philosophy - humanist @ :

future of EU: dare socialism

Written by Romeo Anghelache no comments
Free-market is a non-theory, liberal capitalism is a huge cheat scheme, Adam Smith was wrong from the very start, "property" in all the capitalist-praising texts does not refer to your property, the individualism refers to a consuming/slaving slot, not to a being, and any currently "developed country" is not really developed, in comparison with socialism.

The above is not a poetic figure of speech, the details come in these few lines:

  • free market is never a realistic approximation of an economy, market never comes empty: it's filled from the beginning and you, the gullible, are most of the times cornered by it;
  • liberal capitalism seems to work (for a minority) until it fails them, then you, the majority, pay, to make up for the difference: the free-market promoting US, bailed-out its own banks with non-market public money when push came to shove; the liberal global trading rules are becoming tariffs if they don't serve the bullshitters.
  • the self-interest of all living humans cannot create an invisible hand as in
    They are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life, which would have been made, had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants, and thus without intending it, without know- ing it, advance the interest of the society, and afford means to the multiplication of the species.
    Anyone with a Physics 101, or some bits of neocortex, would discover immediately that the first thing someone self-centred, with a random economic advantage, would do is to continue growing that advantage as far as possible, meaning that the resulting society is a pyramid, with a few ultra-rich on top, and all the rest forced to work for them just for own survival. If that's too abstract to you, here's an example: A self-centred idiot in the market finds a 100 bill in a corner, next thing he does: pays two muscles to "lobby" some other participant to give up its products or its bought merchandise. Then he sells the stuff and pays some more muscles and does it all over again. Next year, he's writing the law of the markets where he's the chief. Until his self-centred idiot neighbour kills him and proclaims himself chief/lawyer of the market. History shows that these guys only stop when they are divinity, that is, never alive. History also shows that this is obviously outdated for countries which practised socialism.
  • all the capitalist systems insist on "the property", the problem is that only the socialist countries managed to make their citizens property owners: don't believe me? check the statistics of the EU countries in terms of house ownership, you'll be surprised to find that all the previously socialist countries have a larger proportion of house owners than all the capitalist ones. And here property means truly owning it, not having a mortgage to pay.
    So, in capitalism, it's not your property the economists and politicians are talking about.
  • no so-called capitalist "developed country" can or could afford free education and free healthcare. Socialist countries could. If you disagree, call your senator/president/prime-minister to prove it! I lived in a socialist country and I know it did.
So, to trash with capitalism and free-marketers and liberal economists: I certainly don't care to see them advising country policies for the next eon.

So, if we let a capitalist system evolve, it destroys the host society: it becomes a tribe with few rich and in power, and the rest of the population as a decorum fussing for the enjoyment of those few. A capitalist EU does not have a future, the Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union reads:

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.

Let's focus on "freedom": if one has to wake everyday up to work only to survive, that's not at all freedom, it's exactly the opposite. We can give some true, verifiable, non-bullshitting content to the word freedom: every person alive receives from society an Unconditional Basic Income, to ensure that freedom is not a word for suckers and really lets people live in dignity and all the rest above = anyone's personal wealth is limited from below.

Let's focus on "democracy": it doesn't mean only that anyone has a voting stamp, it means that each voting stamp is equal in weight with any other. Problem is, a person 1.000 times richer than you gets more ways into the political power than you do, gets a weightier voting stamp than you, then the rule of law becomes more and more his rule of law. It follows that the personal wealth should be limited from above, and I suggest anchoring this limit to a statistical fact about the society you live in: let each personal wealth be limited to an amount equal to a lifetime of average wages. A technical formula no political group can abuse because it includes all the negotiated economical life of, say, the past year. Make an arithmetical exercise and multiply the monthly_average_wage_in_your_country (400-3000) with a_lifetime (130 years*12months~1500): that's the personal wealth limit.

No society is stable or peaceful if the personal wealth is not limited both from above *and* below. This window of wealth is the one that affords the rest: equality, human dignity and the rule of law; it's an engineering truth history will test always.

Outside this personal window of wealth we, or EU, or US, or any other country, do not have any future.

Call it socialism, if you like, but briefly it's this: a country can have a future only if its citizens have comparable political power, that is, their personal wealth is limited both from above and below, and its society provides free education and free healthcare to each citizen. Anything else and your life is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

artificial intelligence is circular

Written by Romeo Anghelache no comments

I have no doubt now that the outcome of the search for the best AI will be the human. More precisely, a self-aware, informed and educated, true proletarian, whom no capitalist will manage cheating.

Until then, I'm also certain that many doctors, all the lawyers, accountants and priests will join the rest of the jobless pack in queues. So, until then, these bullshitters should focus on promoting unconditional basic income before it's too late. The rest of the "middle class" is also welcome. Informed proletarians would not mind this either.

All in all, it follows that the Unconditional Basic Income is the optimal way to fund the artificial intelligence effort.

istorie contemporană

Written by Romeo Anghelache no comments

The exoneration of a man accused of the worst of crimes, genocide, made no headlines. Neither the BBC nor CNN covered it. The Guardian allowed a brief commentary. Such a rare official admission was buried or suppressed, understandably. It would explain too much about how the rulers of the world rule.

Source: Provoking Nuclear War by Media, by John Pilger on August 24, 2016

democracy, freedom and all that

Written by Romeo Anghelache no comments

We all heard these words: democracy, freedom, society, state; but do we have a common understanding of them? Here's a suggestion:

1. Democracy.

We can't have it where some people (say, 1%) are thousand times more powerful than others. A democracy is meaningless if individual people's powers are incomparable to one another, so a universal limit on personal wealth is necessary for true democracy.

This limit should be measurable, adapting in time, and decided by the whole society in a universal/mathematical way. Therefore:

Democracy is possible only if the total personal wealth is limited to an amount equal to a max lifetime (~130 years) of average wages.

2. Freedom.

One can't have freedom while one is bound to accept abuse for a living.

Therefore, freedom is not possible/meaningful without the unconditional basic income.

The unconditional basic income (UBI) covers the resources necessary for a basic human living in dignity: shelter, energy, food, sanitary services.

The source for UBI is the effort of the entire society, a tax system.

3. Society

A society is not possible without democracy and freedom as defined above, but it also requires universal education, communication, transport, maybe more. Call them social services. So a state (as a social organization to make possible all the above) is necessary, and its meaning is to provide/protect/guarantee all of the above, to all the people in the society, the tools of this process are science, industry and exchange and the overall global name for the results of these activities is economy.

So now we all know, in simple terms, what we have to achieve.

on capitalism and religious fundamentalism

Written by Romeo Anghelache no comments

Žižek in NewStatesman:

What Max Horkheimer had said about Fascism and capitalism already back in 1930s - those who do not want to talk critically about capitalism should also keep quiet about Fascism - should also be applied to today’s fundamentalism: those who do not want to talk critically about liberal democracy should also keep quiet about religious fundamentalism.

"liberal democracy" not liberal democracy. FTFY.

There's no democracy where the zombie wealth of a few shuffles lives over the entire world with no responsibility whatsoever: that's a liberal mix of private dictatorships into a transvestite democracy breeding irrationalities, among them, religions, and amid these, fundamentalisms. That's what education as a commodity brings. That's what a for-profit society becomes: a few superrich surrounded by darkness and sorrow. The personal wealth of each person should be limited to a statistic of the society that person's living in; more precisely the total personal wealth of each person should be limited to a (maximum) lifetime of average salaries per its national economy, updated automatically and periodically.

This is a fix for both kinds of tribes: "liberal democracies" and religious fundamentalisms.

Because of the lack of the above limit, we still don't know yet: Who made those bullets? Who made those guns? Who sold them? Who's driving uselessly cars in the cities consuming oil ultimately funding this criminal mess and the criminal mess in the middle east?

After we all find the answers to the above, what is there to do?

The rational algorithm "How to get rid of terrorism in 8 steps": 0. Limit the total personal wealth to a (maximum) lifetime of average salaries per own national economy, updated automatically and periodically. 1. Arrest the chiefs of the companies which produced and sold guns and ammunition to citizens which should not carry guns and their commercial intermediaries in these transactions. These are supporting international terrorism. Send them in jail for life or block their bank accounts, or exile them, or ban their entrance. 2. Ban all guns that can kill at a distance; torrents don't do that, bullets do. 3. Reinstate the death penalty for those who killed. 4. "Randomly" search houses of any religious persons for guns and ammunition: if found, exile their families and strip them of citizenship. Jail their providers. 5. Only allow armament in the country's military defence. 6. Withdraw from any war you might be involved in, use bikes, trains and internet instead. 7. Watch George Carlin --- Religion is Bullshit and George Carlin - Life is Sacred 8. Repeat until we all enjoy living again and consent to having children, if ever.

Rss feed of the category