Why socialism and other current ideas are doomed to fail...
Human beings have a problem. It is that we interfere in the natural order of things as a matter of the course of our everyday lives. Each time we attempt to act in any arena not governed by nature, we come into conflict with nature. We are denizens of a universe designed by competition; we are designed for competition trying to live as if competition can be discounted or even negated.
This universe exists only because of a ubiquitous competitive paradigm. It is competition between the sun and the [speed of the] planets that maintains the solar system. That same competitive schema exists at the atomic level in the push and pull of subatomic particles as well as on the macro level where we humans reside.
Speaking only on a cursory level, it is the competition between the employer's desire to keep his money and his need for help that establishes wage rates for a given job. Likewise, it is the availability of a person’s marketable sk**ls and the employers’ need for those sk**ls that determines who gets the job. Competition is at the core of a man's desire for a woman and her desire for a man that determines c**pling [speaking generally].
That competitive drive makes living together as equals impossible. The rise of warlords and kings among humans is no different than the ascension of the dominant male [or female among hyenas] in any social hierarchy in the animal world. We have created what we call government as a method of mediating our social conflicts and protecting us from the tyranny of the dominance system of the wilderness.
The theory of government is that we surrender some of our natural rights to the group and in return the group ensures a standard of personal security. There is a limit to what the group can demand for that security and that security must be absolute [which it never is] and beneficial [which it sometimes is].
Mandating how we live in our personal domain and how we interact publicly requires two very different scenarios. The power of the American social establishment, i.e. government, has always been successful because we have always drawn a clear line between the two. We all conform to the agreed social mandates and we are left alone to run our own lives.
That, unfortunately, means that there will be casualties from the competition we engage in, in the public arena. Some will get rich and others will not. Some will get sick and others will not. Some will win and some will lose. That is the natural state of public interaction. How restrictive the governing agency becomes depends in part on the accepted system of government and on the complexity of the society. Complexity is a function of size and expanse, therefore, of population and technology.
Competition rewards greed, bellicosity and prowess, all of which t***slate to power. Some people naturally resent that while some naturally abuse it and we assume that government can remedy the disparities and the abuses. That requires that the government interferes in the personal domain of its citizens and it is that interference in the personal affairs, the non-public life of the citizenry, that result in bloody revolutions... ultimately, 100% of the time... without fail, always have, and always will. Think of the slogan, ‘no taxation without representation’. If you demand a portion of my labor, I expect something in return.
America's strength has been its limitation of those governmental incursions into the personal orbit of the individual citizen. We have begun allowing the government of the United States to exceed the authority of the social grant of power it was given. Better stated, the government has begun presuming a greater authority than it has been granted by the Constitution. It has t***smuted the Constitution from a statement of limits on governance to a charter of control of the citizenry. That is a dangerous step with entirely predictable results.
If you understand this mechanism, competition, then you will understand why government can mandate homosexual unions but cannot call it marriage; can require a business to service to all members of the public but cannot demand personal service to any one; can set limits on a******n but cannot outlaw it; and why socialism never works, anywhere, at any time and cannot work.
JW wrote:
Human beings have a problem. It is that we interfere in the natural order of things as a matter of the course of our everyday lives. Each time we attempt to act in any arena not governed by nature, we come into conflict with nature. We are denizens of a universe designed by competition; we are designed for competition trying to live as if competition can be discounted or even negated.
This universe exists only because of a ubiquitous competitive paradigm. It is competition between the sun and the [speed of the] planets that maintains the solar system. That same competitive schema exists at the atomic level in the push and pull of subatomic particles as well as on the macro level where we humans reside.
Speaking only on a cursory level, it is the competition between the employer's desire to keep his money and his need for help that establishes wage rates for a given job. Likewise, it is the availability of a person’s marketable sk**ls and the employers’ need for those sk**ls that determines who gets the job. Competition is at the core of a man's desire for a woman and her desire for a man that determines c**pling [speaking generally].
That competitive drive makes living together as equals impossible. The rise of warlords and kings among humans is no different than the ascension of the dominant male [or female among hyenas] in any social hierarchy in the animal world. We have created what we call government as a method of mediating our social conflicts and protecting us from the tyranny of the dominance system of the wilderness.
The theory of government is that we surrender some of our natural rights to the group and in return the group ensures a standard of personal security. There is a limit to what the group can demand for that security and that security must be absolute [which it never is] and beneficial [which it sometimes is].
Mandating how we live in our personal domain and how we interact publicly requires two very different scenarios. The power of the American social establishment, i.e. government, has always been successful because we have always drawn a clear line between the two. We all conform to the agreed social mandates and we are left alone to run our own lives.
That, unfortunately, means that there will be casualties from the competition we engage in, in the public arena. Some will get rich and others will not. Some will get sick and others will not. Some will win and some will lose. That is the natural state of public interaction. How restrictive the governing agency becomes depends in part on the accepted system of government and on the complexity of the society. Complexity is a function of size and expanse, therefore, of population and technology.
Competition rewards greed, bellicosity and prowess, all of which t***slate to power. Some people naturally resent that while some naturally abuse it and we assume that government can remedy the disparities and the abuses. That requires that the government interferes in the personal domain of its citizens and it is that interference in the personal affairs, the non-public life of the citizenry, that result in bloody revolutions... ultimately, 100% of the time... without fail, always have, and always will. Think of the slogan, ‘no taxation without representation’. If you demand a portion of my labor, I expect something in return.
America's strength has been its limitation of those governmental incursions into the personal orbit of the individual citizen. We have begun allowing the government of the United States to exceed the authority of the social grant of power it was given. Better stated, the government has begun presuming a greater authority than it has been granted by the Constitution. It has t***smuted the Constitution from a statement of limits on governance to a charter of control of the citizenry. That is a dangerous step with entirely predictable results.
If you understand this mechanism, competition, then you will understand why government can mandate homosexual unions but cannot call it marriage; can require a business to service to all members of the public but cannot demand personal service to any one; can set limits on a******n but cannot outlaw it; and why socialism never works, anywhere, at any time and cannot work.
Human beings have a problem. It is that we interfe... (
show quote)
WOW! EXCELLENT! WELL STATED.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.