobs do. A fight is what
invigorates the Fascists, denying them assembly and free speech is just
the right casus belly they would like.

- We can spread to others, or try to explain, how economics works (very
very hard to do ;) lol.
- Short of that, we can engage in fair trade. Support good businesses,
boycot the bad ones.
- We can set up good businesses if possible.
- We can start political parties where possible, on a better program.
- We can organize a proto-Government on a Council Government system.

You will notice these are things that are quite serious and large scale,
however they can still be started in miniscule sizes by a few persons of
good will. All good things start small. The whole end of the middle ages
and modern world with democracy and disagreement with torture and such
activities, has been traced back by J.I.Israel in the master piece 'The
Republic 1477-1806' to an individual called Geert in (IIRC) Deventer
(a small middle-eastern Dutch place), somewhere in the 14th century or
so, starting a movement called the 'modern devotion,' which turned away
from the clergy over the conscience of men and said that the people
should find what is right in themselves (or something like that). It
wasn't even trying to break away from Catholicism, however it was a
reaction to the widespread evil that is Catholicism, a reaction away
from it, which in some ways eventually developed into the Iconoclasm
of 1566, the rebellion against Rome, and the modern era with ideals such
as freedom and rights for all, which is still developing (or perhaps
degenerating and turning into its enemy with Donald - "torture works"
- Trump).
Post by Ördög
Exposing the lies and falsehood assertions your ilk spreads into the
public consciousness is or should be an essential part of the Left's
fight against the current system.
But what program do you have to replace the current system ? I have a
rather detailed program, it could be interesting to compare the two
point by point.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Ördög
2018-06-06 00:49:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Ördög
Post by Ördög
Who wants to be oppressed?
Not the people your ilk is terrorising!
The Left is out of power in most regions around the world.
Because the left messed it up, as usual. I knew they would because they
supported idiocy like Obama,
We will have to agree to disagree.
Obama was a "lame duck" president. But you should ask, really whose fault
was that, before you trash the man. Given the nature of their political
system and the quality of US voting public there was no other outcome
possible.
Obviously Obama has never been part of the real left, nor were the any of
the Democrats. One can only conclude that they are to the left of the US
alt-right, but that is its full extent.
Post by Jos Boersema
and never address the hard questions about
war, neither the questions of Capitalism.
But truly!
Don't confuse the US Democrats with the political left.
Post by Jos Boersema
The right was just waiting to
get in with force after that fiasco. The left is weak, chaotic, lacks
focus, can be bought up fairly easily, etc. That is what i intend to
change with the ideological proposal I made, unfortunately I still need
enough men who want to life or die for what is right. I have not yet
found one.
Maybe because you want to resolve the problems of complexities in our
contemporary of societies by just a thorough "land reform". It does not
take long for people to brush it aside not as a bad idea but a very
incomplete one.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
That makes the
far right feel free to do anything they assume the un/undereducated and
politically naive masses tolerate. Sooner than later they'll push their
luck too far.
They will go to war and that's that, hysteria and war propaganda will
take over. The revolutionaries (if that still existst) will be send to
the front to die, forced to fight their brother revolutionaries on the
other end, and most probably never will realize they are killing their
own.
The realities of contemporary warfare aren't the same as they used to be.
You don't need to send troops to the front any more, you just drop a few
technical nuclear bombs on population centres and then everyone dies!
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Being out of power for the political Left does provide an opportunity
to unite the population when the right wing oppression becomes too
intolerable for the working and middle classes.
Exactly, but it needs a direction that is functional, something more
then teh usual "we want more lollypops from you bosses, then we will be
your slaves until eternity."
At this point you are equating the political Left with the trade unions.
Given the extremely marginalised status of the trade unions (specially in
Anglophone countries) and their virtual non-existence in other parts of
the planet they have lost their political muscles almost completely.
Even in Western Europe trade unions have ceased to be a true political
force.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Until then keeping a low
profile and working behind the scenes backstabbing and sabotaging the
political right time and time again is the best tactic available.
I doubt it, although it doesn't hurt to try to foil the Fascists to the
degree reasonable and to the degree it does not just throw oil on the
fire, which is what hysterical youth mobs do. A fight is what
invigorates the Fascists, denying them assembly and free speech is just
the right casus belly they would like.
- We can spread to others, or try to explain, how economics works (very
very hard to do ;) lol.
- Short of that, we can engage in fair trade. Support good businesses,
boycot the bad ones.
- We can set up good businesses if possible.
- We can start political parties where possible, on a better program.
- We can organize a proto-Government on a Council Government system.
You will notice these are things that are quite serious and large scale,
however they can still be started in miniscule sizes by a few persons of
good will. All good things start small. The whole end of the middle ages
and modern world with democracy and disagreement with torture and such
activities, has been traced back by J.I.Israel in the master piece 'The
Republic 1477-1806' to an individual called Geert in (IIRC) Deventer (a
small middle-eastern Dutch place), somewhere in the 14th century or so,
starting a movement called the 'modern devotion,' which turned away from
the clergy over the conscience of men and said that the people should
find what is right in themselves (or something like that). It wasn't
even trying to break away from Catholicism, however it was a reaction to
the widespread evil that is Catholicism, a reaction away from it, which
in some ways eventually developed into the Iconoclasm of 1566, the
rebellion against Rome, and the modern era with ideals such as freedom
and rights for all, which is still developing (or perhaps degenerating
and turning into its enemy with Donald - "torture works"
- Trump).
Post by Ördög
Exposing the lies and falsehood assertions your ilk spreads into the
public consciousness is or should be an essential part of the Left's
fight against the current system.
But what program do you have to replace the current system ? I have a
rather detailed program, it could be interesting to compare the two
point by point.
I have indicated to you before a few of the key aspects of what I believe
would need to be done:

1
Environmental considerations should be integrated into every policy
platform decision made by the Left. I am sorry to say, I am not willing
to brush away this issue as easily as you do. Our planet may have been
"limitless" in resources at one point in history compared to population
size in the past but this is no longer the case.
Just think of a very simple by absolutely essential resources like water.
As it is the only reason that we are able to maintain the current
population size on the planet is because we are already increasingly
utilising high end technology for the mass-production of food and
essential goods. How would you/could you implement such high tech on tiny
lots of land?
So pure economic considerations by themselves won't/can't solve
humanities problems.
Look, I've spent my life in the field of natural and medical sciences, so
understandably that has determined my way of reasoning.
You brushed away my concerns about simple population arithmetics: there
is just isn't enough fertile land on the planet to distribute. Have you
been to Hong Kong or New York?
You have also brushed away my concerns about over/under production of
essentials and the problems of waste and wastage. No amounts of "positive
thinking" can make the natural world do thing which are scientifically/
technologically impossible.

2
I have absolutely no trust towards "market economics".
I am afraid in this we will have to agree to disagree.
At a certain limited production volume and for certain non-essential
goods some form of trading scheme is obviously acceptable, but given the
environmental issues compassed above an advanced degree of central
planning is unavoidable.

3
I regard the dissolution of the monetary system is a key step forward.
I believe the "Zeitgeist" movement does offer some ideas worth
considering.
No money, no banking, no billionaire ruling class. As simple as that!

4
Emphasis on educating the next generations the correct way:

At the moment they have been brainwashed into believing that the US style
"democracy" is the ultimate end point in political evolution of humans.
They need to bee taught how wrong that assertion is even before we can
discuss alternatives. After all if people didn't want change no
ideologies in existence could move them to lift a finger.

5
It is sadly the case that "peaceful" public protests are very ineffective
in attracting desired effective public notice.
The far left is often criticised for its perceived "militancy" (which in
reality is nowhere near to that of the far right which is ever more more
seriously weaponised). Equating the two extremes of politics is silly as
they are not in balance. The public needs to be better informed about
that fallacy.

6.
The political power of religions need to be curbed drastically.
There is no way a modern society can allow the luxury of religious
irrationality to creep into political decision making. I don't care if
people chose to believe in sky fairies in the confines of their homes and
places of worship, but that needs to stay there.

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

Well, it looks like we have reached an impasse. You are convinced that
your proposal can and would work. But I am certainly not convinced.
At least we both know that things eventually must change. The pass our
societies are on now leads to ultimate disaster.
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-06-06 03:05:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Ördög
Post by Ördög
Who wants to be oppressed?
Not the people your ilk is terrorising!
The Left is out of power in most regions around the world.
Because the left messed it up, as usual. I knew they would because they
supported idiocy like Obama,
We will have to agree to disagree.
Obama was a "lame duck" president. But you should ask, really whose fault
was that, before you trash the man. Given the nature of their political
system and the quality of US voting public there was no other outcome
possible.
Obviously Obama has never been part of the real left, nor were the any of
the Democrats. One can only conclude that they are to the left of the US
alt-right, but that is its full extent.
Post by Jos Boersema
and never address the hard questions about
war, neither the questions of Capitalism.
But truly!
Don't confuse the US Democrats with the political left.
Post by Jos Boersema
The right was just waiting to
get in with force after that fiasco. The left is weak, chaotic, lacks
focus, can be bought up fairly easily, etc. That is what i intend to
change with the ideological proposal I made, unfortunately I still need
enough men who want to life or die for what is right. I have not yet
found one.
Maybe because you want to resolve the problems of complexities in our
contemporary of societies by just a thorough "land reform". It does not
take long for people to brush it aside not as a bad idea but a very
incomplete one.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
That makes the
far right feel free to do anything they assume the un/undereducated and
politically naive masses tolerate. Sooner than later they'll push their
luck too far.
They will go to war and that's that, hysteria and war propaganda will
take over. The revolutionaries (if that still existst) will be send to
the front to die, forced to fight their brother revolutionaries on the
other end, and most probably never will realize they are killing their
own.
The realities of contemporary warfare aren't the same as they used to be.
You don't need to send troops to the front any more, you just drop a few
technical nuclear bombs on population centres and then everyone dies!
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Being out of power for the political Left does provide an opportunity
to unite the population when the right wing oppression becomes too
intolerable for the working and middle classes.
Exactly, but it needs a direction that is functional, something more
then teh usual "we want more lollypops from you bosses, then we will be
your slaves until eternity."
At this point you are equating the political Left with the trade unions.
Given the extremely marginalised status of the trade unions (specially in
Anglophone countries) and their virtual non-existence in other parts of
the planet they have lost their political muscles almost completely.
Even in Western Europe trade unions have ceased to be a true political
force.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Until then keeping a low
profile and working behind the scenes backstabbing and sabotaging the
political right time and time again is the best tactic available.
I doubt it, although it doesn't hurt to try to foil the Fascists to the
degree reasonable and to the degree it does not just throw oil on the
fire, which is what hysterical youth mobs do. A fight is what
invigorates the Fascists, denying them assembly and free speech is just
the right casus belly they would like.
- We can spread to others, or try to explain, how economics works (very
very hard to do ;) lol.
- Short of that, we can engage in fair trade. Support good businesses,
boycot the bad ones.
- We can set up good businesses if possible.
- We can start political parties where possible, on a better program.
- We can organize a proto-Government on a Council Government system.
You will notice these are things that are quite serious and large scale,
however they can still be started in miniscule sizes by a few persons of
good will. All good things start small. The whole end of the middle ages
and modern world with democracy and disagreement with torture and such
activities, has been traced back by J.I.Israel in the master piece 'The
Republic 1477-1806' to an individual called Geert in (IIRC) Deventer (a
small middle-eastern Dutch place), somewhere in the 14th century or so,
starting a movement called the 'modern devotion,' which turned away from
the clergy over the conscience of men and said that the people should
find what is right in themselves (or something like that). It wasn't
even trying to break away from Catholicism, however it was a reaction to
the widespread evil that is Catholicism, a reaction away from it, which
in some ways eventually developed into the Iconoclasm of 1566, the
rebellion against Rome, and the modern era with ideals such as freedom
and rights for all, which is still developing (or perhaps degenerating
and turning into its enemy with Donald - "torture works"
- Trump).
Post by Ördög
Exposing the lies and falsehood assertions your ilk spreads into the
public consciousness is or should be an essential part of the Left's
fight against the current system.
But what program do you have to replace the current system ? I have a
rather detailed program, it could be interesting to compare the two
point by point.
I have indicated to you before a few of the key aspects of what I believe
1
Environmental considerations should be integrated into every policy
platform decision made by the Left. I am sorry to say, I am not willing
to brush away this issue as easily as you do. Our planet may have been
"limitless" in resources at one point in history compared to population
size in the past but this is no longer the case.
Just think of a very simple by absolutely essential resources like water.
As it is the only reason that we are able to maintain the current
population size on the planet is because we are already increasingly
utilising high end technology for the mass-production of food and
essential goods. How would you/could you implement such high tech on tiny
lots of land?
So pure economic considerations by themselves won't/can't solve
humanities problems.
Look, I've spent my life in the field of natural and medical sciences, so
understandably that has determined my way of reasoning.
You brushed away my concerns about simple population arithmetics: there
is just isn't enough fertile land on the planet to distribute. Have you
been to Hong Kong or New York?
You have also brushed away my concerns about over/under production of
essentials and the problems of waste and wastage. No amounts of "positive
thinking" can make the natural world do thing which are scientifically/
technologically impossible.
2
I have absolutely no trust towards "market economics".
I am afraid in this we will have to agree to disagree.
At a certain limited production volume and for certain non-essential
goods some form of trading scheme is obviously acceptable, but given the
environmental issues compassed above an advanced degree of central
planning is unavoidable.
You are insane. "Central planning", apart from delivering destitution and food queues, also gave us the monumental pollution in Eastern Europe of the 1950s-1990s - the dead rivers, the acid rain and the black cities.

The free market economy funds a society that can afford to regulate itself and prevent the utter mess caused by communism.
Jos Boersema
2018-06-06 10:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Ördög
Post by Ördög
Who wants to be oppressed?
Not the people your ilk is terrorising!
The Left is out of power in most regions around the world.
Because the left messed it up, as usual. I knew they would because they
supported idiocy like Obama,
We will have to agree to disagree.
Obama was a "lame duck" president. But you should ask, really whose fault
was that, before you trash the man. Given the nature of their political
system and the quality of US voting public there was no other outcome
possible.
Obviously Obama has never been part of the real left, nor were the any of
the Democrats. One can only conclude that they are to the left of the US
alt-right, but that is its full extent.
I agree with you that in America there seems to only exist an extreme
right, and a right. There is no left as we know it. They do not know
what it is, or how it operates, and they do not have labor unions like
we have in North/Western Europe.

USA also has quite a different history, during the key centuries when
all this came about in our countries. USA history is something like:
- run with your tail behind your legs away from the fight in the 16th
century;
- kill the stone age Injuns with European weaponry, ignore the wisdom
of the Injuns that could cure so many ills, get their free land;
- mess everything up as usual;
- call yourself the greatest Nation ever, go to war on the rest of the
world.

I put it somewhat sarcastic, obviously it was not only this bleak and
the early American colonies incorporated many ideals that European
populations could only dream off achieving. However it is a different
history. One key difference is that they started with many small new
companies and single working people on free land, whereas we always have
had our old production groups and overarching financial parasite
systems, which means we have reached the monopoly/cartel stage of
Capitalism far sooner - if not immediately - then they have. Against all
this abuse, we developed our labor unions and left wing parties. The
Americans are only now starting to realize what "the corporations"
meant.

The fact that the Americans had law against private Corporations even
existing at all, shows that this was a known problem, and that they had
the power to pass such a law, which shows the weakness of criminal
families like Rockefeller at that time. Until they ruined that law.
'Corporatism' seems to be the American word for 'Capitalism.'

Americans have had a great fight about what the right currency should
be, which is of course: the "green back." The right form of currency is
a direct public fiat currency, without any special power for any private
interest, whatsoever. They lost the fight, and they lost their culture
with it.

There are some radical American left wing splinter groups. It is quite
possible that America will start to develop a serious left wing,
although they have had problems with criminally infiltrated labor unions.
I think the program I am offering should make Americans jump up and down
with joy, because it is a free-market system which encapsulates all the
highest American ideals, while at the same time dealing with the ills of
Oligarchy (Corporatism), Plutocracy (rule by the rich), the democratic
deficit, etc.

You are judging too quick about my program by the way. I scanned this
post a little already down, and you think I am only speaking about the
right to free land. That is a mistake.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
and never address the hard questions about
war, neither the questions of Capitalism.
But truly!
Don't confuse the US Democrats with the political left.
They call it the left, but it is not our left. Bernie Sanders might on a
good day be something like center-left for us, or just a centrist.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
The right was just waiting to
get in with force after that fiasco. The left is weak, chaotic, lacks
focus, can be bought up fairly easily, etc. That is what i intend to
change with the ideological proposal I made, unfortunately I still need
enough men who want to life or die for what is right. I have not yet
found one.
Maybe because you want to resolve the problems of complexities in our
contemporary of societies by just a thorough "land reform". It does not
take long for people to brush it aside not as a bad idea but a very
incomplete one.
What is incomplete is your effort in understanding my program, sorry.
I have written it all down as clearly as I could. It is very detailed
on the one hand, but also summarized and systematized. The program has
one essence, which is: to spread power to all.

From that essence come the 4 essential program points:
- A democratic State, as democratic as we can make it. I have proposed
a detailed system of a Council Government, where groups of 50 people
elect their delegate. I urge you to investigate before passing
judgement.

The economy is dealt with in 3 layers: top, middle and bottom.
- The top layer is about destroying the Plutocracy and Oligarchy, the
cartels, the wealth of the ultra-rich, the mega-corporations, etc.
- The middle layer is about pushing companies to become democratic once
the starter retires, and the company is larger then a defined limit.
The starter will be compensated as described in law. I urge you to
investigate this before passing judgement, thank you. I don't wake up
one day and feel like writing this. There is 10 to 15 years of work in
all of this, worked out into a detailed Constitution at
http://socialism.nl/law or market.socialism.nl choose 'Constitution'.
- The bottom layer is free land for all.

You argument is again emotional and nothing more then the negativity of
a mood swing: "people will brush it aside as an incomplete idea." You
are not those people, the masses, so point one: how do you know what
they are doing to do, when more then half of humanity is dead in the
latest Capitalist war ? Secondly it is a false argument, because it is
not the only idea I am proposing. Thirdly even if it was incomplete, if
it is right it is still right and should be part of a functioning
society. Should a law against torture not be passed, because it is
incomplete and will not solve all problems ?

The problem may be that you did not answer my question: can you name a
positive thing about land for all ? You have not, showing that you are
not going to make any effort in working out a solution or having a
constructive debate, right ?

Name something good about free land for all, that is my question or we
might just better call it quits here and then I can spend my time on
studying Blender for making labor union videos.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
That makes the
far right feel free to do anything they assume the un/undereducated and
politically naive masses tolerate. Sooner than later they'll push their
luck too far.
They will go to war and that's that, hysteria and war propaganda will
take over. The revolutionaries (if that still existst) will be send to
the front to die, forced to fight their brother revolutionaries on the
other end, and most probably never will realize they are killing their
own.
The realities of contemporary warfare aren't the same as they used to be.
You don't need to send troops to the front any more, you just drop a few
technical nuclear bombs on population centres and then everyone dies!
That is not the point, the point is the use of warfare as a political
strategy. Not "everyone" will die either.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Being out of power for the political Left does provide an opportunity
to unite the population when the right wing oppression becomes too
intolerable for the working and middle classes.
Exactly, but it needs a direction that is functional, something more
then teh usual "we want more lollypops from you bosses, then we will be
your slaves until eternity."
At this point you are equating the political Left with the trade unions.
Given the extremely marginalised status of the trade unions (specially in
Anglophone countries) and their virtual non-existence in other parts of
the planet they have lost their political muscles almost completely.
Even in Western Europe trade unions have ceased to be a true political
force.
That may be the case where you live, but you are wrong about where I
live.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Until then keeping a low
profile and working behind the scenes backstabbing and sabotaging the
political right time and time again is the best tactic available.
I doubt it, although it doesn't hurt to try to foil the Fascists to the
degree reasonable and to the degree it does not just throw oil on the
fire, which is what hysterical youth mobs do. A fight is what
invigorates the Fascists, denying them assembly and free speech is just
the right casus belly they would like.
- We can spread to others, or try to explain, how economics works (very
very hard to do ;) lol.
- Short of that, we can engage in fair trade. Support good businesses,
boycot the bad ones.
- We can set up good businesses if possible.
- We can start political parties where possible, on a better program.
- We can organize a proto-Government on a Council Government system.
You will notice these are things that are quite serious and large scale,
however they can still be started in miniscule sizes by a few persons of
good will. All good things start small. The whole end of the middle ages
and modern world with democracy and disagreement with torture and such
activities, has been traced back by J.I.Israel in the master piece 'The
Republic 1477-1806' to an individual called Geert in (IIRC) Deventer (a
small middle-eastern Dutch place), somewhere in the 14th century or so,
starting a movement called the 'modern devotion,' which turned away from
the clergy over the conscience of men and said that the people should
find what is right in themselves (or something like that). It wasn't
even trying to break away from Catholicism, however it was a reaction to
the widespread evil that is Catholicism, a reaction away from it, which
in some ways eventually developed into the Iconoclasm of 1566, the
rebellion against Rome, and the modern era with ideals such as freedom
and rights for all, which is still developing (or perhaps degenerating
and turning into its enemy with Donald - "torture works"
- Trump).
Post by Ördög
Exposing the lies and falsehood assertions your ilk spreads into the
public consciousness is or should be an essential part of the Left's
fight against the current system.
But what program do you have to replace the current system ? I have a
rather detailed program, it could be interesting to compare the two
point by point.
I have indicated to you before a few of the key aspects of what I believe
1
Environmental considerations should be integrated into every policy
platform decision made by the Left. I am sorry to say, I am not willing
to brush away this issue as easily as you do.
I beg you pardon ?
Post by Ördög
Our planet may have been
"limitless" in resources at one point in history compared to population
size in the past but this is no longer the case.
Just think of a very simple by absolutely essential resources like water.
As it is the only reason that we are able to maintain the current
population size on the planet is because we are already increasingly
utilising high end technology for the mass-production of food and
essential goods. How would you/could you implement such high tech on tiny
lots of land?
Lol, this is really confused. You think high tech helps the environment
? It ruins it. I just come back from my allotment garden, where I am
trying to grow ecological food with my own hands. There is probably a
lot less pollution involved in the food I make there then is in the
typical farm-factories.

You also seem not to understand how fertile land is, because we in the
Netherlands have a large export sector an great amount of cattle, yet we
are in one of the most overpopulated countries.
Post by Ördög
So pure economic considerations by themselves won't/can't solve
humanities problems.
I didn't say that it will.
Post by Ördög
Look, I've spent my life in the field of natural and medical sciences, so
understandably that has determined my way of reasoning.
Maybe it will be healthy to try growing vegetables.
Post by Ördög
You brushed away my concerns about simple population arithmetics: there
is just isn't enough fertile land on the planet to distribute. Have you
been to Hong Kong or New York?
I did not brush it aside, you simply didn't care to take notice of the
argument. You brushed aside my argument, and then - in usual fashion -
blame me for what you did. I said: the population levels itself off and
even shrinks when it is prosperous, because that is what the evidence
says. Dutch couples have a lower then 2 birthrate, which means a
shrinking population. It is the same in all our countries here.

I am not going to say to you what the solution is to a city like
HongKong, because it is your job to figure it out, or you can read it on
my website. You need to have a positive attitude to finding some
solutions first.
Post by Ördög
You have also brushed away my concerns about over/under production of
essentials and the problems of waste and wastage. No amounts of "positive
thinking" can make the natural world do thing which are scientifically/
technologically impossible.
I put my vegetable waste on the compost heap. What you are doing is
turning this debate into being exclusively about your fears about the
natural environment, as if economic factors and the abuse of people are
suddenly no longer relevant. You are brushing aside significant topics,
and then you blame me for your own vices. There is an economic debate,
there is a military debate, there is an environmentalist debate: they
are all important.
Post by Ördög
2
I have absolutely no trust towards "market economics".
I am afraid in this we will have to agree to disagree.
It looks like it.
Post by Ördög
At a certain limited production volume and for certain non-essential
goods some form of trading scheme is obviously acceptable, but given the
environmental issues compassed above an advanced degree of central
planning is unavoidable.
That makes you a capitalist and servant of the ruling class, in my view.
This is one vector they are going to use to try to enslave humanity to
their distopian view of reality. I think that Communism is, strangely, a
right wing creation, because it centralizes all power, and that is
precisely what the right wing is about. It just does it with a sweet
sause that some people accept, without noticing what is underneath. It
looked cute when Lenin was angry at the Kings, it was not so cute
anymore when Stalin became the 'Czar.'
Post by Ördög
3
I regard the dissolution of the monetary system is a key step forward.
I believe the "Zeitgeist" movement does offer some ideas worth
considering.
hahaha
Post by Ördög
No money, no banking, no billionaire ruling class. As simple as that!
Yeah, simple as that, sure. Emotions, all it is: emotions. I saw that
Zeitgeist garbage. It looked like another ruling class astroturfing
garbage operation to me. Slick graphics to take in the superficial, but
not an ounce of content. The one thing I think was key was their high
rise buildings, where the serfs where kept. But it looked cute, because
the high rises where in a circle and there where some trees.

It looks like we may have to agree to live in different countries. We
will watch your Empire like a hawk, knowing it is only a matter of time
until its rulers are criminals and will try war against us. That is how
these things go. But you will also be weak, because the central planning
bureaucracy means that incompetent and bad people will suffocate bright
and creative and good people, which we will not do, because in our lands
people will be free.

I am - by the way - very concerned about the environment, which is why I
always buy everything at double the price at ecological stores. I also
don't drive a car, and don't go on airplane vacations. I always travel
on bike. I think we need to return 20% or our agricultural lands to
nature, ideally in many strips over the entire land. We have taken too
much, nature is destabilizing. That will cost us a lot, but it is also
ugly and boring to destroy nature.
Post by Ördög
4
Living an example as best as possible goes further then talk, but I
guess you are right that education about these issues matters, and
trying to find a better way to live is at the same time an education.
Post by Ördög
At the moment they have been brainwashed into believing that the US style
"democracy" is the ultimate end point in political evolution of humans.
I'm not sure from where you hail, but America in our Nation is seen as
an example to avoid. We even have the phrase "American circumstances"
(Amerikaanse toestanden) which means things that are completely out of
wack, corrupt, abusive, and without hope to correct them.
Post by Ördög
They need to bee taught how wrong that assertion is even before we can
discuss alternatives. After all if people didn't want change no
ideologies in existence could move them to lift a finger.
You are yourself an example of that though, because you are unwilling to
even understand my proposal before you brush it aside for no reason.
Post by Ördög
5
It is sadly the case that "peaceful" public protests are very ineffective
in attracting desired effective public notice.
I agree, although it is still something easy to do, and still has some
effect. It also moralizes the group itself.
Post by Ördög
The far left is often criticised for its perceived "militancy" (which in
reality is nowhere near to that of the far right which is ever more more
seriously weaponised). Equating the two extremes of politics is silly as
they are not in balance. The public needs to be better informed about
that fallacy.
Some parts of the far left are quite violent.
Post by Ördög
6.
The political power of religions need to be curbed drastically.
There is no way a modern society can allow the luxury of religious
irrationality to creep into political decision making. I don't care if
people chose to believe in sky fairies in the confines of their homes and
places of worship, but that needs to stay there.
Your proposals in practical terms seem to come down to a focus on
environmentalism. I agree with that, we need a lot more care for the
environment. However the masses do not really care, and therefore it is
important to be ourselves the one who care and try to do the best we
can.

In political - economic terms I see that you are sortof of a Communist
bend, full of naivity about how that will work out, and without the
willingness to see either the dangers of that, or the good points in
something that you currently see as a rival ideology. You have a bad
feeling about free market, and that apparently will do for you, but
it does not do.

I even have a theory about why the far left reacts emotionally against
the idea of trade and markets, and that is because the right has always
abused those ideas as cover for their own abuses. The market and trade
have become synonimous with the abuse of the Corporations and the
bankes, who pretend to be there by way of free trade and markets, when
in many if not most cases they are there because they abused the
principles of a free market with their cartel and even criminal
operations, allowing them to dominate.

There is an essential good in the right to trade and to own what you
make. If I grow potatoes on my garden, your politbureau will decide what
to do with them ? If I manufacture a bench, your politbureau will decide
who will get that bench, and how many more I will make ? No: I will
decide what I will do with them, or I will not make any more of them.
You will pay me for what I make, and if you don't want to pay me and I
don't feel like sharing, you will not have it but have to make your own.
Incidentally in my system you can, because the Oligarchy and Plutocracy
are destroyed by law, there is land, and you can work and buy things in
various companies around, many of which are hopefully a little less
abusive to themselves then they used to be under a single person owner
who is working together with a financier parasite.
Post by Ördög
~~~ ~~~ ~~~
Well, it looks like we have reached an impasse. You are convinced that
your proposal can and would work. But I am certainly not convinced.
You did not even check it, that is the problem here.
Post by Ördög
At least we both know that things eventually must change. The pass our
societies are on now leads to ultimate disaster.
We agree on that, yes. I think you have a lot of thinking and studying
to do, but are in danger of being so deeply and completely without
knowledge about how these things work, that you do not realize how
little you know. That is the trap you are in, I hope you will get out of
it, then you would probably be someone who can do a fair amount of good
in the world because you aren't a bad guy or anything like that. I think
this is exactly the trap that the left broadly is in. They (we) aren't
bad people at all, in fact good people, but the knowledge is so
catastrophically low on the issues at hand, that it ruins everything.
If the knowledge and understanding was there, our Nations would be
forever changed for the better.

For reason of lack of knowledge, our Nations will be destroyed. It has
been said before by someone else, but it is as true now as it was then.
Today I was thinking about this issue, and it is like people think that
whatever mood they wake up with, or whatever silly emotion they have
with the major isues of economics and the state, that will do for them,
that will be enough. That will be their opinion, and they will think
highly of their own opinion, even though virtually zero work went into
it. As always on Earth, the amount of effort put it, dictates the
quality of the result. People underestimate greatly how much work it is
to get to the bottom of these issues, and that projecting how a nice
family works unto Nations with millions of people is just not good
enough, just like learning how to swim does not make anyone a naval
architect capable of building an ocean liner.

You can blame me for being arrogant, I don't care, but this is how I see
it honestly. A great amount of evil and death will likely be the result
of the ideological stupor on the left, and on the right as well, where
they are in their own way confused and manipulative about what markets
are and should be. Together these two entities go down, Divided &
Conquered, unwilling to listen to each other, unable to acknowledge the
good points in each others ideology, to work out something that can
encompass both into a more profound truth.

I'll open up Blender and do something useful, lol. Have a nice day.

P.S. There is not much time left in this society, to get to a meaningful
ideological truth. A problem with good people, is that they have
more capacity to live in a Communistic society then others do, and
that skill within them, to work voluntarily and so on, to work for
the good of another, then becomes an intellectual weakness because
they do not invest enough in understanding what a society is, what
trade is and what the dangers of power centralization are. The
moral high causes an intellectual low.

The right suffers the reverse effect: they are often plenty egotestical,
self centered, mean greedy, but at the same time that causes them
to have a greater understanding of what markets are, because they
need them to not abuse everyone around them, although they still
try to. The right understand markets better, but fails to set them
up properly because they still do not really honestly understand
them either in the sense of how they should be structured to be
stable in the long term, and give everyone a permanent and lasting
meaningful foothold to live and be free.

I see how closed peoples minds are, but that was known since
forever. People do not want peace or justice, I think that is
behind it. They aren't really stupid, they are afraid of the peace.
The next great war will perhaps show humanity what war is all
about. We will see who still wants more of it, and who is ready to
make an effort for Peace and Justice.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Ördög
2018-06-06 03:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I love your strawmen.
But please try to pull another one!

When you can't think of any real reasons for why Venezuela is in such
dire straights now you make up tons of shit arguments. No wonder we end
up with a shortage of toilet paper in Usenet too.
Venezuela... blah...
Oh well, let's just ignore the GFC and its effect on the World economic
landscape. Let's just ignore Venezuela's appallingly horrible social
record before Hugo Chávez came to power. Let's just ignore all those
overt and covert attempts by the big multies and of course the full might
of the CIA and the US state department's shit stirrer apparatus to make
that regime collapse in a spectacular way. What a surprise that now even
the most basic supplies are in shortage...NOT!
To me that which does not work is evil.
Aside from the crappy religious connotation of the word evil as a
descriptor, I suppose you must be by now very unhappy about the state of
your heavenly alt-right capitalism. Is that why you are attacking all
guns blazing the less extreme factions of the US political right, like
the Democrats for instance labelling them fascist/socialist/even
communists?
I’m now
in Germany where I will spend the summer this year. Not long after the
‘wall’ came down I discovered I have relatives in former E Germany. When
they visited my mother then living in Munich they were not familiar with
flush toilets.
Given European history and economic development (if only you knew more
about it that what Faux News planted into your skull) that fact should
not surprise anyone. You can stop bullshitting about Europe to indigenous
Europeans like myself. I won't buy it!
When I visited them a year or so later their town was
just beginning to build a sewer system. I visited Yugoslavia and Hungary
before the Soviet collapse. It was pretty awful by the standards I was
used to.
Oh how amazing! What remote villages were you visiting?
Mind you, I am ethnic Hungarian so know the facts much better than you
ever will.
Our current problems in the West stem from growing creeping socialism
sapping capital.
What utter unadulterated garbage! The ultra rich 10% already owns 80% of
all wealth! How much more wealth do they demand to own now?
As Mrs. Thatcher reminded us,.../snip/
...that society does not exist, and humanity is made up of a bunch of
greedy bastard egotistic bullies who constantly fight with tooth and nail
over the limited wealth and resources of the planet to the bitter end?

That lowlife sociopathic bitch should have been jailed for crimes against
humanity. The mass suffering she had caused in her own country as well as
abroad was staggering in respect to what is expected of modern Western
civilisations. What a disgrace.
R(ot)I(n)P(iss) I'd say!
“ The problem with
socialism is that eventually it runs out of other people’s money...”
Crappy slogan based on a big lie!
But hey, it sounds good enough for the dumbed down under/uneducated
masses.

Alt-right self proclaimed libertarian capitalists like yourself wants to
keep all the money for yourselves and force the majority into never
ending financial and political state of extreme dependence and/or
outright subjugation.

So! Pull another one!
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-06-06 07:08:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
What utter unadulterated garbage! The ultra rich 10% already owns 80% of
all wealth! How much more wealth do they demand to own now?
Yes, but 2 things:

1/ that is wealth that simply wouldn't exist under the defective "system" applied by socialist governments
20% of a very big capitalist pie is far more that they would have if they were forced into food queues and starvation by a communist regime

2/ that level of wealth distribution is far more egalitarian than at any time in the history of human civilisation prior to the 20th century. And human civilisation was steered, from the extreme inequality that applied previously, by capitalist civilisation
Ördög
2018-06-06 21:51:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I spent a month in Budapest a couple of years ago. I still remember the
taxi driver from the airport. He told me learning Russian was compulsory
when he was in school. Now he’s forgotten a lot of it.
So what! Is there an actual point to this anecdote?
Kids aren't always open to compulsory subjects at school.

I hated learning Russian, too. But than I was not enthused about learning
any other language either. Now as an adult I regret never learning
Russian properly.

Ironically, I have ended up to become trilingual.

I don't care what opinions spoiled septics had of any communist block
countries while holidaying there.

You have no idea what the Hungary looked like before WW2 with 30%
unemployment and an oppressive undeveloped feudal/semi-capitalist
fascism. You have no idea how much damage was done to it by that world
war, nor acknowledged the fact that it had received no help whatsoever
from the West for the purpose of rebuilding the place after the war quite
unlike West Germany. And of course you happily overlooked the fact that
Hungary was an occupied country till the collapse of USSR.
His English (not
compulsory) was pretty good.
The first time there, before the socialist collapse, was so unpleasant
the wife and I couldn’t wait to leave.
So what? Is there an actual point to this anecdote?
Contemporary Budapest was a joy to visit.
The second time we were a little
sad we had to leave. It was a night/day difference.
Whatever. Nice restaurants, luxury hotels and tourist excursions don't
always show the rot of a country.
Post communist Hungary, like Poland has turned into an authoritarian semi
fascist and racist capitalist hell hole. No wonder you felt so happy
there.

YAWN!
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Jos Boersema
2018-06-05 12:12:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
I offer the following (I shall try to be brief, but it is hard with
something this complex (sigh.))
The goal should be a free market economy with a State under
Constitutional democratic law. A free market implies that all have the
right to productive land for free, and we need to deal with
monopolies, cartels, and other such dangers that close the market from
the side of the ultra-rich and make it into their private
plan-economy.
Well, what makes you think that there is enough land for all to go
around.
I'm sorry to say but you really need to think a bit harder on this
matter, because this is not a question you need to be asking. I have
seen this question more often. I think it shows that the person asking
the quesiton has not invested in thinking over what the issues are.
Post by Ördög
After all land is not always land worth using for anything.
You can figure it out, if you try.
Post by Ördög
And how do you envisage land usage for example in New York City, London
or Hong Kong given the population numbers?
Figure it out. I can, you can too.
Post by Ördög
And how do you envisage dealing with the problems of overproduction vs
actual demand, likely waste and occasional shortages in our complex
societies should free marketeering be retained? Markets aren't all that
efficient at self regulation.
They are efficient, provided they are real as proposed. Secondly: there
is no better alternative for the bulk of society. Thirdly, you can
always step in with emergency measures in case of life & death
situations.
Post by Ördög
As I have indicated to you before I firmly believe that free markets are
mostly governed by the rule of entropy. We live on one small planet but
our way of live demands the resources of at least three or more.
Free markets are not going into chaos by themselves, that is an over
simplification. The planet Earth is not small, it is enormous, well
larger then any human mind can comprehend, by a factor so large the
factor itself is beyond our comprehension.

I have been thinking recently about people who quickly turn to
negativity when being confronted with how economics really does work. I
hypothesized that I would not even answer their negativity, because that
only feeds it. Instead I came up with this question to ask them: what
positive thing can you see that free natural resources in equal value to
all can do ? Can you see a positive ? So let me ask you that question
now: can you see a positive ?

You can ask me the same, and I can list all kinds of positives for
Communism, Capitalism, even Naziism if you want. Every shade of grey has
some light mixed in, and even if the cloud is as dark as night it may
still serve a higher purpose.

It seems to me that in many cases, this is not a debate about economics
I am having with people, because they do not react with logic, but
rather with emotions cloaked in words that mimmick arguments and logic.
It is an emotion that is coming out, it is not an opinion about
economics. Therefore I now try to confront the emotion with another
emotion type responce, which is to ask: try first to see what is good
about it, to jerk people from their negativity emotional responses.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
As the method I suggest this, in steps of increasing intensity, and
applies as necessary (especially from number 5) dealing with counter
pressure.
- Propaganda - Buying the kind of services / products from sources in
line with this
ideology, which is fair-trade and the like (it is shocking how few
people engage in fair trade buying, and by that one could suggest
all these people are politically bankrupt if they pretend to be on
the left)
- Start the kind of democratic companies we should want.
- Start political parties to join in the vote, around said ideology, and
with a very strong internal democracy as suggested for the State.
Start multiple parties because they all corrupt fast.
- Start to form a public good cause which is run by those elected by
groups of 50 persons. Those elected form councils. This is the new
proto-State. It can practice itself with donations and do something
good, whatever that might be. It is a Revolutionary Government to
be, but it merely exists as a common good cause, for stray cats and
public litter, or whatever. It will stay that for as long as not
enough people are in the new system to warrant a claim to
Sovereignty.
Now for some defensive methods, to deal with to be expected
- We can set up Militias, which defend everyone their right to freedom
of speech and assembly. We do not defend ourselves, but we defend
everyone and especially those we do not politically or economically
agree with. This way it acts as a dampener on all political
violence, so that issues need to be solved by debate and vote rather
then by violence. Cooperation with existing police, army, etc,
should be viewed as a good thing, because the new system would take
over those functions and organizations of State later, if need be
and if the people in general so wish.
- Such Militia struggle - much of which can be done unarmed - can spiral
out of control due to either mistakes or a tyrannical ruling class,
and become an open front war of liberation against tyranny. At that
point it morphes into something more then a sort of a police force
against all political violence. Now it is a full scale war, and it
should be run as that.
- If that is crushed, we are left with a form of low organized
resistance.
- If that is crushed too, all we can do is hide such ideas for a better
generation to take up the struggle against evil, apathy and stupidity.
This is not a binary system, it is a spectrum. It is designed so that
violence will be minimized. Example: a lot of violence comes from
polirization, until political parties start arming themselves for
defense, and then later the parties can go to war on each other. This
is short circuitted as it where, by setting up a common Militia,
divorced from politics, inviting all kinds of people from many
ideologies, to then act as a defence on whomever is threatened with
violence. You put a buffer into the system, an additional one for when
the ordinary police and courts either cannot handle the pressure
anymore, or if the ordinary police and justice system (army) have
become a party that is engaged in tirannical violence themselves; or
more realisticly: where such organizations have powerful cliques
inside them which are de-facto above the law and which need to be
dealt with, and against which the political struggle is deadly. Think
of defending good people their lives, such as journalists,
politicians, and of course the name Falcone comes to mind, the great
hero of Italy. He was poorly defended, if at all. A grave mistake.
etc. See exhaustive detail on my website market.socialism.nl
What is your opinion on the above ? We can tire ourselves with our
expectations, however we should only do so in order to plot our course
and set ourselves to it, right ?
Any talk about militias at this point in time is an absolute no-no.
You cannot write that way, sorry. We shall talk about all that is
necessary, and when it is a time we do not need a Militia, then is a
good time to muse about what shall be the best way to do it, because we
have time to think before the time to act comes.
Post by Ördög
The current establishment has full control over the means of implementing
Orwellian surveillance technologies.
I notice your mode of writing, in these words (it looks like I am going
to be a pain in the neck today, but you know I have seen it all and I am
kindof tired with humanity; humanity has gone too far):
"Any" "absolute" "full control". These are words on the extreme of the
spectrum. It is important not to fall into that trap when dealing with
issues of war, because things are fluid.

If we need to go to war on the establishment (which I hope not, but it
depends on the establishment), then the establishment will break in two
as well. That is an example of what fluid means. There will be traitors
on our side, and there will be people who see the truth and repent from
their evil coming to our side, there will be spying back and forth, etc.
Morale is the greatest good in the army, the rest follows. When the
morale is a fraud, that is a weakness for the enemy. If we have the
better story, that is a great strength, after which all other strengths
follow in time.
Post by Ördög
If they get too nervous they just
declare their opponents as terrorists and deal with them in the most
brutal fashion possible while lecturing the unruly masses about their
'superior' version of democracy.
You are computing things from how they are today, and you do not
understand what I am talking about with a Militia or what it will do,
and how it will come to be known and develop. Perhaps you will like to
learn that an important part of this Militia effort, is to support
someone who is under attack from the establishment, for example by
spurrious court cases harassements, or even physical threats. The
support can be as simple as show up in the court as support for some
journalist or whomever, unarmed and with no intention to do anything
other then to watch.

Falcone, hero Judge of Italy against the mafia, was left unguarded in
his own office, to such an extend mafia figures could literally walk
into his office, and did. Nobody protected him. He was eventually killed
in a car bomb on the highway. Had there been a Militia effort as I
propose it, then Falcone would be someone under threat of violence and
death who cannot count sufficiently on the police / army, who might want
to pick a number of volunteers to guard him. Maybe we could then have
driven in a column of 10 cars over the highway, and the mafia would not
know which one to bomb.

You want to leave such things undone: why ? I find it unacceptable.
It is for the police to do ? The police cannot always get everything
done in all historical periods, for lack of money, for being the enemy
of the people themselves in many Nations, for being ruled by the ruling
class, etc. Are you too weak to lay your life on the line for the
freedom, life, the right to express themselves and to organize, of
someone else ? Your answer right now stands as "yes" to that, I hope you
will reconsider and do your duty, in word, and deed if need be.

I train a little with my bow every day, it is what we can have legally
here. We saw what the Nazis did in Odessa in 2012, will you let that get
by you without them having to do it over you dead body after you did
your best ? I fully intend to fight to the death should a group of Nazis
try to attack our labor union building, or other buildings, and there is
some way I would be able to get there in a useful way. In Odessa they
fought the Nazis with: nothing. One mad had a shovel I heard, they
eventually escaped to a room with an iron door, which by luck held them
safe. He and some women where the only survivors of the Nazi attack. The
rest they hacked to death with hand axes and with fire, also some
pistols where used by the Nazis.

Talking of Militia is an absolute no-no ? This happened 4 years ago.
When should they have mobilized their Militias ? Never, because the
establishment has lasers ? These Nazis came with nothing more then
molotov coctails that where filled for them by 17 year old girls earlier
in the day in the city center, made from beer bottles or whatever. That
is what the establishment uses. If someone with a decent bow, a
crossbow, a nice sword and some good clubs had been in that building, we
would probably all have been dead anyway, but we would have taken 5 or
10 of the Fascists with us to hell, and that would have been worth it.

If you don't agree to that, we may have little in common, and although I
realize that talk is cheap and dying is hard, if we don't set ourselves
to what is right in talk, we can just forget about the rest. Who needs
a life in this failed culture anyway, I rather die doing what is right.
Post by Ördög
I see absolutely no chance for any political change as long as the
current status quo remains.
It will not remain, that is why we are debating here.
There is a great amount of things we can do.
Post by Ördög
For instance, by making a serious effort towards conserving leftist
ideological concepts for future generations who will get a chance to
implement effective changes to society when the time is right. We should
fight public misinformation propaganda by the ruling class leading to
utter political confusion amongst the average citizens by educating
anyone who is willing listen telling them that there are alternatives to
the way things are done now.
But you are against the proposals I am making.
Post by Ördög
Educating the next generation the right way is of utter most importance.
I am trying to educate you, but fail. ;-)
Post by Ördög
Yes, we could also join political parties trying to reform them from the
inside, although that is a very hard thing to do given the mindset of
those ambitious personalities who lead political parties.
I would not even dare try it. Those parties are religions and have
strong tribal unity rites and enforcement. It is better to start new
parties, and in doing so perhaps the other parties, particularly those
who are chaotic in their ideology (which most are) might want to snap up
that ideological market share and trickle it into their own.
Post by Ördög
And we can help undermining the efforts of the political right every
legal way open to us every step along the way. They may rule us now but
we do not have to make that easy for them.
Yes, I am not afraid to be a political pragmatist and will support anyone
in any form who promises to destabilise or bring down any alt-right
government regardless of their flagship ideologies!
Yet I have proposed a program that can and will do that, but you are
against it. What now ? You see how this is going ? There is no progress,
you don't develop your ideas. You think you are there already, as do I.
So now we are just head butting and degenerating together, as the enemy
laughs and agrees with itself, that the people simply need a strong man
to rule them, so that they can be the wealthy minions of the rulers.
Are they right ? Yes ! We are ourselves the problem.

Have a nice day.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-25 00:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.

Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.

It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.

Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
Pelican
2018-05-25 03:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.
Very few saw it in Eastern Europe, and there are as many forms of
communism as there are with capitalism or democracy.
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.
It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.
Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
You could equally substitute quite a few idealogues for "Communists".
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-25 12:57:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.
Very few saw it in Eastern Europe, and there are as many forms of
communism as there are with capitalism or democracy.
I don't really get your point - I saw many examples of "democracy", and they all looked the same.
I saw many examples of "communism" and they also all looked the same.
What I never saw was a "democracy" that looked grey and miserable with gulags for he politically reticent.
What I never saw was a communist state where there were bright lights, a big city, and a very wide swathe of middle class spending their money on on unnecessary consumer products, thus keeping a lot of other people in jobs.
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.
It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.
Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
You could equally substitute quite a few idealogues for "Communists".
Maybe, but even Adolf Hitler didn't even begin to murder a fraction of the amount of people killed by the Marxists.
Pelican
2018-05-25 13:03:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.
Very few saw it in Eastern Europe, and there are as many forms of
communism as there are with capitalism or democracy.
I don't really get your point - I saw many examples of "democracy", and they all looked the same.
I saw many examples of "communism" and they also all looked the same.
What I never saw was a "democracy" that looked grey and miserable with gulags for he politically reticent.
What I never saw was a communist state where there were bright lights, a big city, and a very wide swathe of middle class spending their money on on unnecessary consumer products, thus keeping a lot of other people in jobs.
But you are no-one.
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.
It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.
Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
You could equally substitute quite a few idealogues for "Communists".
Maybe, but even Adolf Hitler didn't even begin to murder a fraction of the amount of people killed by the Marxists.
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-25 22:11:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.
Very few saw it in Eastern Europe, and there are as many forms of
communism as there are with capitalism or democracy.
I don't really get your point - I saw many examples of "democracy", and they all looked the same.
I saw many examples of "communism" and they also all looked the same.
What I never saw was a "democracy" that looked grey and miserable with gulags for he politically reticent.
What I never saw was a communist state where there were bright lights, a big city, and a very wide swathe of middle class spending their money on on unnecessary consumer products, thus keeping a lot of other people in jobs.
But you are no-one.
Sure, but the point is I have *seen* societies created by the likes of Ordog, and they were truly awful.
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.
It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.
Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
You could equally substitute quite a few idealogues for "Communists".
Maybe, but even Adolf Hitler didn't even begin to murder a fraction of the amount of people killed by the Marxists.
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/20th-century-death/

Have a look at "humanity" --> "ideology" and then compare Communism against Fascism.

Communism killed vastly more people than Fascism ever did and yet we still have unapologetic supporters of this murderous ideology.
Pelican
2018-05-25 23:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
We know exactly what it is because we saw it in Eastern Europe.
Very few saw it in Eastern Europe, and there are as many forms of
communism as there are with capitalism or democracy.
I don't really get your point - I saw many examples of "democracy", and they all looked the same.
I saw many examples of "communism" and they also all looked the same.
What I never saw was a "democracy" that looked grey and miserable with gulags for he politically reticent.
What I never saw was a communist state where there were bright lights, a big city, and a very wide swathe of middle class spending their money on on unnecessary consumer products, thus keeping a lot of other people in jobs.
But you are no-one.
Sure, but the point is I have *seen* societies created by the likes of Ordog, and they were truly awful.
No doubt. There are still plenty of people in the countries of, say,
the former USSR who look back fondly on the communist regimes then in
place. Regimes typically run by people little more than thugs.
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Post by Pelican
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
Socialism/Communism is about people who feel justified by their virtuous ideals to ride rough-shod over other people's rights, up to and including depriving them of their freedoms, their liberty and their lives.
It's about people who try to put into practice marxist ideas that have proven themselves over and over to have been completely wrong.
Communists are dangerous and destructive people whose ideas are a recipe for misery.
You could equally substitute quite a few idealogues for "Communists".
Maybe, but even Adolf Hitler didn't even begin to murder a fraction of the amount of people killed by the Marxists.
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/20th-century-death/
Have a look at "humanity" --> "ideology" and then compare Communism against Fascism.
Communism killed vastly more people than Fascism ever did and yet we still have unapologetic supporters of this murderous ideology.
I don't support either of those, but a comparison of the numbers killed
is no way to critique them. Neither is inherently a death cult, and
both achieved clear social and economic benefits for the countries
involved. Both allowed for leaders to emerge who set their countries on
a path to death and destruction. So have other ideologies.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-28 16:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Bernie does not appear to be a socialist in any strong sense of the
word. He wants a society more like the Scandinavian countries, he said.
Those are not socialist countries, they are Capitalist. They have a core
Capitalist system, with softening measures to alleviate the suffering
that Capitalism creates. Americans call that 'socialism.' They also call
Communist Stalinist Russia 'socialism.'
In the USA anyone who isn't willing 100% committed to further the
interest of monopole-capitalism and far right conservatism is labelled as
a socialist/communist, not even in the sense of the underlying ideologies
these words represent, but as intended verbal abuse. It is meant as
something worse than calling someone a matricidal maniac.
Right, Americans are abusive in their ideological debating. They are not
debating, they are merely trying to pull someone by the hair and put
their heads in the toilet, and that will be that. What surprises me
about Americans is how the same they all are. There is just about as
much difference between Americans as there is between McDonalds burger
joints around the world. Always the same yaddayaddayadda about
'socialism,' it never actually has any content, it never goes into any
sort of history, it is just so boring and shallow.
Post by Ördög
In my experience most people in the US don't even have the vaguest idea
what socialism or communism is (or supposed to be). They only regurgitate
what they have been feed for decades since the end of WW2 in the form of
"reds under your beds" state sponsored propaganda.
Exactly. I wish we could ban all Americans from this group. It is a real
drag to deal with them, and they add nothing. Sorry to be harsh but it
is reality. I'm sure there are some Americans who can be subtle and
wise, indeed there *is* anti-capitalist ideology even in America. Such
brave souls they are, that they can stand in that sea of ignorance and
boring blablah.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Who says that Bernie is on the side of a more social society ? He said
it, I guess. I saw him say that he wanted war with Iran (Iran can not
have the atom bomb under any circumstances, which means he has declared
war on Iran and he isn't even elected yet), and he caved in to Hillary
like a good little vote catcher. Good carreer move ? Dog and pony show ?
Lot of money involved. Who really knows Bernie ? I never met him.
Given the nature of the political culture in the USA even if Bernie had
turned out to be a saint and was actually elected as POTUS the likelihood
of him successfully legislating anything really social is near absolute
zero.
I know, and 100% agree with you. Even if he may be dirty, he probably
would have shined like a saint compared to the animals and Fascists
around him. Bernie wasn't shallow enough, I think that was his problem.
If you haven't already, look up the speech analyses of the US
presidents, it is on youtube. Trump is something like grade school or
whatever, while Bernie was by far the smartest. Ron and Hillary where
somewhere in between.

I don't trust Bernie, because even though he may have been 'tough' on
Iran because his advisort told him to, or because he was dragged along
with Fascist US propaganda, or whatever, but he should never have budged
on that issue, ever. Unless Iran attacks USA, there can never be war
with Iran. You have to have principles and you have to stick to them,
and if a Nation cannot cope with someone with principles, then you have
to have the principles of saying: take our country to hell if you must,
but I will not do it for you.
Post by Ördög
As much as I hate the idea of "revolutions" given the social chaos and
excessive bloody violence hurting mostly the innocent I see no chance for
implementing anything progressive in the USA without an actual
revolution. Their oligarchs won't give up their strangle hold on power
over that country without putting up massive resistance.
Expecting them to actually listen to reason or even caring about what the
majority of people need or want is nothing but daydreaming.
Yes that is true. I wrote a book that details how you can best do a
Revolution, to keep any sort of violence to a minimum. This is not an
easy matter.
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
We can just start doing all these things, so long as the Fascists have
not undermined the freedom of association yet, which they are probably
planning on to do with war as their cover (as usual). That doesn't mean
we have to be as simplistic as the 'occupy wallstreet' crew, rather we
can learn something from their failure. It is not a Revolution or
Sovereign initiative, when you are with a tiny minority. However you can
try to organize a useful group and try to do something constructive and
reasonable, such as writing a periodical, being a political party, and
living out some of these things for ourselves because we think they are
good things, regardless of whether it would eventually win the day
Nationally, or when that day might be.
Sorry to vent on the Americans, I'm so sick of their way of 'debating'
here.
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Ördög
2018-05-16 23:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got to
eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to do.
If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter of
weeks from starvation, as it should be.
Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow others
to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not learned
through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so is
your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel or
monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans which
destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from you in
the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power in
Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in Yugoslavia ?
You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist gangsters at the
Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets deployed by them: American
presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and far
right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and survive
independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as so
ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order is
outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build that
bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of socialist
tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back by
creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such as
Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.
It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything
depends on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident.
Communism is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the
control of the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These
mechanisms go back to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical
Empires with their god King and god Queen at the center of everything,
including the markets (that is a very long time ago, around the eastern
medditeranian sea). This is at least what I have tried to understand of
things in the past, from the historians / archeologists.
This is a strange post which is not surprising at all since it promotes
the concept of a strange hybrid created out of "markets" + "socialism"
which is like crossing a fox with a duck.

Having said that I have no issues with some of the points you've made.
Capitalism is indeed a sick system which inevitably tends to drift
towards the direction of monopolies wanting to own and run everything
including the people (treating/trading them like commodities). Free
trading the ownership of land and the all the means of production is at
the heart of the problem. Eventually the big fish always gobbles up the
little ones.

I firmly believe that you have never understood what communist ideology
was all about, nor why it has been so badly implemented and why it has
eventually degraded into a brutal personal cult state capitalism.
What you've said about Marx, Engels and Lenin is pure conspiracy kookery.
Before Marx hardly anybody been stating so clearly how the world has
deteriorated into a dog eat dog inhumane brutal political/ideological
system that is called "Capitalism". And Lenin has understood brilliantly
what it took to bring down such a system and replace it with something
that could have worked had it not been for the weakness of the society he
was trying to implement it in. Sadly Lenin has could not envisage the
resistance to a change from both within and without. Stalin did, but he
was a paranoid megalomaniac who thought that brutal repression will solve
all of his problems. He had given up on every democratic elements
communism had and replaced it with an almighty and brutal centralised and
state owned/run machinery concentrating purely on cementing an ossified
regime ruling over everything forever regardless of what happened on the
planet elsewhere. The inevitable failure of that approach was only a
matter of time. Idiot and senile Ronald in the US and the "Iron Lady" in
the UK had falsely claimed that it was to their credit bringing down that
system.
Nothing could have been farther from the truth.
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-17 00:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
I firmly believe that you have never understood what communist ideology
was all about, nor why it has been so badly implemented and why it has
eventually degraded into a brutal personal cult state capitalism.
Actually, you and yourfellow-travellers are the ones who demonstrably don't understand the implications of the fact that every single implementation of communist ideology has delivered both material destitution as well as the world-champion denial of human rights.
Post by Ördög
What you've said about Marx, Engels and Lenin is pure conspiracy kookery.
Before Marx hardly anybody been stating so clearly how the world has
deteriorated into a dog eat dog inhumane brutal political/ideological
system that is called "Capitalism".
You are clearly too simple to see that the real world is a place of compromise.
Starry-eyed ideology cannot be translated into a perfect reality, and nothing deteriorates so much as an ideological system
Under capitalism, our poorest people have full access to world-leading healthcare, they have nice big homes, they have cars, TVs and smart phones, while their children have access to the same high-quality education as everybody else does.

This is *not* what happens under communism.

Tearing down this imperfect reality only ever results in mass murder, poverty, and denial of freedoms.

Marx's writings contain nothing but trite, superficial observations, and completely erroneous analyses. Everything done in his name has been a disaster.
Ördög
2018-05-17 04:54:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Tell me about the strong society in which Lenin’s brilliance would have
worked.
Why do you ask?
I'd wager you could not care less what I post on this issue as you are
obviously not approaching my previous post with an open mind. Snipping
everything I have posted attests to that!

I also recommend that you improve your understanding of twentieth century
history. This here is NOT alt.fan.rus-limbaugh here where alt-right
sociopaths and illiterate libertarian imbeciles dominate the cyberspace.

Tsarist feudal Russia was a basket case, both socially and economically
at the time of Lenin's revolution. In fact, a large part of Europe was
barely coming of the dark ages of decaying feudalism. Lenin was brilliant
in the way how he brought down the regime in Russia, but had greatly
underestimated the resistance both within and outside that horribly
undeveloped country. With hindsight it is safe to say that the best
chance for a functional post socialist/communist revolution socio-
political system could have been either Germany or France had it not been
for the ugly push factors that had led Europe to World War I.
The often brutal monopol-capitalist strong hold on power
in the USA, the most economically advanced country of that time on the
planet, made a communist take over of that country impossible.
However had there been a successful revolution in the USA the chances of
realising a viable and democratic communist social system would have been
a lot more likely that it ever was in Russia...

But in any case that is all speculative. What has happened back then is
unlikely to be repeated the same way again.
My guess is that once people had enough of the libertarian (anarchist)
egotistic nonsense of a dog eat dog free- marketeer pretend utopia (as
resources become more scarce and more expensive, as the environment
degrades further, and as the wealth of the planet concentrates even fewer
hands than it currently is while the rest lives in misery) socialist and
communist ideas will become a common team for the exploited masses again.

We'll see, said the blind man!
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-17 06:38:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
With hindsight it is safe to say that the best
chance for a functional post socialist/communist revolution socio-
political system could have been either Germany or France ...
Yes, unsurprisingly, you are parroting what Marx said. AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!.
Why?
Because Marx had NFI. His economic "theories" were up there with the kind of stuff published in New Idea today, and his social theories proved to be just as wrong as they were fluffy.
The revolution did not happen in Western Europe.
What *did* happen was that Western Europe continued to evolve ever better social systems and managed to drag much of the rest of the world along behind it.
Nowadays, Western civilisation has exported the notions of social justice, personal freedoms and the rule of law far and wide across the globe.
Social equality has been achieved through free market capitalism, while the unequal systems devised by students of Marx have mostly all withered away.
Post by Ördög
had it not been
for the ugly push factors that had led Europe to World War I.
The often brutal monopol-capitalist strong hold on power
in the USA, the most economically advanced country of that time on the
planet, made a communist take over of that country impossible.
However had there been a successful revolution in the USA the chances of
realising a viable and democratic communist social system would have been
a lot more likely that it ever was in Russia...
The "brutal monopol-capitlist" USA
1/ Didn't deliberately starve 15 million people to death, as the marxists in Russia did
2/ Achieved greater social equity in that society than has ever existed at any time in any place in human history.

Let's just repeat that: the "brutal" system you decry achieved precisely what the marxism you advocate has never managed to achieve.
This simple fact of history is what separates you neo-marxist buffoons from we people who are laughing at you.
Post by Ördög
My guess is that once people had enough of the libertarian (anarchist)
egotistic nonsense of a dog eat dog free- marketeer pretend utopia (as
resources become more scarce and more expensive,
You're describing what happens in a communist system.

A free market system generates wealth. Resources become cheaper. Even the poor have iPhones in a free market society.
In a communist society, 4 hours of queuing used to get them 2kg of beets, if they were lucky.

I well remember how laughable the inTourist guide was as she boasted how cheap bread was and how every citizen was guaranteed a job, as we drove through a city clearly mired in abject poverty, with the streets and buildings black from the dire pollution of primitive and inefficient communist industry.

It's funny you bring up the environment - the pollution produced by communist countries has to be seen to be believed - their cities were literally black with pollution. China's still are.
Ördög
2018-05-18 00:37:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Yes, speculation is wonderful.You can speculate whatever suits you.
I am so thankful for you generously granting me such permit!
Forever in your debt...NOT!
But
facts indicate failures of socialism under all actually attempted
conditions.
Bulldust!..hang on...oh I see! You are talking about your alternative
facts universe!
Why? Because it is human nature to limit the power of others
but not their own.
And that is why according to your take Capitalism is even a bigger
failure than Socialism ever could be for the bulk of humanity.
This is why societies are not ‘stable’.
That is correct! What happens to societies is what happens to a
bacterial culture in a petri dish ... they exhaust all the readily the
available resources and then they decay.
Unless some outside top up can be found...hence the last stage of
capitalism always turns into fascist imperialism.
They cycle
from capitalist makers to socialist takers.
YAWN!
When socialist taking power
runs out of other people’s making powers the cycle returns to capitalist
making power.
You really have no idea what drives society, do you?
You can’t take wat has not been made. That is not
speculation.
Amazing logic....NOT!
“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people’s money”
Lovely neo-Liberal slogan spewed up into the Universe as blinkered
capitalist zealots pick the pockets/cheat/invade societies for pure
personal gain by any means possible.

Yeah!

1 The planet resources aren't matching the demands put on them.
2 Humans are over populating the planet
3 For each billionaire created millions live become poverty stricken
4 Neo-Liberals deny the existence of society and could not give
a damn about human suffering
5 Neo-Liberals have no concept of conserving human existence on
this planet. No plan...no future!
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-18 00:47:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
1 The planet resources aren't matching the demands put on them.
What is that based on? Dogma?
Post by Ördög
2 Humans are over populating the planet
True. But the nations within Capitalist civilisation have a birth rate that is about equal to replacement rate. Global population growth is occurring outside of our civilisation, with the encouragement of the neo-marxists who see the flow of refugees from the over-populated parts of the world as their best bet for creating the chaos that is required for the overthrow of our society.
Post by Ördög
3 For each billionaire created millions live become poverty stricken
Our "poor" have houses, cars, free education and medical care. They aren't "poverty stricken".
Our "poor" are are objectively wealthy, thanks to free-market capitalism.
Post by Ördög
4 Neo-Liberals deny the existence of society and could not give
a damn about human suffering
..and yet Capitalist society is where social justice principles have been codified and put into practice, including notions of equality, anti-discrimination and universal suffrage. None of this stuff is available to the inhabitants of this planet who have the misfortune to have been born under theocratic or single-party communist rule.
Post by Ördög
5 Neo-Liberals have no concept of conserving human existence on
this planet. No plan...no future!
And yet here in the real world, it is capitalist societies that lead the charge in terms of individual wealth, individual freedoms, and care for the environment.
Jos Boersema
2018-05-17 17:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by John Going
There is no incentive to excel in a socialist environment.
There is in my version of Socialism (market.socialism.nl), because all
you have is your free land as a birthright of equal value to the others
in the Nation, you have your vote in the State, and then ... you got to
eat. Good luck. Do something. If you do it well, you will be well to do.
If you sit on your arse, you will in principle be dead in a matter of
weeks from starvation, as it should be.
Do you dare to be free, John ? Do you dare to own land and allow others
to own the same ?
Post by John Going
Everybody gets participation medals, lose or win.
Not in my version of Socialism (which I loosely term "market
socialism.").
Post by John Going
"Principles" are shouted by facist extremist organizers, not learned
through study.
Are you an American, John ? It is usually Americans who start ranting
against the term Socialism, without specification.
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so is
your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel or
monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans which
destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
Your money and property are not yours, in Capitalism: your money is
dependent upon your corporate Boss, and your property you need to rent
from your home rental Boss. You do not have your right to land, which
means you are a helpless serf. I put things in stark colors for clarity,
but this is what western so-called "Capitalism" eventually develops
into, because it cannot maintain a level playing field for the
population. Everything centralizes, until it becomes a centrally planned
economy, or the system breaks down before that, which is quite likely
because people are not likely to accept such totalitarian control
anymore.
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from you in
the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power in
Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in Yugoslavia ?
You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist gangsters at the
Council of Foreign Relations, and the puppets deployed by them: American
presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
Post by John Going
Independence is discouraged.
As you may have noticed, independence is the bread and butter of my
version of Socialism. What version are you ranting about, the system
made up by Lenin, who was financed by the Capitalists / fascists and far
right scum in the German army high command ? Those "Socialists" ?
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and survive
independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist. Never mind. Government is the
commission to handle the day to day details of the common good, as so
ordered point by point by the People, and for as long as that order is
outstanding. You need someone to do that. Someone needs to build that
bridge, someone needs to hunt down that criminal, etc.
Post by John Going
Truth. The truth about socialism? The very existence of socialist
tendencies is madness and based on falsehoods.
The reason Socialism as a movement exists, is because Capitalism proved
to be a fraud and it proved to be hell. The question is then how to deal
with the historical failure of (laissez faire) Capitalism. This problem
has not yet historically been answered. The Capitalists have hit back by
creating superficial and damaging forms of counter movements, such as
Communism and Karl Marx / Engels, Lenin, and so on. Communism is a
substantial distraction for the labor class, from which confusion the
Capitalists have profiten greatly.
It was a Divide & Conquer system, either so intended (which I think it
was, because things are more controlled then they seem, everything
depends on funding or you just wouldn't hear about it), or by accident.
Communism is a flavor of Capitalism: the control of society through the
control of the Capital goods and the Capital city itself. These
mechanisms go back to ancient Rome, and even before that, the tyrannical
Empires with their god King and god Queen at the center of everything,
including the markets (that is a very long time ago, around the eastern
medditeranian sea). This is at least what I have tried to understand of
things in the past, from the historians / archeologists.
This is a strange post which is not surprising at all since it promotes
the concept of a strange hybrid created out of "markets" + "socialism"
which is like crossing a fox with a duck.
Thank you for your reply. The issue at hand is that both "markets"
(in the red eyed dog-eat-dog Capitalist warfare version of overextension
of a good thing), and "socialism" in the sometimes equally agressive
stone throwing mob "lets put all bankers up on the wall and have 5
year plans for the Politbureau" version of that word, have a certain
truth to them, although they both also quite critically fail on a
most important aspect, being the natural resources. Once you dig out
the kernel of truth (as I see it anyway) in those two opposing
movements, it becomes obvious that this is not a fox and a duck at
each others throats, but that there is a Divide & Conquer at play
against a deeper truth.

Capitalists say that trade creates value for all, prices dynamically
go to fair, trade is freedom, the need to produce or not having to
eat matters, etc. This is true.

Socialists say that the Capitalists are not telling the whole story
(I'm putting it mildly now), because the markets get controlled by
huge corporations, people work crazy hard for little while super
rich exploit them, etc. This is true as well.

The key they both fail to acknowledge, is that trade is about human
effort. Natural resources are not made by humans, the planet is a given.
Therefore the natural resources themselves do not belong in a trade
system. The land should not be sold. Centralized ownership of land
creates a power position, which distorts the market. The vast land
owners don't work, they abuse their own people instead, getting rich
from doing nothing but hurting people. People who fail to see that,
don't look high enough in the power structure to notice it. It is not
the farmer that is the big problem, it is the banker who holds the
farmer as a pet with the million dollar killer mortgage on his land.
The farmers themselves however can also become a menace, as they
have been in our country. They where a new kind of Barons, who where
land central owners as well.

Although Capitalists recognize officially with Adam Smidth the danger
of cartels and monopolies, in fact they do little or nothing about it.
Their words have always been hollow, look for example at Bill Gates
with his global cartel, which has crushed so much in computing. Nothing
gets done, a few limp attempts and then the Capitalists move on to
the next delerium of the day.

Socialists recognize that people need to be free from the feudal Barons
or Capitalists, however their words have proven hollow when they took
the land away and gave it to the bureaucrats in the USSR. Many
socialists / communists say they represent the labor class, but are
they afraid to work when they reject the idea that land should be given
for free to all ? I see them often demanding money, rather then land.
I suspect there is a fear for hard work in that, because once you have
land, you will realize that you have a job (and indeed, 100% employment
is guaranteed, a supposed goal of many Socialists, but when do you hear
them about land ?).

I say we need to quit this Divide & Conquer, and see the larger truth.
Post by Ördög
Having said that I have no issues with some of the points you've made.
Capitalism is indeed a sick system which inevitably tends to drift
towards the direction of monopolies wanting to own and run everything
including the people (treating/trading them like commodities). Free
trading the ownership of land and the all the means of production is at
the heart of the problem. Eventually the big fish always gobbles up the
little ones.
There is not enough *distributive effect* to offset the concentrative
effect in the economy. For Capitalism to be stable, people need to
dissipate their accumulated power and wealth at the same overall rate
as they have aquired it. This is not going to be done voluntarily.
Vast land owners or corporate combines are not going to decide one good
day that they are going to unwind their Empire because it got out of
hand. It will be concentrate forever more, beat the others and eat them
alive, until the people rebel in civil war, and that's that.
Post by Ördög
I firmly believe that you have never understood what communist ideology
was all about, nor why it has been so badly implemented and why it has
eventually degraded into a brutal personal cult state capitalism.
No reason to make this personal.
Post by Ördög
What you've said about Marx, Engels and Lenin is pure conspiracy kookery.
The fact that Lenin was put in a train with gold from the German high
command is - as far as I know - commonly agreed upon history ?
Post by Ördög
Before Marx hardly anybody been stating so clearly how the world has
deteriorated into a dog eat dog inhumane brutal political/ideological
system that is called "Capitalism".
So you say, I doubt that.
Post by Ördög
And Lenin has understood brilliantly
what it took to bring down such a system and replace it with something
that could have worked had it not been for the weakness of the society he
was trying to implement it in. Sadly Lenin has could not envisage the
resistance to a change from both within and without.
I broadly agree with you, that Lenin probably was trying to do a good
thing, unfortunately he had no plan and certainly not one that could
work. I notice that the November Revolution (IIRC), replaced the
Februari Revolution of the Menshevicks, which where the Councils.
Hence Lenin institutes the central power, because he seems to have
though he could control it and be the one to judge all in the planned
economy, but this is (IMHO) folly. Nation are far too big for that,
especially Russia. Then Stalin comes in and takes it over. Russia
having no democratic tradition of any kind, did not help the situation.

Lenin made the mistake of accepting money from the enemy. I am strongly
against taking money from the enemy, by the way.
Post by Ördög
Stalin did, but he
was a paranoid megalomaniac who thought that brutal repression will solve
all of his problems. He had given up on every democratic elements
communism had and replaced it with an almighty and brutal centralised and
state owned/run machinery concentrating purely on cementing an ossified
regime ruling over everything forever regardless of what happened on the
planet elsewhere. The inevitable failure of that approach was only a
matter of time. Idiot and senile Ronald in the US and the "Iron Lady" in
the UK had falsely claimed that it was to their credit bringing down that
system.
I agree.
Post by Ördög
Nothing could have been farther from the truth.
It had to fail. By the way, I have been a member of the Communist
party in the Netherlands, and have Das Kapital here, even in multiple
languages. I'm not sure why you have decided I do not understand what
Communism is, and assume I have been too verbally violent and
hysterical in my approach, but I like to think that I understand enough
of it, including what is good about it.

I see it this way: the Communists often are the best and strongest
elements in the political labor movement. They have a vast amount of
great opinions upon facts and exact laws and problems, and they are
often very right about loads of stuff. I have read the Communist paper
a lot, I do think I know a little about what the Communist movement is.
Sadly it all gets put back under Capitalist control, because they
have fallen for the idea of the plan economy. That is the poison
that neutralizes them, while they think it is their greatest possession.

I chose to gloss over that Karl Marx had not actually said much or
anything about what other type of economy he would like, although he
made the collossal error to say that if the labor class got into control
of the companies that they would become their own exploiters. That
cut off all hope of some sort of understanding and useful implementation
of the market principle within the sphere of Communist thought.

Ironically, Karl Marx is even correct, within the scope of thought that
land is misunderstood, as they indeed did not figure it out properly
(in my opinion). Within that first error (land should be commonly held
by the State, etc), there was no ultimate solution for freedom to
trade anymore, and labor taking control over the businesses would indeed
result in what Marx said it would (IIRC). Take the error about land
away, and put strong laws against an overarching class of ultra-wealthy,
and - in my opinion - a democratic co-operative business looks a whole
lot better then does either the Polit Bureau or a "Capitalist" dictatorial
company. It is a similar mechanism as State Democracy versus State
dictatorship.

best regards
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Lions Growl of Butchers Foul
2018-05-17 19:55:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Socialists recognize that people need to be free from the feudal Barons
or Capitalists, however their words have proven hollow when they took
the land away and gave it to the bureaucrats in the USSR.
Wrong. What the communists *PROVED*, was that, absent personal land ownership, productivity declines because people are not engaged/invested.
And it declines massively.
Post by Jos Boersema
There is not enough *distributive effect* to offset the concentrative
effect in the economy. For Capitalism to be stable, people need to
dissipate their accumulated power and wealth at the same overall rate
as they have aquired it.
Unfortunately, because marxists and communists just don't believe in real-world economics, they don't bother learning its basics.
What capitalism does, that communism has singularly failed to do, is *generate* wealth.
To be "stable",
a. people have to be confident that the wealth their labour generates is secure from being the target of state-sanctioned arbitrary seizure
b. everybody has to be participating/generating personal wealth

This obsession with "dissipation" is the precise reason that communists and marxists don't know how to deliver economic development.
Ördög
2018-05-17 23:27:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jos Boersema
Ördög
Post by Ördög
John Going
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Post by John Going
Your money and property are not yours.
Not in my version of (market) Socialism. Your money is yours, and so
is your property. However, you shall not become a feudal - Capitalist
baron, repressing the others in the Nation under your massively
centralized control of enormous swaths of natural resources, cartel or
monopoly corporate operations, and other ultra-rich shenanigans which
destroy the freedom and opportunity of the people and the market.
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Post by John Going
Radical political groups decide who gets the money stolen from you in
the form of fees or taxes.
What "socialists" are you talking about, the ones financed by the
Capitalists of the US State Department, such as the likes of
Otpor/CANVAS, and its offshoots ? Tools to bring Nazis to power in
Ukraine, or earlier to whitewash the NATO terror bombing in Yugoslavia ?
You mean those Socialists, who work for the Capitalist gangsters at
American presidents and heads of US State departments ?
Post by John Going
There is no democracy.
In my version of "market Socialism" you get more democracy then you
might be able to deal with. Do you dare to live in a real democracy,
where you can immediately replace your representative, for any reason,
and elect the same in a group of only 50 persons, a group small enough
so that you can be heard, if you have the capacity to listen to others ?
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and survive
independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist.
These are actually neo-liberals who in my opinion actually deconstruct
the meaning of being a liberal human. They view the world through
their limitless egotism: "Me...me...me...and only me! Forget the rest!"

/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
This is a strange post which is not surprising at all since it promotes
the concept of a strange hybrid created out of "markets" + "socialism"
which is like crossing a fox with a duck.
Thank you for your reply. The issue at hand is that both "markets"
(in the red eyed dog-eat-dog Capitalist warfare version of overextension
of a good thing), and "socialism" in the sometimes equally agressive
stone throwing mob "lets put all bankers up on the wall and have 5 year
plans for the Politbureau" version of that word, have a certain truth to
them, although they both also quite critically fail on a most important
aspect, being the natural resources. Once you dig out the kernel of
truth (as I see it anyway) in those two opposing movements, it becomes
obvious that this is not a fox and a duck at each others throats, but
that there is a Divide & Conquer at play against a deeper truth.
Capitalists say that trade creates value for all, prices dynamically go
to fair, trade is freedom, the need to produce or not having to eat
matters, etc. This is true.
Socialists say that the Capitalists are not telling the whole story (I'm
putting it mildly now), because the markets get controlled by huge
corporations, people work crazy hard for little while super rich exploit
them, etc. This is true as well.
The key they both fail to acknowledge, is that trade is about human
effort. Natural resources are not made by humans, the planet is a given.
Therefore the natural resources themselves do not belong in a trade
system. The land should not be sold. Centralized ownership of land
creates a power position, which distorts the market. The vast land
owners don't work, they abuse their own people instead, getting rich
from doing nothing but hurting people. People who fail to see that,
don't look high enough in the power structure to notice it. It is not
the farmer that is the big problem, it is the banker who holds the
farmer as a pet with the million dollar killer mortgage on his land.
The farmers themselves however can also become a menace, as they have
been in our country. They where a new kind of Barons, who where land
central owners as well.
I completely agree that land ownership should not be traded. The issue is
of course that land is used as a means of production, in other words the
use of land (food production, mining, housing, recreational space)
creates products which are then traded for money. Given the fact that we
are heading in the direction of vastly overpopulating our planet there
seems to be no easy way to share the land (and its use) equitably.

That is essentially the downfall of any currently existing econo-
political model we have come up so far. Both the capitalists and the
socialist/communists forgot to factor in the constraint of our
environment.
And of course both system have forgotten to account for the fallible
human nature.

So what could we do? I see no easy solutions anywhere to this dilemma.
However I am slowly coming around to the idea that the core issue is our
monetary system. I know that this is very hypothetical but ridding the
World of money could solve at least part of the problems we are facing.
(See:
<https://www.quora.com/What-would-happen-if-the-entire-world-got-rid-of-
money>
<https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/alternative-monetary-
systems-address-economic-problems>

See also:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zeitgeist_Movement>)

Yes, I know that is all very speculative, but which other viable
alternatives do we have?
Post by Jos Boersema
Although Capitalists recognize officially with Adam Smidth the danger of
cartels and monopolies, in fact they do little or nothing about it.
Their words have always been hollow, look for example at Bill Gates with
his global cartel, which has crushed so much in computing. Nothing gets
done, a few limp attempts and then the Capitalists move on to the next
delerium of the day.
Socialists recognize that people need to be free from the feudal Barons
or Capitalists, however their words have proven hollow when they took
the land away and gave it to the bureaucrats in the USSR. Many
socialists / communists say they represent the labor class, but are they
afraid to work when they reject the idea that land should be given for
free to all ? I see them often demanding money, rather then land.
I suspect there is a fear for hard work in that, because once you have
land, you will realize that you have a job (and indeed, 100% employment
is guaranteed, a supposed goal of many Socialists, but when do you hear
them about land ?).
I say we need to quit this Divide & Conquer, and see the larger truth.
Post by Ördög
Having said that I have no issues with some of the points you've made.
Capitalism is indeed a sick system which inevitably tends to drift
towards the direction of monopolies wanting to own and run everything
including the people (treating/trading them like commodities). Free
trading the ownership of land and the all the means of production is at
the heart of the problem. Eventually the big fish always gobbles up the
little ones.
There is not enough *distributive effect* to offset the concentrative
effect in the economy. For Capitalism to be stable, people need to
dissipate their accumulated power and wealth at the same overall rate as
they have aquired it. This is not going to be done voluntarily.
Vast land owners or corporate combines are not going to decide one good
day that they are going to unwind their Empire because it got out of
hand. It will be concentrate forever more, beat the others and eat them
alive, until the people rebel in civil war, and that's that.
Post by Ördög
I firmly believe that you have never understood what communist ideology
was all about, nor why it has been so badly implemented and why it has
eventually degraded into a brutal personal cult state capitalism.
No reason to make this personal.
Indeed! I have no intention of offending you.
However this is Usenet, and this place is not for the faint hearted.
Specially not when the place is full of extremist nutjobs constantly
posting propaganda and/or conspiracy kookery.
That is why my input sounds more "robust" at times out of the acquired
habit of dealing with less worthy posters.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
What you've said about Marx, Engels and Lenin is pure conspiracy kookery.
The fact that Lenin was put in a train with gold from the German high
command is - as far as I know - commonly agreed upon history ?
Well, not Marx nor Engels had been particularly supported by the rulers
of the UK nor Imperial Germany. Providing Lenin with money have to be
understood as international political power play that has always been
going on throughout human history. I don't think that whoever provided
those initial founds to Lenin understood what the ultimate outcome would
be.

Nor do I believe that Lenin cared much for the donors once his revolution
succeeded.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Before Marx hardly anybody been stating so clearly how the world has
deteriorated into a dog eat dog inhumane brutal political/ideological
system that is called "Capitalism".
So you say, I doubt that.
Marx's socio-economical analytical approach to explaining and
understanding history was a novelty in his times.
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
And Lenin has understood brilliantly
what it took to bring down such a system and replace it with something
that could have worked had it not been for the weakness of the society
he was trying to implement it in. Sadly Lenin has could not envisage
the resistance to a change from both within and without.
I broadly agree with you, that Lenin probably was trying to do a good
thing, unfortunately he had no plan and certainly not one that could
work. I notice that the November Revolution (IIRC), replaced the
Februari Revolution of the Menshevicks, which where the Councils.
Hence Lenin institutes the central power, because he seems to have
though he could control it and be the one to judge all in the planned
economy, but this is (IMHO) folly. Nation are far too big for that,
especially Russia. Then Stalin comes in and takes it over. Russia having
no democratic tradition of any kind, did not help the situation.
Lenin made the mistake of accepting money from the enemy. I am strongly
against taking money from the enemy, by the way.
I sympathise with you feelings but practicality often trumps ideology.
That is what people call "Realpolitik".

/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
By the way, I have been a member of the Communist party in the
Netherlands,

And I grew up in a communist country....have seen its merits and noted
its faults and fallacies as first hand experience.

/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Ironically, Karl Marx is even correct, within the scope of thought that
land is misunderstood, as they indeed did not figure it out properly (in
my opinion). Within that first error (land should be commonly held by
the State, etc), there was no ultimate solution for freedom to trade
anymore, and labor taking control over the businesses would indeed
result in what Marx said it would (IIRC). Take the error about land
away, and put strong laws against an overarching class of ultra-wealthy,
and - in my opinion - a democratic co-operative business looks a whole
lot better then does either the Polit Bureau or a "Capitalist"
dictatorial company. It is a similar mechanism as State Democracy versus
State dictatorship.
I consider myself as a reform communist.
I think contemporary communists should finally decide to say good by to
the political philosophy of a one party state dictatorship run by a party
elite somewhere on the top.
For goodness sake what a horrible folly...for instance Stalin ordered
growing bananas within the Arctic circle and lemons in Hungary.
Talking of madness!

So!
They should instead concentrate on working out a system of grass roots
democracy that actually works for the people. Plan economics is
not necessarily a bad thing if we let science and technology govern
political decision making and if we can ditch our dependence on the
monetary system which creates corruption and monopolies. In fact, plan
economics might become unavoidable for the future of our existence as
humans are now living on an increasingly small planet with finite
resources.

Regards
--
Ördög, without any apologies
Jos Boersema
2018-05-23 12:43:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Ördög
Post by Ördög
John Going
/snip for brevity/
:)
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Post by John Going
Government is based on dependency, not the will to act and survive
independently.
Oh boy, we got ourselves an anarchist.
These are actually neo-liberals who in my opinion actually deconstruct
the meaning of being a liberal human. They view the world through
their limitless egotism: "Me...me...me...and only me! Forget the rest!"
You are right I guess. The political right has a big campaign about
pretending to be 'Libertarian', which is an old (centuries old) left
wing ideology (or so I have heard). Steve Bennan (?) who is a right wing
extremist in USA politics, has admitted that they have corrupted the
word 'Libertarian,' so that it now has become a far right wing movement.

That movement, which has been corrupted and overtaken by Trump I guess
(who is another business-as-usual gangster corrupted idiot) seems to be
created (financed) by the Mercer billionaires, who have created it in
order to use politics to reduce their taxation payments (and the like).
The Mercer billionaires in turn are useless parasites, who have won
their loot by ultra-fast stock trading using computer algorithms (IIRC).
There is no useful service provided, at all, by these Mercer guys. Such
is the ways of the Capitalist system ...

The various labels do not mean a lot, because they mean so many things
for many people, by the way.
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
This is a strange post which is not surprising at all since it promotes
the concept of a strange hybrid created out of "markets" + "socialism"
which is like crossing a fox with a duck.
Thank you for your reply. The issue at hand is that both "markets"
(in the red eyed dog-eat-dog Capitalist warfare version of overextension
of a good thing), and "socialism" in the sometimes equally agressive
stone throwing mob "lets put all bankers up on the wall and have 5 year
plans for the Politbureau" version of that word, have a certain truth to
them, although they both also quite critically fail on a most important
aspect, being the natural resources. Once you dig out the kernel of
truth (as I see it anyway) in those two opposing movements, it becomes
obvious that this is not a fox and a duck at each others throats, but
that there is a Divide & Conquer at play against a deeper truth.
Capitalists say that trade creates value for all, prices dynamically go
to fair, trade is freedom, the need to produce or not having to eat
matters, etc. This is true.
Socialists say that the Capitalists are not telling the whole story (I'm
putting it mildly now), because the markets get controlled by huge
corporations, people work crazy hard for little while super rich exploit
them, etc. This is true as well.
The key they both fail to acknowledge, is that trade is about human
effort. Natural resources are not made by humans, the planet is a given.
Therefore the natural resources themselves do not belong in a trade
system. The land should not be sold. Centralized ownership of land
creates a power position, which distorts the market. The vast land
owners don't work, they abuse their own people instead, getting rich
from doing nothing but hurting people. People who fail to see that,
don't look high enough in the power structure to notice it. It is not
the farmer that is the big problem, it is the banker who holds the
farmer as a pet with the million dollar killer mortgage on his land.
The farmers themselves however can also become a menace, as they have
been in our country. They where a new kind of Barons, who where land
central owners as well.
I completely agree that land ownership should not be traded.
BINGO ! I should caveat quickly though, that I belief that land should
be owned as an inalienable right, and that those who have that right -
which should be all citizens, and probably not immigrants - have the
right to rent their land out. They can however not sell their right to
land, so that they can always recover their land, and so that land
cannot coalesque in the ownership of the usual trouble makers
(Capitalists, the owners of the Capital goods that is).
Post by Ördög
The issue is
of course that land is used as a means of production, in other words the
use of land (food production, mining, housing, recreational space)
creates products which are then traded for money. Given the fact that we
are heading in the direction of vastly overpopulating our planet there
seems to be no easy way to share the land (and its use) equitably.
Overpopulation and a correct economic system are two different topics.
To get land management correct helps (IMHO) with overpopulation, because
it turns out that ordered, productive and peaceful societies see their
birthrate drop dramatically. When having children is hard, when there is
starvation, it seems to increase the population, unless the famine is so
great that people are really dying.

Secondly I belief that Nations should be Sovereign, and not be too large
in size, because if they are too big then there is no democracy anymore.
In practice democracy dies when the size gets too large. Our first concern
hence should be our nation and its economic system.
Post by Ördög
That is essentially the downfall of any currently existing econo-
political model we have come up so far. Both the capitalists and the
socialist/communists forgot to factor in the constraint of our
environment.
And of course both system have forgotten to account for the fallible
human nature.
I agree. We set a balance with nature is the first task we have when we
divide the land to all. First we need to set aside enough for nature to
survive, and then we can put our own species and Nation into the space
that it can bear, or less. Then by the system of land for all, we
prevent a few owning too much and doing all their megalomaniacal damage
to the world.

I see that there is a theoretical gap in the system that there are too
many people, however it is good to remember that the idea that there are
too many people is something that the capitalist ruling class has
historically been moaning and hysterical about, because it threatened
their exploitation system with masses large enough to overthrow them,
which might be their real reason for the fear.

Predictions that the world could not bear more then a billion people
have come and gone, yet humanity on average lives more wealthy then ever
before. Other sordid affairs in history on this matter include eugenics
in Brittain and Nazi Germany. Now all the fear turns to be for naught,
because populations seem to naturally limit themselves. The birhtrate in
the Netherlands (arguably one of the most overpopulated Nations) is below
the replacement rate. Ironically we are one of the most overpopulated,
yet we have a vast agricultural / meat export industry, and we are one
of the wealthies Nations on Earth, also one of the happiest.

The ruling class just wants to kill off a lot of people for their own
insane games and wars.
Post by Ördög
So what could we do? I see no easy solutions anywhere to this dilemma.
We need to reform the economic system, and start with our own behavior.
I wrote a rather thick book about it, which is available for free on my
website (PDF), and can also be purchased as a regular book. I point you
to that book (market.socialism.nl) because this is not an easy question
to answer. It took me more then 600 pages to give some kind of answer to
it that I think will have a chance of being an improvement, which should
best be started as a minority movement (which is natural anyway).
Post by Ördög
However I am slowly coming around to the idea that the core issue is our
monetary system. I know that this is very hypothetical but ridding the
World of money could solve at least part of the problems we are facing.
Sorry but I belief you are quite mistaken. Money is just fine, it is the
third medium of exchange, in which all trades are communicated. Money is
a tool, extreme money hoarding is something different and should be
illegal (billionaires and the like).
Post by Ördög
<https://www.quora.com/What-would-happen-if-the-entire-world-got-rid-of-
money>
<https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/alternative-monetary-
systems-address-economic-problems>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zeitgeist_Movement>)
Yes, I know that is all very speculative, but which other viable
alternatives do we have?
Many:
~ A more real democracy, for example on the council Government model.
~ Forbidding extreme wealth concentration and lending games
~ Forcing companies to become democratic by law, once the starter leaves
and the company is large enough.
~ Free land for all, by individual and same value in that Nation, with
the right to rent out.

[...]
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
I firmly believe that you have never understood what communist ideology
was all about, nor why it has been so badly implemented and why it has
eventually degraded into a brutal personal cult state capitalism.
No reason to make this personal.
Indeed! I have no intention of offending you.
That is generous of you.
Post by Ördög
However this is Usenet, and this place is not for the faint hearted.
I know lol.
Post by Ördög
Specially not when the place is full of extremist nutjobs constantly
posting propaganda and/or conspiracy kookery.
Many conspiracies are real, even those who are fake are often thrown in
by the real conspirators, to create the fog and confusion which is used
to coax the masses into the emotion laden belief that conspiracies don't
happen, which is quite absurd.
Post by Ördög
That is why my input sounds more "robust" at times out of the acquired
habit of dealing with less worthy posters.
I have this problem that you point to all the time, which is why you see
me often apologize to the 'New York Libertarian.' I have learned - or
just tell myself - that if you insult someone, you loose points in the
debate. It is my belief that the commoners, those few who lurk here
perhaps, will look down on the one who puts another down personally.
Hence if you want ot win, you always need to be cordial and forgiving;
but it is hard sometimes ! lol
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
What you've said about Marx, Engels and Lenin is pure conspiracy kookery.
The fact that Lenin was put in a train with gold from the German high
command is - as far as I know - commonly agreed upon history ?
Well, not Marx nor Engels had been particularly supported by the rulers
of the UK nor Imperial Germany. Providing Lenin with money have to be
understood as international political power play that has always been
going on throughout human history.
Right, the Lenin affair was just another chaos making 'open' conspiracy
in the art of warfare. However by the funding, the German high command
takes ownership of the Leninist Revolution, because without their
funding and supporting activities it is unlikely that there would have
been a Bolshevick (dictatorial) revolution after the Menshevick (democratic)
Revolution. Hence, the Capitalists have created the form the USSR took
under Lenin, and indeed it is - precisely - a Capitalist system: a
system where society is ruled by the control of the Capital goods.

Most people are told that Capitalism equals free trade, however I beg to
differ. Capitalism means Capital-ism, the rule of Capital over all.
Capital is the Capital goods and the Capital city, those things which
are overwhelming over the individual. I do not see the word "trade" or
"free" in any variation in the word "Capitalism." The centralized
Communist society goes back to absolute Capitalist centralization, and
also to the central control of the economy in the Jesus Monestaries,
which have 'communion' with each other, and are economically communist.

The Marx and Jesus religious fraud systems, are (IMHO) closely linked
and ultimately similar. It is also all similar to the feudal system and
the system of the ancient Empires around the medditeranean in the early
time of ancient Egypt, where there (or so I have heard) everything was
ruled by the King and Queen, including the prices in the economy. People
who breached the prices set for certain goods, received capital
punishment (heh). That is a planned economy, absolutely ruled top down,
without freedom to trade, the most radical form of Capitalism.

Modern Capitalism, which of course has a lot of free trade in it, has
the tendency to centralize all power, and then collapse into a planned
economy, feudal economy, absolutely tirannical economy, etc.

Hence it makes perfect sense that the USSR was created by German
Capitalists. They replicated their own ways of thinking and acting.
Lenin was their point man, who assumed all power, and that was the death
knell for democracy. Stalin merely brought the corpse back to life in
his own way, and showed what its dangers are (the dangers of
dictatorship). It was a Czarist success in the end, they only changed
their tune but not their methods. Stalin was the new Czar, heir of
Lenin. Nothing fundamentally changed, merely another battle for the throne.

The rethoric changed, the poverty remained, although they probably did a
lot of things better in the beginning because that is how things are in
Revolutions. They have a life of their own and the many more reasonable
people who overthrow the evil ruling class, for a time has the upper
hand and does things better.

Sorry to be longwinded, but it is all a big topic and it is difficult to
deal with so many potentially different ideological readers who need
their own set of caveats.
Post by Ördög
I don't think that whoever provided
those initial founds to Lenin understood what the ultimate outcome would
be.
I don't know, I think the cunning of Germany's top Generals should not
be underestimated, nor its bankers and other ruling class cliques. They
are where they are because of a fair amount of experience in how people
are ruled. They must have studied the Lenin clique and Marxism
sufficiently, to know what it was about and where it would possibly
lead.
Post by Ördög
Nor do I believe that Lenin cared much for the donors once his revolution
succeeded.
That is probably true, however he may not have realized how they used
him, but it is also possible they just fielded him as a way to deal with
the Czar and stoke rebellion, and not care about what came after. To
know the precise reasons they had, would take historical proof. I once
saw a film on Lenin, probably partially based on reality, where Lenin
and other types of Revolutionary leftists, had quite the disagreements.

You may know that the Capitalists have a history of funding and setting
up fake leftist movements. As I often point to: Otpor/CANVAS in
Yugoslavia, related to the Einstein Institute, 'civil disobedience /
non-violence', which has its tentacles in the various color Revolutions,
the so-called Arab Spring, the Nazi coup in Ukraine (2014), etc. They
are funded by the International Republican Institute, the National
Endowment for Democracy (CIA front), and get training from the US state
department. Some of their top Revolution stokers get payed per Nation
they topple. I think one of them said they would get a million dollar
for toppling Russia, but not sure anymore.

Funding Lenin to stoke Revolution in Russia fits broadly into this
scheme of strategies. It is not only about creating movements, it is
also about corrupting and warping existing movements. It is about taking
the head. Incidentally this is why I have setup my democratic system the
way I have proposed it, where we can constantly rotate new heads in
place, which are constantly beholden to those they represent.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
Before Marx hardly anybody been stating so clearly how the world has
deteriorated into a dog eat dog inhumane brutal political/ideological
system that is called "Capitalism".
So you say, I doubt that.
Marx's socio-economical analytical approach to explaining and
understanding history was a novelty in his times.
Ok maybe. Lamenting the misery on Earth was not new. I think it serves
to be cautious to who has gotten the credit now, because quite often
someone else did the hard work, and then the rulign class decided they
wanted someone else to get the honor, or it just messed up for some
reason.

Where they taking the head of an existing movement ? Maybe they
where, Communism certainly proves to be a misdirection with its radical
plan-economy, and failure to propose a detailed Constitution, even going
so low as to look down on the principle of law (!), and pretend that it
is not for now to think of how we should form our society, it is for the
Revolutionary vanguard in the moment to make something up. That is a big
mistake, and childish too. I see proof in that stance of the Communists,
that it is indeed no more then an attempt to conquest a lawless throne.
Post by Ördög
Post by Jos Boersema
Post by Ördög
And Lenin has understood brilliantly
what it took to bring down such a system and replace it with something
that could have worked had it not been for the weakness of the society
he was trying to implement it in. Sadly Lenin has could not envisage
the resistance to a change from both within and without.
I broadly agree with you, that Lenin probably was trying to do a good
thing, unfortunately he had no plan and certainly not one that could
work. I notice that the November Revolution (IIRC), replaced the
Februari Revolution of the Menshevicks, which where the Councils.
Hence Lenin institutes the central power, because he seems to have
though he could control it and be the one to judge all in the planned
economy, but this is (IMHO) folly. Nation are far too big for that,
especially Russia. Then Stalin comes in and takes it over. Russia having
no democratic tradition of any kind, did not help the situation.
Lenin made the mistake of accepting money from the enemy. I am strongly
against taking money from the enemy, by the way.
I sympathise with you feelings but practicality often trumps ideology.
That is what people call "Realpolitik".
Look where it got us. I prefer principles over 'real politik.' If the
masses don't like my principles, I don't want to 'realpolitik' them
(rule them).
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
By the way, I have been a member of the Communist party in the
Netherlands,
And I grew up in a communist country....have seen its merits and noted
its faults and fallacies as first hand experience.
How interesting. With the divided history of Europe, one part
Communist-Capitalist and one part Capitalist-free-market, maybe there is
hope that we can see the dangers of both and get to something better
which unites both into a new syntheses.
Post by Ördög
/snip for brevity/
Post by Jos Boersema
Ironically, Karl Marx is even correct, within the scope of thought that
land is misunderstood, as they indeed did not figure it out properly (in
my opinion). Within that first error (land should be commonly held by
the State, etc), there was no ultimate solution for freedom to trade
anymore, and labor taking control over the businesses would indeed
result in what Marx said it would (IIRC). Take the error about land
away, and put strong laws against an overarching class of ultra-wealthy,
and - in my opinion - a democratic co-operative business looks a whole
lot better then does either the Polit Bureau or a "Capitalist"
dictatorial company. It is a similar mechanism as State Democracy versus
State dictatorship.
I consider myself as a reform communist.
I think contemporary communists should finally decide to say good by to
the political philosophy of a one party state dictatorship run by a party
elite somewhere on the top.
For goodness sake what a horrible folly...for instance Stalin ordered
growing bananas within the Arctic circle and lemons in Hungary.
Talking of madness!
Good point.
Post by Ördög
So!
They should instead concentrate on working out a system of grass roots
democracy that actually works for the people.
I already did that, because 'they' never will. It is based on groups of
50 people electing a delagete, and also a reserve delegate and a group
house keeper. Then those so elected form councils. The system is
detailed at length in my book, including graphics and the necessary
Constitutional law.
Post by Ördög
Plan economics is
not necessarily a bad thing if we let science and technology govern
political decision making and if we can ditch our dependence on the
monetary system which creates corruption and monopolies. In fact, plan
economics might become unavoidable for the future of our existence as
humans are now living on an increasingly small planet with finite
resources.
I strongly disagree with that last part, sorry. The planet is still
incredibly large, by the way, and in a sense everything got infinitely
larger for the extremely long term (thousands of years) by the
possibility of moving into outer space. It seems to me that you do not
have a vegetable garden ? If you have, you would know that 100 meter
square already is a good lot of work for your hands, and if your land is
as vertile as ours, you can eat a fair amout of it, and it is but a
fraction of land that we would all get by person in the Netherlands,
which is one of the most overpopulated Nations on Earth.

There is no science without politics, in fact science is quite corrupt
already because of the ego of those people (IMHO, see the absurd Einstein
fraud). We need a free market, because the freedom to live with
individual freedom, with groups in democracy and sometimes have ordered
companies where the starter is the ruler, with all that diversity that
brings, life is more interesting and worth living, and that is what
economic is about.

A plan economy is turning ourselves into vegetables,
into machines. This is not how things work in reality, IMHO.
Dictatorship should be nothing more then a temporary illness for a
people who do not yet listen to each other, and who are either going to
die out in the long run, or learn and be part of the great interesting
and varied life of the future on Earth. I think that such is the real
science of economics and Statehood. It is not that scientists will
determine - like in the feudal system - what you shall do for your
life because that fits their plan, but rather it is the proven and
reasonable conclusion that humans are happiest when they live a creative
and free life, in a prosperous and peaceful society.

That only leaves the criminals, but those will be destroyed sooner or
later. They do not belong inside of humanity, they fail to make the cut,
they fail to achieve the threshhold of being allowed to live free.
Slowly but surely their class will the stifled and choked off, although
that will likely take thousands of years (short of an act by heaven).

Incidentally I have some more theory about why there is dictatorship and
why humanity needs to be peaceful rather then go to war, but I already
write too long and it is in my book too (apendixes).
--
https://market.socialism.nl How economics works, and how to get it fixed.
Reasoning, implementation plans, example Constitutions, forum, software.
Loading...