Repost: Observations on Capitalism

Capitalism, like Communism, is inherently neither good nor bad. It is a tool which we utilize, and how we utilize it decides its worth. Unfortunately, as with many of our other tools (wealth, technology, self awareness), people are severely unprepared for dealing/living/working in such a system. Some of this unpreparedness has to do with the conscious evolution of our species, but a great deal of it is also linked to our massively underdeveloped (and tightly constrained) educational system. More still, how society raises us to feel about other living things greatly affects our sense of responsibility with people, nature, and society itself. We abuse our economic system (as we abuse wealth, technology, and our capabilities for self awareness & whether or not we strengthen said awareness.)

Therefore, we regulate our economic system, making it not true capitalism but a mixed market economy. People, in their constant abuse of wealth and self worth, see regulation as a threat to their ability to gain MORE MORE MORE, regardless of how impossible and damaging that constant gain is. (Quite literally, we have limited resources and limited labor, grand though both may be.) Meanwhile, much of our regulation is geared toward helping money grow as opposed to avoiding abuse. It's juuust enough to keep the rest of the country from flipping tables over how badly we've destroyed our environment; the damage we've caused to peoples in South America, Africa, and Asia; and the destruction we've brought upon our own values, physical health, and emotional health. We want things more desperately than we want health. We want convenience more desperately than we want peace. Arguably, we've done this to ourselves.

The Kayapo being expelled from their homes for the construction of the Belo Monte Dam,
which will flood 400.000 acres of the Amazon Rainforest in Brazil.

There is another factor, of course. We are carefully sculpted to think this way. After all, this behavior is most profitable for private businesses and for governments, alike. Private business has become so important that it has the same rights as living, breathing people. For example, human beings are losing the right to know what private businesses are feeding them. We're in a fight right now to require the labeling of GMOs, and Monsanto is spending millions of dollars to make sure the public doesn't know they're being killed by the company which feeds them and profits from their ignorance. There is no government effort to protect us, despite the regulation supposedly meant to keep this kind of greedy behavior from harming us. In order for the richest few to remain this way, we must be kept under tighter and tighter control. We must be raised to think it's okay to encourage our children to be violent, slutty, wasteful, and morbidly obese; because then we'll buy up all the military games, bratz dolls, cheetos, and (eventually) Hummers without bothering batting an eye. There's no economic need to instill other values in our children along the way. Thinking this way moves money along, and it supports the companies which support our politicians.

Amendment flier for California, 2012.

Most importantly, however, we must see how the cycle feeds back on itself. The reason we are kept in such a state is because it's not enough to maintain one's wealth. Once a person has grown accustomed to constant growth and wealth, it's never enough. This is the human weakness that encouraged regulation on Capitalism in the first place.

MORE MORE MORE. At the expense of all else. That is why we can't "handle" capitalism. Or communism. Or socialism. For various reasons, we can't handle freedom. We continue to elect assholes to make decisions for us, because we're raised to think only rigid, controlling assholes are the right kinds of people to be leaders. We do it to ourselves.

But do not confuse my hypothesis with hopelessness or pessimism. Rather, I am recognizing a core of the issue. Altering our values, our attitudes toward living things, and our attitudes toward cooperation within systems must become a top priority. (See article, "Cooperation Is a Key To Intelligence.")
In order to create better systems, we must become better people. It starts with us, as individuals. I have to make the decision for myself. I cannot make it for anyone else. I cannot force it on anyone. Trying to do so paints my intent in a negative light and destroys it. I can live the example and help to educate people. I can encourage.

So, arguing about whether any of these existing economic systems are good or bad is a losing battle, in my opinion. We have to make something sustainable. Something new. We have to live the lifestyle we want others to mirror. And we have to hold each other accountable. When Person A abuses his/her power and lessens the quality of life for Person B, we cannot just sit idly by, no matter who profits from Person A's behavior. Agreeing on these basic points is arguably several steps back from being able to point to an existing, fully developed economic system or budget plan, but we've been needing to go back to the drawing board for a while. We keep ignoring the root causes and focusing on the symptoms/effects of the disease.

Repost: Focusing On the Wrong End of Money

I think it's important to stop and realize that no one president's (or vice president's) budget plans are going to fix our problems. Moving our limited resources around does nothing but move where our difficulties are--not eliminate them. Meanwhile, the causes of these difficulties march on, benefitting from our passive ignorance.

It's all short term. We talk about "oh well in 200x so-and-so did such-and-such and it helped this or that!" If we need a major budget overhaul every 4 years, we're doing it wrong.

Stop playing with our limited budget and start playing with the way the money and power work in the first place. Shut down these predatory banks. Strip the power from mass-production food companies to produce (and infect) all of our foodstuffs (from companies like Monsanto and Purdue.) Stop allowing private companies to help police the people, locally and abroad (for example, our red light cameras, and Blackwater, the latter of which is also now owned by Monsanto.) Stop allowing pharmaceutical companies to control every aspect of our medical rights (and yes, these should be rights, not an industry. The control includes the production of our medical textbooks, power over the FDA, power over medical studies and scientific breakthroughs, etc.) Stop allowing single corporations (like Amway and Procter & Gamble) to control every product and service we consume, thereby also limiting all of our talents, knowledge, skills, and educational incentives to serving these singular companies. Stop allowing companies to abuse the planet for profit, because without a healthy planet, eventually there IS no profit. There is nothing. The planet is not a money factory. The planet is where we live and coexist with more than just other human beings (which we do poorly) but every other living and non-living system.

Money is not the purpose of life. When we focus our politics on reorganizing money rather than changing the power we give it and the power we give those who hoard all of it, we accomplish nothing. All we do is help those with the money and the power keep playing their game.

Meanwhile, money is not an evil thing. It is a tool. We let our tools run our lives far too often. (Technology is also a tool. We rely so heavily on technology that we abuse it to complete our every task. No one knows how to DO anything anymore.)

I'm tired of budget arguments. They're empty because they were never intended to actually make the country a better place. They're intended to move money around, so long as we keep the status quo afloat. At the same time, I get caught up in pointing out the blatant problems with candidates' budget plans. Because our ability to encourage real change has been wrenched out of our hands, and when we try to exercise it, we are arrested and called terrorists and made to be the enemy of the people.

Sighing all day long.

Personal Anecdotes Often Do Not Negate An Argument

Edit: Despite the work I put into wording this just so, it seems I didn't illustrate my purpose well enough, and I managed to offend someone very dear to me. Quite simply, this blog post aims to do the following: 

• Assist fellow activists/conversation starters.
• Assist non-activist individuals trapped in the dramatic whirlwind of these conversations.
• Encourage all parties to recognize that their perspective, while important, may not embody the full "story." It's important to consider the other party's perspective, as well.
• Inform readers that very rarely does a personal anecdote amount to an effective argument. That does not make the anecdote unimportant. Anecdotes are necessary to share a perspective, and we should feel privileged to be given a glimpse into the other party's life. Generally speaking, however, anecdotes do not negate the argument of the other party (there are always exceptions, of course.)

Most importantly, if I know you personally and you're reading this, you are not represented by either of the generalized "people" listed below. (And if you are, I had no idea and didn't intend it.) When I first posted this, I was inspired/reminded to cover the topic (which I have been thinking about on and off since Occupy Wall Street began in 2011) after talking with a friend about the same topic (societal/economic struggles and the fact that many people are trapped.)  Similarly, if someone says "donut," I may be reminded that I haven't eaten all day. That doesn't mean I want to eat a donut, specifically. Does that make sense? Probably not. I tried.

I hope this clears up a few things. On to the post.

When voicing my opinion or sharing information regarding the state of the economy, medicine, industry, education, civil rights, workers' rights, or other present situation worthy of attention, I am met with many different reactions: some are very positive, some are inquisitive, some are disinterested and neutral, and some are flat out spiteful. Throughout this range (and inclusive of other reactions not listed because there are honestly too many to pinpoint each), there are two kinds of arguments I come upon more frequently than others, and they both involve an individual using their own experiences as proof that nothing is actually wrong. It should be said that these are broad generalizations based on my own experience, along with what I have read/heard/witnessed for many others. These two arguments can be very similar, and it may not be obvious why I have separated them in the first place. There tends to be a difference in the two viewpoints, however:

1. The I've spent my entire life struggling and you don't hear me complaining argument, and
2. The I've worked hard and made ends meet, so people need to take responsibility argument.

Person #1 is often quite angry. He/she has indeed worked incredibly hard under inhumane conditions. Perhaps they served in the military and experienced life-altering situations, or worked two or three jobs while fitting as many college classes in as possible. Perhaps they have children, as well. Perhaps their families were a great drain on them emotionally, financially, and opportunistically. Or, perhaps all of these apply to this person. Person #1 is upset that they had to deal with so much in order to maintain some livable situation, and other people aren't as willing to do so.

Person #1 fails to realize that people fighting for fair wages, fair hours, fair and cheaper school opportunities, and all the rest, do not think for a moment that Person #1 does not deserve everything they have. Quite the opposite, in fact. Person #1 deserves a great deal more. In our modern society, with money and food and resources aplenty, no one should have to deal with all of those things just to survive. If you have, I have a great respect for you and am so sorry that life has been so difficult. Your government should provide far more opportunities for you. I fight the idea that I should have to juggle a debt-bloated college education, varying part time jobs with no benefits and minimum wage income, and a system consistently standing up for the demands of Big Business while stepping all over the workers who allow business to function at all. Yes, people do it. That doesn't make it okay. That's the whole point, really. Do we really want our children and grandchildren to have to use these personal anecdotes as the measurement of their worth and success? Aren't we supposed to want better for future generations? Isn't that the point--to be constantly bettering ourselves and our society?

Person #2 is more apt to assume that the people who can't "make it work" simply aren't doing it right, and/or they're trying to milk the system while avoiding responsibility/hard work. (Person 1 and 2 may overlap on this subject, but I have separated them for this writing.) These individuals also use their personal anecdotes to show how success (however you define it) is possible.

Person #2 also deserves everything he/she has drawn together for him/herself. This is where the anecdotes serve another purpose, however: just because you did it, doesn't mean everyone else can, too. My fiance recently worded it pretty nicely when she said, "For every one person who makes the system work for themselves, there's a dozen people who abuse rather than trying, and hundreds more who simply cannot, for one reason or another." This isn't about the people who did it vs. the people who can't. It's about the system which makes it so difficult for so many who simply are in wholly different situations and therefore do not have the same opportunities.

Many of these individuals want nothing more than to grab that full time job and start putting away to Social Security. They want to take out a loan for a new car and build credit. They want to go to school and better themselves and their employability. But for whatever reason, they are unable to get that full time job, or they can't afford payments on a new car, or their credit won't allow for the purchase to be realistic for them in the first place, or their schedule and dismal future don't place a college education within their reach. Maybe they made a few mistakes. Still, they deserve the chance to make a decent living and get a decent education. After all, a mistake from which we've learned shouldn't wreck the rest of our lives; and the more educated we all are, the better society would be. Or maybe they've spent their entire lives in a poor situation with very poor opportunities. It's easy to forget that every little detail about our childhood leads up to the place we are in today, and not only do many people grow up in low-wage households, but many children grow up in abusive, oppressive households. These individuals are not doomed to fail, but are far more likely to.

If you find yourself in an argument regarding these issues, regardless of the side you're on, please stop and consider these things. Nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and it is very easy to condemn a person while knowing nothing about them or what brought them to the current stage of their life. Just because Person #1 has had to fight so hard, doesn't mean he/she should have been forced to. Just because Person #2 was able to make it work, doesn't mean it's a possibility for everyone else. Just because Person #1 or #2 is arguing that you're not working hard enough, that doesn't mean he/she deserves to be disrespected. Just because you can't make it work, doesn't mean it's unworkable. We live our lives and so are limited to our immediate perspectives, but there's always more.

Personally, I have to make sure I choose my wording a little more carefully to avoid excluding or stepping on some folks/groups. For example, I should point out that anecdotes are not useless. However, an individual's personal anecdote often does not form a complete argument. It may have a good point, but that doesn't make it a complete argument. A single anecdote is only useful to that single set of circumstances--its logic often cannot be applied to other situations. (This is not all-inclusive, of course. There are always exceptions to everything.) Huge groups of anecdotes start to form a visible trend, and statistics can be very useful.

What I encourage people to avoid is, "Here is the problem, and here is what I did for that problem. Therefore my solution also works for you, and if it doesn't work, you're doing it wrong/you don't want it enough/you don't deserve it."

Edit: Which also means to avoid, "It's impossible to make anything work, why even try?"

Both of those are incorrect assumptions. They exclude both people and opportunities, and they limit the individual.