RSS

Tag Archives: living income

Colonialism equals delusions of grandeur

Living Income Guaranteed

 

Colonialism, as we spoke about in our previous blog, is closely related to Imperialism or even interchangeable. Robert J. C. Young says that Imperialism is the concept while Colonialism is the practise. So Colonialism is instigated through the desires of the empire, which in turn creates a consequential relationship between the empire and the desired countries by the empire. The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says about Colonialism that it uses the term Colonialism to describe the process of European settlement and political control over the rest of the world, including Americas, Australia, and parts of Africa and Asia.

Throughout time the European continent has been the biggest colonizer in the world. Once they were able to make horse carriages and they build wooden ships, they could explore their environment on a global scale. Where it started of with curiosity of what they would find it slowly but surely turned into the desire to have and control that what other far away countries had. First it was herbs and foods, human labour and later it became minerals and oil. This European rage started in the 16th century with the Greek emperor Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire and Napoleon as well.

In almost all cases the empire forces their language, culture, political preferences and law upon the colonized countries. Thus Colonialism goes a bit further than simply stealing some land and becoming a geological bigger empire. It’s about suppressing the people of the captured countries, using them as slaves in their fatherland or as slaves in their own country and steal all their valuable resources. Through Colonialism we’ve also seen that the immigrants of the fatherland outnumbered the native people of certain countries or even continents. We can surely see that in Australia, Canada, Argentina, United States of America and South Africa where mostly white people are now the majority or at least a large portion of the entire population.

In Canada and Europe we can also see how diseases were used to eliminate the native population. There were as well vaccination programs throughout Africa that did increase the world population. Though Canada colonialized by Great Britain had its own way, in the beginning of the 20th century, of dealing with the native Indians in the country they now called theirs. Tuberculosis and smallpox were introduced and no measurements were taken to stop these deceases from spreading. Some even speak of genocide against the native population.

Roger Tignor says in a response on the book ‘Colonialism: A theoretical Overview’ written by J├╝rgen Osterhammel: ” Colonialism is a relationship between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and a minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonized people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interest that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonized population, the colonizers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule.”

According to Rogers explanation of Colonialism and taking in mind that an Empire is frequently referred to as the fatherland or motherland, we can see the resemblance between Colonialism and a dominant parent. Whereas the Empire is the parent and the colonized country is the suppressed child. How often are parents absolutely convinced about their children being their possession? It’s the same for the Empire that is convinced that other countries simply need to belong to their territory.

The majority of parents expect their children to do as they told them, because it’s for their own best. Could it be that the parent is directing the child in certain behavior because they are under the spell of their own fear of losing their possession? Many children are not allowed to explore and play in the sand, because otherwise they will get dirty. So big daddy Empire doesn’t want their servant population to explore, the wiser they get the more chance they will rebel and fight themselves free.

That’s what we’ve seen in countries that were colonized and became independent again. They started of as a child of the Empire and then when they entered puberty they fought the rules daddy had set to keep them suppressed. Though many colonized countries kept being dependent on the motherland in one way or another. As if they never learned how to deal with life because the parents had been so dominant that they had never been able to explore life for themselves.

So the Empire sees his exponential territorial growth as something that he’s allowed to do and the population of the colonialized country should be glad that the Empire is here to protect them for their own stupidity. While it is all about control, having control over the other to become more than the other and thus entitled to suppress the other. Again not much different than how parents possess and treat their offspring. As Kahlil Gibran says in one of his poems:

 

Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.

They come through you but not from you,

and though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

 

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,

for they have their own thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls.

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them,

but seek not to make them like you.

For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

 

You are the bows from which your children

as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,

and He bends you with His might

that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the archer’s hand be for gladness;

for even as He loves the arrow that flies,

so He loves also the bow that is stable.

 

It is essential to keep in mind that controlling others is not the way forward and thus Colonialism, even when its done in a modern way through capitalistic measures by corporations, is not giving us as global populace the freedom to thrive. Even though the grass looks greener at the neighbors, stealing land and resources and suppressing people is not a sustainable way of interacting with each other.

History shows us that every Empire came into existence but eventually fell. So if Imperialism/Colonialism isn’t sustainable why not invest in long-term relationships and fair trade. I might have the green grass you want, even though that is no reason to go and suppress me, we could also join and share our knowledge and make the grass greener on both sides of the fence. Cooperation is key here, and paying each other real and fair prices for the resources we do not have ourselves, would make us “long for Life itself”.

Within a Living Income Guaranteed we do not think in structures of control and suppression. And it is already in the name of Colonialism that we know what its all about. Colon is me which translate into shit is me. We do not want to interact with something or someone when we know shit will happen and is inevitable. We want to work together with people and find solutions to problems that affect us all now or in the long run. We respect the existence of other countries, even how borders will look like many years from now. We do not want to force our mental legacy upon another we’ll explain LIG and see how another can see the common sense of it. We exchange views with people that support a unconditional Basic Income and we exchange views with people that want a better life for all. We would love a big community spread throughout the world that all have the goal to “long for Life itself”.

Colonialism is for narcissists that want every other country to become a clone of themselves like a daddy syndrome where the dad want his child to be in his likeness so that he will live forever though his child. Colonialism is for fearful people that think they lose it all when others do not comply to their phobic desires to have a world that is from them and in the likeness of them. We’re all one as humanity and we can be all equal within our own individuality. With LIG we have the financial support to work on ourselves and to have the time to do so in order to become the individual that is really us when stripped from fear of survival. We do not need the shit of Colonialism, we can do better than that and we’re essentially capable to be a better version of ourselves, which is in a way cloning 2.0. Be your improved self and join groups that work towards sustainable solutions. We have only one earth and one life, so if we do not put our efforts together who’s going to do it for us?

Advertisements
 
2 Comments

Posted by on May 9, 2015 in economic systems

 

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: , , , , , , , , , , , ,