U.S. Capitalist Party

One of the founding fathers of the United States, John Adams, rarely mentioned today, was important enough to be the first Vice President to George Washington and our second President. He wrote a little bit about constitutional laws and principals. The main idea of a Republic is to keep all power from collecting in one center. History taught us that to accomplish this we have to divide the power between the three classes of people: Democratic, Capitalist and Government.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Wisconsin, United States

Reading the classics teaches one the basic principles on which our world was established. This has nearly all been lost in the fog of time past. All that remains are syllogysms and subjunctives it seems. In my BLOGs, i attempt to incorporate principals that are the real basis underlying civilizations as contrasted with the mythology we learn in our childhoods that goes unreflected. About me as a person: I enjoy wine(organic)and pizza (organic), and in the morning a nice strong cup of coffee - organic and fair trade whenever I can get it. I started cooking a lot more lately.

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Security Update

Aristotle observed that one of the primary functions of the State was security. By security, he did not mean only military security, in fact, Aristotle ridiculed the Lacedamonians (Spartans) for emphasizing only the military security of the State, a truism justified in his day, by the fall of the Lacedamonian empire. To Aristotle, military security and the promotion of economic trade did not make a state. Military alliances and economic trade agreements were objects that transpired between states, and though necessary for the security of a state, were not sufficient. Security meant security of necessaries, such as food, clothing and shelter for the citizens, something that was much more rigorously addressed in early civilizations than now.

To be a State also required that the State promote virtue in its citizens. In fact this is the distinction Aristotle made between a true State and a simple alliance of individuals. Virtue is a multifaceted concept, but the ultimate translation of this term is: a strong adherence and promotion of the cultural norms of the society.

In Aristotle's time, inovation was considered a bad thing, something that served to disrupt a State. In this he even agreed with Plato. In many nations of the time, including Sparta, India, Macedonia, Egypt, Rome, for examples, innovation was also considered something to be suppressed and avoided, except on the battle field. However, the governing norm of the time was either of monarchy or aristocracy, and power was held very tenuously, as a reading of Plutarch's Lives, especially Aemilius Paulus, who, upon conquering Macedonia, discourses with Perseus, the king he just conqured:

"Is it meet, for him that knows he is but man, in his greatest prosperity to pride himself, and be exaulted at the conquest of a city, nation or kingdom, and not rather well to weigh this change of fortune, in which all warriors may see an example of their own frailty, and learn a lesson that there is nothing durable or constant? For what time can men select to think themselves secure, when that of victory itself forces us more than any to dread our own fortune? and a very little consideration on the law of things, and how all are hurried round, and each man's station changed, will introduce sadness in the midst of the greatest joy." [Plutarch's Lives, volume I, the Dryden translation, Modern Library, New York, 2001, p374]

Inovation, in that day was feared not because it led to improvements or intended changes in social structure, but because, in the warring ways of the times, everyone was keen on how great changes in fortune were brought about by the smallest changes in the way things were accomplished. There were technological, political and social changed that did occur, but they were always accompanied with war and violence, usually being imposed by usurpers and tyrants. In this political climate the emphasis on virtue as a stabilizing force in societies was highly promoted.

Virtue has evolved. With the stabilization of governments due to the invention of constitutional republics, which balance power, inovation is no longer a bad thing. Virtue has changed into terms such as ethics and morality. Morality is defined by Whitehead as a concern for how actions in the present affect the future. It is primarily supported by science and technology, since the social aspect of cultural values has become so trivial with the mass mingling of cultures over the past several centuries.

When a culture is strongly supported and highly valued by its citizens, individuals have a motivation for preserving it in all its features. To this end, people invest time and effort into ensuring the material sustainability of this culture. The eroding of any cultural form is the product of barbarianism and individuals with such a mentality, in the days of Aristotle, would have been considered as useful to the state only as a slave, and subdued accordingly. Such thinking was still alive and healthy in the 14th century writings of Thomas Moore in his "Utopia".

In modern society, it seems the tables have turned. Science, which is the universalizing force that allows for inter religious and inter cultural harmony that serves the role of cultural security, is trivialized by governments, so the very point of material stability is ignored. The very aristocracy, who were those of virtue in Aristotle's day, are the ones most guilty of diminishing the material security of the state in the name of chrematistic gain by the strategem of charging interest on a fiat money. And, no one who corrects the Dow Jones Industrial, or any othere stock market average for inflation, can truly say that there has been any real wealth created in the U.S. over the past 30 years.

What all this is saying is that the point of State security is material stability, and since Eisenhower, this nation has ignored material stability in favor of military power. The victims, in addition to the majority of the citizenery, are the real capitalists who create material wealth and those inovative folks who work toward material stability in the way of renewable energy, recycling, energy efficiency, urban design, housing improvements... These individuals are faced with trying to make a profit, or even earn a living in a market system flailing about on flawed principles, whose primary beneficiary is the military industrial complex and its promotion, strictly, of political power.

What if real capitalist folks were to rise in power again? What if renewable energy were to soundly divest fossil fuels? It might

1) undermine political hegemony by distributing the source of energy among ordinary people. e.g. as photovoltaics. This eliminates the justification of wars for oil - or natural gas and with it the attendant tax burden and the tyrannical power structure that has undermined our Republic.

2) accelerate wealth production by introducing a low cost and non fuel based energy source, the cost of which would be regulated by a capitalist market system, as opposed to a feudal - landlord style market system.

3) any and all rationale for indebting people would be eliminated as there would no longer be any future need for 'conscripted labor'. Robotics and technology can, does and will eliminate drudgery.

4) eliminating rationale for debt (on a fiat money!) would recover a functioning economic system contributing a lot to point #2.

5) renewable energy tends toward electronic technologies. If automobiles were powered entirely electronically, they could be automated or semi-automated to eliminate the vast majority of collisions and injuries. The insurance saved can be redistributed to finance a better healthcare system.

6) renewable energy would promote food security by ensuring a supply of energy for agricultural applications. In addition, greater use of electronic technology and science can go a long way toward rendering more food organic, and soil more fertile by allowing greater diversity of species grown simultaneously.

7) employing renewable energies in harvesting technologies would eliminate the motivation to bring in illegal imigrants, while also contributing to the improvement of their livelihoods at home (being there's more sunlight in Mexico, also correcting the fundamental flaws in our own economic system might lead a good example).

8) with renewable energy, recycling takes on a whole new meaning. Recycling can lead to increased and sustainable material wealth, allowing for the neoclassical principals of supply and demand to increase profits for those virtuous enough to deserve them. Without contributing to the diminishing of the p0tential of the nation's or planet's biosphere.

9) renewable energy technology allows us to close the loops of material flows, since the energy itself is no longer a one way flow or a limiting factor.

10) like Lee Iacocca, I am going to limit the points to nine, since ten is just another arbitrary number. There's no sense in being a number junkie, especially after just recently correcting the DJI for inflation. I'm sure there are a lot of good things that renewables can contribute toward, air pollution, nuclear radiation, oil spills, the greenhouse effect...

A real State would be investing more in real security, like renewable energy, rather than squandering its wealth on maintaining 'security' to the detriment of inovation, strictly to serve political ends.

Peace