RSS

Monthly Archives: April 2015

Imperialism is so last season, sharing is the new caring

Living Income Guaranteed

Imperialism the big brother of Colonialism or is it the other way around? It’s seems like the chicken or the egg question and researchers are not agreeing on this point yet. What we do know is that empires have existed in ancient times as well as today and also colonies have been set up throughout time. We could say that Colonialism started off with curiosity for other parts of the world, the adventure of finding new land and foods. Once seeing these countries, full of resources that didn’t belong to them, the colonist were stimulated to take that which didn’t belong to them. So they colonialized these countries in order to have a say in these resources. The imperialist also took land that didn’t belong to them to enlarge their imperium, with or without resources. Whereas todays Imperialism is more about gaining control over other areas in the world by influencing groups of people. This can be done in various ways, where we see today that Imperialism is not only an act of countries suppressing other countries, it’s as well an act of influencing people worldwide by corporations. Marxist once said that Imperialism is the ultimate form of Capitalism, which can be understood when people in developed countries are measured by the brands they wear and use. They breath Capitalism.

When we have a look at the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of Imperialism we see the following explanation:

  1. a policy or practise by which a country increases its power by gaining control over other areas of the world.

  1. the effect that a powerful country or group of countries has in changing or influencing the way people live in other, poorer countries.

These explanations lay out the basics of Imperialism, but there is more to it. There are various ways of Imperialism such as Cultural Imperialism, Political Imperialism, Economic Imperialism, Corporate Imperialism etc.

Cultural Imperialism and its problems:

Is forcing our cultural values and preferences upon another minority such as American and European pop music being in the charts of a developing society. As well as making American and European artwork into Art and that of African artist into craftsmanship. In both examples we are speaking about the domination of another group of people that we as developed countries determine as less. The problem is that we as developed countries force them into this position in which they will never become more than their oppressors.

Political Imperialism and its problems:

Is forcing political control over another country and replacing their government with a puppet government is not new and at the same time it’s not at all threatened by extinction yet. We’ve seen this happening in the Cold War on both sides with the United States and the Soviet Union. Also in Iraq and Africa we’ve seen how Political Imperialism played out. Almost in every case it looked good and noble when these empires took over the local regime, though it always ended up in a bigger nightmare for its native inhabitants. Once the imperialists had what they wanted, resources or land, there was no interest in the native inhabitants left whatsoever.

In Libya the American empire murdered Gaddafi after he had organized a society where all could benefit. Afterwards the entire country has fallen in disrepair and up until today citizens are fleeing the country to Europe. Here we can see that Imperialism has contributed to the massive problems of illegal immigration and people dying on boats on the ocean.

Economic Imperialism and its problems:

Is forcing countries into cheap labour for the empires while lying through their teeth about the real intensions when they offer these companies and countries work. Even organizations as the World Bank have to make this scam look valid and legal, while they are robbing these countries through unfair contracts. There is no way developing countries will get upon their own two feet when the developed countries do not stop dominating them. In India we’ve seen many farmers commit suicide after they’d taken a microcredit of the imperialists.

Corporate Imperialism and its problems:

Is forcing to break the national spirit of a country and its only concern is how to maximize profit. It has nothing to do with bringing civilization to developing countries; it’s about robbing a nation of its resources, whether that is natural or human resources. We could see that for instance in the Iraq war a corporation such as Halliburton was practicing Corporate Imperialism where public resources were allocated to reconstruction while they profited from it. Here we could see the slogan of Imperialism, destroy, rebuild, occupy and exploit in the flesh.

So what is it exactly what we’re looking at here besides another ISM. With Capitalism we already saw that greed was a big influence, also with Imperialism greed is a big motivator. Though when we dig a bit deeper we can also see that in the foundation Imperialism is the lack of the ability to share. If one is satisfied with oneself and ones situation, there is no need to expand in a material way and keeping it all for oneself. Imperialism is imbedded in our developed country genes. There are enough resources to feed the entire planet, yet some have food and some have not. The question we could ask is: when is enough enough? What makes people from developed countries so unwilling to share? Maybe once they’ve tasted from the imperialistic elixir they were hooked?

Sharing is an act of self-honestly taking unconditionally all that you need, while considering as well the needs of others.

When we look at the construct of sharing and how that is pre-programmed within us and modelled by the living examples that we call parents, we can see that sharing comes naturally when the living examples in our lives have that same tendency. So if we see the empire as a child and their toy is crude oil, then we can see that some children see their toy as a part of themselves, an extension as you will. So the empire sees crude oil as their possession and a part of who they are. The empire uses up litres or gallons of oil, because that’s the way they live. So here we can see how important the genes of the child are, its personality and its environment. The empire is used taking all that there is for its pleasure, it has a personality of glamour and spending and its environment is breathing crude oil. We can say that the empire has a projected attachment to crude oil, which means that it has a strong connection with it and that it identifies itself with it.

Since a parent of a child has a big influence over the way the child is going to perceive sharing. So who the is the parent of an empire? That must be the emperor himself, or the one that is directing the empire. When the parent has to have a certain item so badly we see this same urge within the child playing out in different situations. So when the emperor wants crude oil so badly because he believes strongly that all oil is his own, the empire will use a lot of gasoline in their cars, because they believe they’re entitled to have freedom and go wherever they want to go. So after many many decades the empire doesn’t even grasp the point that crude oil is off the earth, through their possessive urge that is bigger than themselves they feel all oil is already theirs and they are entitled to take it no matter what.

So the empire’s mind tells it that it needs crude oil and thus they will justify anything to get to the crude oil. Ultimately it’s the pre-programming of the survival of the fittest, with an underlying current of the fear of not having, missing out and the fear of loss. So by taking and not sharing, the empire starts feeling completed and more than anything else around it. And that’s where the war machines come in, to take all it can take, simply because it can.

Due to the polarized nature of this unequal way of sharing it would have been as easy to share and live equally. George Orwell said it already in his famous book Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” That’s the entire construct of the personality of an empire; I am more equal than you and I have the right to screw with you.

It is obvious that Imperialism is not going to do any good for our planet and all life on it. Yet we still have to deal with the physical consequences of it on a daily base and more consequences are still produced. A Dutch organization started an Urban mining project in Africa and collects cell phones, pay people money for it and ship it back to the developed countries. In those countries they perform the mining in a safe way and collect metals and minerals from the cell phones. When this mining is done in Africa on dumping grounds, they simply burn the materials and do not get all minerals out and cause major health problems in the youngsters who do this work. So for the coming years we will have to be creative about how to deal with the consequences of Imperialism/old school Capitalism and at the same time think about how to organize our world in such a way that sharing becomes natural to all.

Many alternatives are already in place, people that like to base entire societies on sharing alone, or paying with your heart. Which is all right within a small community, but at this stage in time not yet a way to reorganize globally. Lets use fair pricing first where all parties who collaborate in making a product get their fair share, where no one gets exploited by imperialistic urges.

Many countries have these special courses for foreigners that want to apply for a citizenship. Native citizens never have to take a test. Wouldn’t it be fair to test the waters of all your inhabitants as a country to see if they are content and confident in the future of their country they live in. Ask the people what they see as solutions for certain problems, make it automated and form groups that can address the problems and solutions and really interact with the inhabitants native or by choice. When we make happy citizens we make a happy country. The same as in parenting, when the child is happy the parent is happy. And with happy we do not mean creating an society with no responsibility that’s hunting for freedom no matter what the consequences are. Its good to know what sucks according to a countries inhabitants, when a country gives them self-responsibility to come up with solutions the inhabitants feel respected and validated and ready to participate. As now a days discontent of citizens ends up in activism or verbal diarrhea on social media. Give people the tools to become constructive beings and share their knowledge, since sharing is caring.

Within the Living Income Guaranteed we give people the opportunity to think along and share their experience and knowledge to build an economic system that is best for all and that doesn’t need an empire to move itself. So care and share and help building your own future and that of your children and children’s children. Connect yourself with LIG.

Sources:

https://eqafe.com/p/sharing-perfecting-the-human-race-parenting-part-54

http://classroom.synonym.com/difference-between-cultural-political-economic-imperialism-19042.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/28/the-strategy-of-global-corporate-imperialism/

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 27, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Liberalism: the dream about freedom

Living Income Guaranteed

Liberalism is a theory in economics and a political philosophy that is founded on the ideas of liberty and equality. In Classical Liberalism and especially in Social Liberalism these two principles are the most important pillars of the entire philosophy. Liberals around the world have different views on what it entails to be a liberal, though the majority of liberals support: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments and international cooperation.

The 18th century philosopher John Locke is seen as the founder of Modern Liberalism. Locke wrote the foundational text “Two Treatises” where he outlined his major ideas. According to Locke each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property. He made a social contract for governments to not violate. The liberals in that era opposed Traditional Conservatism and found ways to replace this Absolutism with Representative Democracy and the rule of law. After the French Revolution in the 19th century also other parts of the world had liberal governments coming into place. In the 20th century the liberal democracies were the winners of both world wars and thereafter Social Liberalism became the key component in the expansion of the welfare state. Up until today liberal parties are of substantial influence throughout the world.

When we look at the definition and etymology of Liberalism we see that the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the follow about Liberalism:

1 :  a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard.

2 :  a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically :  such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (as those involving race, gender, or class).

Words like liberal, liberty, libertarian and libertine do all originate from the Latin word liber, which means free. The word liberal was first used in the 14th century to describe liberal arts that represented a specific form of education for the free-born man. Up until the 16th century the word liberal was used in a positive way, in the 16th century the word had positive and negative connotations and denotations, though the positive use of the word was most common up until the 19th century. Throughout the years the meaning of the word Liberalism changed, whereas in the USA Liberalism was connected to the welfare-state politics and Europe associated it more with less government influences and a laissez-faire economy. Even now a days being a liberal in one country, doesn’t have to be the same in another country.

Liberalism didn’t just emerge from within the populace, several revolutions took place such as: the American Revolution, the Belgium Revolution and the French Revolution. After the French Revolution, France ended up with the Code of Napoleon, which was a merely libertarian society. Italy gained a lot from the French revolution; they got a better economic and religious situation as well as intellectual intolerance and nationalism that emerged. Also Switzerland had a long-term positive influence after the French Revolution.

During these turbulent times also the Industrial Revolution took place which drastically changed the 18th century society, classes shifted, wealth increased and nations began assuming national identities. Farmers and craftsman became factory workers, women and children started out as cheap labourers till child labour was no longer legal and later in time schools came into place to let the women and men work in the factories. The schools were there to prepare these low class children for the same kind of work their parents did. The liberals didn’t mind schools to be a place to create obedient people, since the never ending economic growth has always been their goal, thus more workers in one’s factory is only stimulating one’s own wealth.

Now the question is how liberal is Liberalism when it comes to practical daily living and how much difference is their within liberty when looking at their opponents the Conservatives. Liberals and Conservatives, especially in the USA, have always been each other’s opponents. Their relationship started of as a polarized relationship and nothing changed since 3 centuries. Which is funny in a way when we hear Obama say he wants change, while under no government real change takes place. The never-ending rivalry between Liberals and Conservatives show us the current political minds that have not transcended a certain level of egoistic toddler behaviour.

Recently a clinical psychiatrist (Lyle Rossiter, USA) declared that Liberalism is a mental disorder. He says: “Liberalism is a wilful failure to mature beyond adolescence that can have catastrophic consequences for society.” While a study funded by the US Government’s National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health has concluded that Conservatism can be explained psychologically as: “a set of neuroses rooted in fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity.” This seems to be a case of the pot calls the kettle black where both political currents are getting dirty. It makes one think about the real differences between the psyche of politicians if there are any. We might be depicted as psychological patients, we probably all want freedom at the end of the day and we probably all mean different things when we say freedom.

So the evidence is in the pudding or more specific the evidence is in the words. Freedom, equality and the right to life are currently noble words and at the same time hollowed out and full of egoism. It is simply not lived and certainly not fully grasped. When my freedom is enslaving you and your freedom is being good to me, it might seem like a win-win situation, but in fact we are abusing ourselves and each other. When the actions that flow from achieving freedom would be in the best interest of all, there would be no misunderstanding at all. Wouldn’t that be a case of liberal thinking? Or shall we say critical thinking? We might have entered a century where freedom on all areas of our lives has to be in the best interest of all and how do we start making people aware of that? Indeed education, the schools that we used so many years for indoctrination can be used to create critical thinkers who are able to live freedom instead of bending freedom into our own or simply dream about true freedom that will never come.

Liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society, which would be meaningful to teach our children. Looking at our educational system right now we see that the foundations are still from centuries ago. We are still training kids to be obedient and do tasks in certain timeframes regardless of the learning pace of the child. We are still moulded into factory workers or office clerks, nothing changed there. How many times did we see the teacher bending natural expressions of kids into obedience and only being able to express oneself when asked? How many times did we see an entire class walk in couples in a row not being able to speak? Does that contribute to learning to cooperate and communicate in a civil way? Does that teach our kids how to practically live life?

There are already schools worldwide that do understand what kids need in the 21th century, but it’s only a few and not enough to give all children the chance to truly learn. Schools that value evidence based learning and teachers that are capable of trusting the students because they trust themselves with the task as coach for these students. Plain language and math needs to be learned and tested in a natural way and once the student is equipped with free accessible information he can start learning in a practical way and direction that is fit for him and his skills and or talents. When we look at Liberal Education for College students we can see that it is a form of learning that does come close to the previous description. It’s an approach that empowers individuals and prepares them to deal with complexity, diversity and change. It provides students with broad knowledge of the wider world (e.g. science, culture and society) as well as in-depth study in a specific area of interest.

So the pillars of Liberalism can only work when we have our definitions of all types of freedom aligned. In the end it is all about words and releasing our words of any emotional charges. When our freedom has greed as connotation we will never reach what is best for all. When freedom is simply the right to live equally, where we can express our true selves and communicate in equality, then freedom can work. The only but is, whenever our vocabulary is as limited as it generally is we are not able to communicate in an effective way and inequality would meet up with us soon. So here again our basic education needs to be in place and automated so that we are able to function optimal and thus support and assist others and ourselves. Liberal is me, and I can only be liberal when I am able to understand others without the noise of ignorance and lack of proper education.

The Living Income Guaranteed is a valid replacement of Liberalism or better Social Liberalism. It deals more with the outflows of all that needs to be implemented in society in order to maintain freedom and equality. What do certain goals implicate in certain situations? How can we best make a transfer from the old to the new? And never let words and terms be open to fantasy or abuse, be clear and directive in tomorrows world where we can all have a place that gives value to our surrounding and which values ourselves through who we are. We’re able to liberate ourselves from old systems as long as our mind set is what’s best for all we’ll find our way to freedom.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2008/02/psychiatrist_co.html

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080122165609AAhQTTW

https://www.aacu.org/leap/what-is-a-liberal-education

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 8, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Social is my middle name

Living Income Guaranteed

Socialism as an economic system and a political movement, to introduce Socialism within society, has one big problem; it never has been practiced in its true form as one system that runs society. There have been several countries throughout time and there are still several countries that call themselves socialist countries, while in fact they’ve created a cocktail of which Socialism is one of the ingredients. Some countries used Socialism as a first stage to enter Communism and others gave in to Capitalism and made their own Molotov cocktail.

Having a social security system or social safety net as a country, doesn’t make it an absolute socialist country. We can neither speak of absolute Socialism when a country has a totalitarian regime that organizes the major industries in that country. Although the word Socialism carries the following words: social is me, it depends on the countries actions whether at the end of the day it was indeed social in any way possible as Socialism dictates. So lets have a look at the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of Socialism:

A way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies.

Socialism as an economic and political theory was created from a starting point of making an utopian society. Opposite to most other systems, Socialism had no consensus on how the ideal socialist society would function. There are in fact many forms of Socialism created that all differ from economic planning to community size. The most common are Guild Socialism, Utopian Socialism that also includes communal societies, Christian Socialism, Market Socialism and Agrarianism. The common denominator in all of these variations is stressing the importance of cooperation among the people and keeping away from (capitalistic) competition.

True socialists want to create an entire classless society where the major industries are controlled by the government. Socialists see this control as only way to get rid of competition among the people and to create equality. In a socialist society there is no such thing as private property, since working results in equal wages and equal basic necessities, it provides all with equal benefits and opportunities. Among true socialists the idea exists that Capitalism causes oppression of the lower class. Due to the competitive nature of Capitalism, it is possible for the wealthy minority to keep in control over the industry, which eventually lessens the opportunities and wages of the working class. Within Democratic Socialism we see in countries such as Germany, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Great Britain that Capitalism is part of the socialist foundation.

Opponents of Socialism say that the problem of this economic system is the equal wages and therefore no incentive to get up in the morning and to do our paid work with an equal amount of pleasure as when we get paid more than people who studied less or have less effective connections in life. Furthermore they say that human beings are selfish and self-centred power seeking beings that when given power they will abuse that power. They point out that our tumultuous past and history books show us what human nature has brought us thus far. Governments may not become the collective alter ego that is driven and energized by power and no longer serving the people and the greater good, according to the opponents.

The question is whether the true socialist and the opponents of Socialism are really depicting reality or are they making a caricature out off reality? Things don’t always have to be black or white, when we speak about utopia most people can’t grasp the fact that this world could be or become an utopia, it’s simply denial. When we speak about totalitarian regimes, a lot of people can’t either relate to that as a daily reality. So as much as Socialism, as many other economic theoretical systems, has never been reality in its purest form nor has utopia or an utter totalitarian hell on earth been for us all. That means that we’re merely talking about things from a mind perspective and trying to gather examples from real life that are not always correct examples and do not always take all dimensions in consideration.

What if we, in an attempt to better our world systems, take what seems valid from Socialism and Capitalism and recreate it into ‘Distributive Capitalism’ and place the central power with the people and the government. That way we could make the government more into a logistic department that is at the service of the people. We’d take from Capitalism the creative entrepreneur and from Socialism solidarity. In one strike we would eliminate ‘the winner takes it all’ principle and the all-controlling government. As Jeremy Rifkin, an American economic (1945), says: “Being social and entrepreneurial go well together now a days. It changes the way of thinking. This would really mean ‘power to the people’. It means democratization of energy and information and even the economy. It is flattening down Capitalism and what arises one could call ‘Distributive Capitalism’. In a way Capitalism and Socialism do no longer exist, because ‘Distributive Capitalism’ takes the best of both systems. It combines risk taking, creativity and entrepreneurship.”

When we look at the statement of the opponents of Socialism who say that it will promote laziness and it devaluates self promotion, we can ask these same people if they would come out of bed every morning when they become entrepreneurs instead of the working slaves they’re right now. When in a system such as ‘Distributive Capitalism’ or in a Living Income Guaranteed, we are a part of the companies or have our own companies, that will surely be enough incentive to get out off bed. When you for real become a part of society and what you do matters and therefore you only want to do the things that matter, you feel validated by society and yourself. When you are entrepreneur and the business you’ve started had to be tested in real time and didn’t work out for the best of all, you can simply stop and have temporarily a living income. Now when our business is likely to fail we would push even though we damage others, we would push because of money issues. When money is no longer our main concern we can do the jobs we like, we can invent new jobs and let technology do the jobs technology does best. We never would feel threatened and fear for our living.

We could start seeing jobs in a whole other perspective and really practice solidarity. We no longer would have to focus on one of our talents and make a career out of it. We could pile up all our talents and we could have different jobs build upon the different talents. On Monday and Tuesday we work for a newspaper, Wednesdays we use for development and creativity in a brainstorm team with all kinds of different professions and on Thursday and Friday we teach children and adults. Wouldn’t that be great to be able to be creative, talented and reassured of income when our real time tested ideas do stand the test of time? There might be people in the beginning that simply do not know how to move themselves even in a society that is inviting them to do so, those people can live on a living income and slowly but surely discover what they want to do to contribute to society. In school we can start on an early age to teach children how to become an entrepreneur, since not all of us have that in us as a natural talent. Thus when there are no good or bad ideas in essence but only one criteria that applies namely: we will not abuse, we could gradually grow towards utopia whether we call it Socialism or simply living in the best interest of all.

The same goes for power, when we are already in ‘power’ over our own lives, do we still need to overrule other’s lives? Seeing what real power is and what sustainable power entails, no one ever would want to reach for totalitarian power. As soon as our inner strength is the force that direct us, and that will be reached when financial fears are no longer there, we simply become equals without even thinking about bossing another around that is equal to us. That way we would not let people in charge that are mentally instable, if that’s a polite term for dictators and sociopaths, they would get the opportunity to get to their inner strength with the support and assistance of society. Power and the need for power can look like a big thing to overcome in a transitional period where another economic system is introduced, whereas greed will be an even bigger thing for all of us to overcome. Where greediness for power is really indicating where it all stems from, the fear to not have enough, which will be eliminated with for instance LIG.

So Socialism as in ‘social is me’ or ‘I’m social’, has many valuable proposals in it that we can use to create a society through which we can enter the 21 century. We can ask ourselves if we want to hang on to all the ISMs that have been invented so far or are we willing to take what is effective and move on. We as a person know that it is of no use, when we continue living in our own past, the same goes for our society and us as a whole. Living in the past with ineffective pillars that arrange our society, we can call plain stupid. It’s time to move on and leave the ISMs behind us and for one time dare to think out of the box of our comfort zone. When we continue walking this known path, will there still be an old age pension for us, will there still be enough jobs, and will we be able to simply be happy and not fear tomorrow’s sorrows? When social is in you, then you’ve got the incentive to move and change and mould this society until it fits our 21 century needs, not greed, but plain and normal needs. Being social leads to feeding your needs who are most likely equal in essence to all the other people’s needs. We need you to need yourself and to investigate a Living Income Guaranteed.

Sources:

http://www.debate.org/opinions/has-socialism-ever-worked

http://money.howstuffworks.com/socialism.htm

http://socialistworker.org/2010/11/22/does-socialism-exist

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 1, 2015 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,