Government Industrial Complex (GIC)

Military Industrial Complex = Government Industrial Complex (GIC).

The only consumer of the military products of industry is the government and it is only for government purposes. Taxation to pay for it is an onus placed upon Real Industrial Capital (RIC). Since all military contracts are governmental, these industries are defacto government industries and not actual capitalist industries. The contract bidding is market driven, but there is only one consumer, so it is not a market where price regulates demand, it is more a market where demand accepts any price, especially since the money is not earned by the government from the manufacture and exchange of goods and services. Ultimately, the government industrial complex is a socialist form, where government completely controls manufacture. While the argument can be made that these industries are not owned by the government, it can also bring into question who the government is.

Wars today are engineered by the CIA, which serves as the marketing firm of the GIC. The majority of government spending is on war and the maintenance of a 'soldier reserve' through the welfare state, which would not exist without the fallacious institution of interest on fiat money. Fiat money, or money which retains value only as a consequence of governmental authority and not as a result of it being or representing actual capital, is not capital and as such is not eligible to collect profit (as "interest") in a capitalist economy. It could earn a tax, but then that tax would be paid to the government not to private individuals who own credit card companies (stock therein) or banks. By charging such interest, real capital is steadily losing value and power to governmental power, which is simultaneously promoted by the pseudo-leftist ideology promulgated by so-called Marxists. The steady weakening of capital and the total corruption of interest lead to a steady diminishing of employment opportunities, as there is inadequate capital being invested in domestic production of goods and services and most 'money' being invested in the illegal expansion of consumer debt, no jobs, interest on debt and diminishing supplies of domestic products together conspire to impoverish individuals and force them into military and government occupations (which can also afford to pay higher wages).

If one follows who is on the board of directors of these banks, government industrial complexes and usually oil companies, it is all the same people. Are these individuals the oilgarchs who run our socialist state? Government collects over two thirds of the social product, capital and social security battle it out for the remaining third. This would be a reasonable arrangement if human beings were not all "specification fanatics", but a balance of power is the only just, rational, or functional system that has ever been found to work for human civil states. States where power has concentrated into the hands of the few are not functional, just, or liberal states. They are tyrannies. And the absence of investment capital available for renewable energies and energy efficiency technologies is proof of that. The constant manufacture and 'growth' of war is another obvious proof that government is not there for the people of this nation.

The fact is that Capital needs a political voice, and joining the party of the GIC is never going to be a good idea. Joining the party of the common folk, is also not a good idea. That leaves only one alternative....

U.S. CAPIALIST PARTY (NOT THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY EITHER)

Peace, Lou

Checks Balances and political economy

Was gonna post a blog on how it is the government's responsibility to maintain the value of a fiat money, meaning that inflation can never occur, and that it is consistently failing to do so, but being the Christmas season, and everyone is using their plastic to make other's happy, I decided to hold off on that one for now. I will be contacting the House on that to see if the Democrats are for real or just more blow up toys that just say nice things when you pull their chain.

Instead, I have been pondering how one could really go about balancing our government today, what sort of checks and balances are appropriate. If we consider money as a form of power as well as the authority to do violence to a person, which is what law is, then we have two forms of power to check, the third form of power is the social or sovereign will of the nation, and today media allows for a check on that as well, so all three forms of power are capable of being checked, but there is no constitution that balances them. For a civil society to work well, the aristocratic class must be necessarily and sufficiently checked such that their socioeconomic value is grounded in their merit with respect to the providing of goods and services to the market. This is the most important class to check not because of their power, but because they are the most rational class and must be motivated to rely exclusively on reason, rather than arbitrary and unmerited gain, which diminishes the quality of their endeavors. Will and want need to be decoupled in this classes mentality, such that will is the tool by which inclination is managed objectively by reason and virtue.

For a while I was bashing unions for the sole reason that unions divvy up the democratic political power between a paltry few blue collar working professions, which weakens it for everyone else, but this thinking is erroneous. The union today plays in the economic arena not the political arena. That the economy is unfairly divided in the aftermath of union influence is, however, a real issue that should find a mechanism for checking and balancing so that everyone is treated fairly, not just an exclusive lot who manages to organize - usually by force though, which is political power. What we do not want to see, though, is government setting wages, but it would be nice to see the sort of economic power that unions exert in the favor of exclusive professions divided equally between professions, on the order of an entire second 'constitutional republic' style of government charged with balancing power between economic classes, but with no capacity for doing physical violence, only exploiting economic power as its source of authority.

The economic branch of the republic must also establish a forum where labor and capital are equally represented, monitored, perhaps by a government based executive branch. Functional at a federal or international level, but with political participation at the local level. Division must be along profession lines, with equal power between professions. The differential line would then be necessarily based upon reason.

In the social arena, the sort of influence that the media wields must also be somehow managed. While advertising inculcates messages that appeal to the lowest common denominator - man in the state of nature-, industry and business require a labor force functioning in the state of civil society. So while advertising and marketing are undermining human morality, business, becoming increasingly sophisticated and international, requires professional, civilized behavior. Not to mention that marketing prefers the uncritical mind where business requires the critical mind. So, something needs to happen with bringing these two diametrical forces to a common solution.

There are the three main forces (political, economic and social), which need to be balanced in order for civil society to persist. Currently, government controls two thirds of the social product (what's left after all costs are subtracted) at the federal level and States control about half of what's left of that. Business profits are inadequate to invest in the sort of physical changes that we need to be investing in in order to survive the changing socio-physical environment that we are increasingly being faced with. This protects old capital but prevents adaptive progress. War is not good for the economy, it deprives the nation of wealth and is only useful against seriously legitimate enemies who are capable of physically demolishing our nation. The military industrial complex must be prevented from creating opportunities to justify their obesity. Currently government's failure to invest in renewable energy and responsibly manage our fiat money - to prevent inflation- is actually the greatest threat to our nation's physical well being.

At the same time, there are still many other imbalances between civil society and capital, capital and government,and government and civil society that need to be brought into a state of accountability. Not specifically via the use of punishment or physical force, but rather through some sort of contractual blue print or kinetic formula that adjusts to counter imbalances in a socially responsible manner. Large populations tend to obscure the individual and provide more opportunities for indiscretion, so individuals must possess an increased morality, which only a common formula or constitution can provide. Morality being the making of choices in the present which affect only the future, with the will objectively subordinating excessive impulses to reason and virtue. This is also the definition of 'freedom', since a hand to mouth existence is independent of choices. Knowing what choices to make in the present, such that a brighter future is ensured needs to be part of the knowledge every individual is habitually aware of.

What I would like to pursue this next year is the addressing of these various checks and balances and see how they can be implemented such that the social, political and economic powers are all balanced. Then we can contrast that with what we have now to see if and or what changes could be made to improve the well being of civil society.

Peace and prosperity,
Happy New Year!

It's been too cold up here to write until now - sorry about the delay - Notice that I've been reading Kant?