LINK TO NO KILL EYE PARTNER SITE

PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE

Liberal economics is a brutish and unsophisticated ideology that practices torture, terrorism, slavery and human sacrifice, and qualifies as theocracy by virtue of its superstitious mythology and rejection of science. The future reserves no place for rustic barbarism, arbitrary disproportion and deprivation, politics, materialism or psychopathic individualism. Human civilization will evolve in the near future to a sophisticated form of constitutional government that practices cooperative social organization with a philosophically advanced foundation of moral imperative, or the human species will become extinct. Liberal economics offers the promise of torture, terrorism, slavery, human sacrifice and extinction. The classical humanities offer hope through the alternative theories of ethics and morality.

THE FOUNDATIONS

of

UNETHICAL LIBERAL ECONOMIC CIVILIZATION

SUPERSTITIOUS TRADITION & MYTHOLOGY:

Liberal economic ideology is a system of belief founded on sentiment, intuition, superstitious tradition and mythology, and coincides with a conspicuous and perhaps even occasionally boastfully proud rejection of scientific methodology and empirical observation. A liberal economy is a church, the practice of liberal economics is archaic, unsophisticated, superstitious religious ritual, and a liberal economic oriented society is tyrannical theocracy.

The building blocks of liberal economic theology:

Universal Creation Mythology

(Entrepreneurial First Fathers and the Creation of Wealth from the Dark Immaterial Void) In liberal economic mythology, the extraordinary individual creates and orchestrates the enterprise that improves the conditions of all humanity with the provision of beneficial product, occupation and wage. The actions of humanity are otherwise of no inherent value to humanity and only the transcendental qualities of the enterprise convert action to productivity, and productivity to value in the form of beneficial product, occupation and wage. Humanity prevails over the chaotic tyranny of nature neither collectively nor as a species but subsequent to the provisional orchestration of the benevolent extraordinary individual that creates enterprise, creates productivity, creates jobs and creates value for an incidental species otherwise insufficiently adapted to transcend primordial happenstance. In liberal economic creation mythology, a primordial subspecies ascends to a realm of divine order in which benevolent creator gods orchestrate nature and bestow the bountiful gifts of products and jobs, created from the dark immaterial void by the superhuman magical god powers of extraordinary individuals. Liberal economic creation mythology elevates the enterprise to a transcendent divine order beyond the comprehension of humanity, originating from a higher power than humanity, and elevates the conductor of the enterprise to the status of omnipotent creator god, revered, celebrated and worshipped as divinity in human form.

Belief that the creator of enterprise makes great contributions to humanity with the orchestration of coordinated productive beneficial action presumes coordinated productive beneficial action would never otherwise occur. The historical record and the facts in evidence incontrovertibly establish that human evolved from hominid as the consequence of an evolutionary strategy of coordinated productive beneficial action. Every human naturally practices coordinated productive beneficial action, and the liberal economic ideology of extraordinary individualism and enterprise creationism rejects indisputable scientific fact in favor of superstitious faith, sentiment and mythology. The creator of enterprise creates nothing, orchestrates nothing and contributes nothing that would not otherwise naturally occur under any other circumstances. The only thing ‘extraordinary’ about the extraordinary individual is the extraordinarily wasteful squander of cooperative value disproportionately awarded to the most inconsequential and unproductive individuals among humanity in tribute to the superstitious belief that the extraordinary individual and creator of enterprise creates, orchestrates and OWNS the coordinated productive beneficial action of humanity.

Meritorious Reward for Heroic Action Mythology

(Meritorious Profit and Titanic Heroes of Epic Deed) In the creation of enterprise, productivity, job and value, the mythological extraordinary individual performs meritorious heroic deeds that earn the entitlement of extraordinary reward. Like the legendary hero that discovers a pot of gold beneath a rainbow or defeats a guardian leprechaun in a contest of wit, the extraordinary individual performs daring and courageous feats, triumphs over perilous hazard then collects natural treasures liberated from the prohibitive custody of material reality with the subordination of the chaotic forces of nature. In liberal economic meritorious reward for heroic action mythology, the extraordinary individual wields awesome superhuman powers over the incomprehensible magnitude of nature and collects fabulous treasures to which only the worthy are entitled.

Belief that meritorious heroic action entitles the worthy extraordinary individual to extraordinary reward presumes common ordinary productive action accounts as unworthy and merits no reward. Disproportionate reward for the extraordinary individual occurs at the disproportionate expense of the ordinary individual, not as a natural consequence of meritorious action but in tribute to the superstitious belief that the extraordinary individual earns the entitlement of determining the value of the constructive actions of others and controlling the distribution thereof.

Transformative Metaphysical Miracle Mythology

(Miraculous Multiplication and Molecular Recombination of Material Element) The superhuman magical creation powers and meritorious heroic actions of the extraordinary individual support the complimentary feature of transformative metaphysical miracle mythology. While arithmetic might establish the disproportionate reward of the extraordinary individual occurs at the disproportionate expense of the ordinary individual, liberal economic mythology retroactively modifies the history of constructive value and cleanses the conscience of the extraordinary individual with the alternative proposition of miraculous multiplication. The heroic action of investment, ownership and individualism alters the chemical properties of value and stimulates spontaneous meritorious multiplication, and though the ordinary individual encounters diminishment of value, it is merely coincidental as the profit of the extraordinary individual involves only the isolated interaction of heroism, merit, creation power and molecular element. The action of investment and ownership transforms value appropriated from the constructive actions of others into value created and value entitled for the worthy meritorious hero, and subsequently accounts not as value produced by the constructive actions of others but value created by the heroic performance of transformative metaphysical miracle.

Belief that disproportionate reward occurs through the transformative metaphysical miracle of investment and ownership presumes that ordinary constructive action is neither transformative nor a form of investment or ownership. The liberal economic mythology of transformative metaphysical miracle disregards the obvious material reality of productive action as well as the unattractive reality of a chain of custody involving appropriation, diminishment and disproportionate redistribution. The appropriation of constructive value and conversion to disproportionate reward for the mythological extraordinary individual is not the product of proportion, coordinated productive beneficial action, creative action or meritorious heroic action, but merely the product of blunt crude tyrannical force. The mythological transformative metaphysical miracle of investment and ownership is not a natural entitlement but superstitious belief in magical superhuman powers and miraculous multiplication of value through abstract symbolic ritual, incantation, alchemy and enchantment.

( LINK to expanded articles featuring LIBERAL ECONOMIC MYTHOLOGY and REJECTION of SCIENCE )

The Arithmetic and Mythology of Disproportion

Material reality imposes absolute practical limitations on the potential accumulative productivity of constructive action, and though accumulative productivity may vary to some degree by individual, an individual can produce in one lifetime no more than one lifetime of accumulative product through constructive action. Under the ideological theocracy of liberal economics, mythological value has no proportionate relationship with practical material reality, and the extraordinary individual is entitled to potentially limitless reward. The mythological products of economic creationism, meritorious heroic action and transformative metaphysical miracle, when converted to practical material reality equal a sum total value of zero… because… mythology, ownership and entitlement are BELIEFS -- NOT CONSTRUCTIVE ACTIONS -- and therefore DO NOT PRODUCE practical material value (such as food and shelter) in a world of practical material reality. The extraordinary individual may routinely convert mythological values of economic creationism, meritorious heroic action and transformative metaphysical miracle to practical material product of constructive action in values equal to hundreds or even thousands of accumulative lifetimes of constructive action. Because every individual can produce in one lifetime, no more than one lifetime of accumulative product of constructive action, the value of the entitlement of the extraordinary individual occurs by appropriation of hundreds or thousands of lifetimes of accumulative product of constructive action, for there is no other origin of practical material value.

The consequence of liberal economic disproportion is the wastefully excessive concentration of value awarded to an unconstructive minority supported by the punitive deprivation of a constructive majority, but with the magical powers of symbolic ritual, incantation, alchemy and enchantment, liberal economic mythology transforms harsh reality into a mystical dream realm of elves, wizards, leprechauns and unicorns, miraculous creation, epic heroism, extraordinary individualism, and legendary deeds of daring and courage.

Belief that extraordinary individualism warrants the entitlement of the appropriation of value produced by others elevates the extraordinary individual to a position of superiority. The liberal economic society does not cooperate, organize, plan, prepare and conduct controlled constructive actions that ought to produce easily predictable results. In the liberal economic society, a minority of superhuman meritorious heroic creator gods orchestrates a subordinate majority of inferior subspecies in the production of excess value on a schedule of perpetual hyperactivity, and selects from among the masses, the deficient, the defenseless, the solitary and the distressed for ceremonial exhibitions of dispossession and displacement to remind the subordinate that greater powers ordain all that occurs, reward sufficient appeasement with bountiful gift and smite down the impudent, insolent and disrespectful with punitive vengeance.

A technologically advanced society that practices specialization is not a collection of independent individuals. Specialization is a complex arrangement of designed mutual dependence, and the corporate executive specialist is no less dependent on society than the pizza delivery specialist, the food stamp recipient, the paraplegic or the child. Dispossession and displacement are not the consequences of the actions of the dispossessed and displaced, nor are they the consequences of the inaction of society; they are the consequences of the deliberated actions of society, specifically intended to cause dispossession and displacement. The practice of dispossession, displacement and all forms of deprivation are less than lethal human sacrifices that reflect not the inherent value of the victims or lack thereof, but the superstition of a society that does not believe it controls its conditions, does not believe it bears responsibility for the consequences of its actions, and does not believe it exercises judgment or discretion but simply encounters good and bad fortune determined by random omen, manifest sign, the chaotic forces of nature and the fickle sentiment of temperamental gods.

( LINK to expanded articles featuring liberal economic roots of EXISTENTIALISM and PSYCHOPATHIC DISORDER )

MORAL IMPERATIVE

and

THE ETHICAL SOCIETY

MORAL IMPERATIVE:

An ethical society with a moral code is a modest and realistic goal. Every society is already ethical with a moral code, the majority of societies simply practice bad ethics with bad moral codes, so an ethical society with a moral code requires only constitutional refinement of its ethics and moral values, not a culturally shocking departure from tradition or a foray into unfamiliar territory.

Modern secularists contend it is not appropriate for society to determine moral values for the individual, yet modern secularists also advocate organized law enforcement, court systems and a military, but those things are in fact the very kind of socially determined moral values to which modern secularists insist they object. That kind of logic is the fundamental philosophical flaw of modern secularism and liberal economics, and that is why secularism and economics chronically produce unethical and immoral results.

Modern secularism and liberal economics sprout from the host philosophy, existentialism, and existentialism is a fundamentally flawed philosophy, so modern secularism and liberal economics are the poisoned fruit of the poisonous tree, existentialism. The fundamental theory of existentialism commences with the proposition that all existence is the product of absolute quantifiable material reality and nothing beyond obvious immediate quantifiable material reality exists with any degree of certainty, from that foundation the existentialist concludes that abstract concepts such as god, moral values and even society ‘do not exist’. Existentialism ultimately prescribes ‘ethical’ principles and a ‘moral’ code in the form of self-centric individualism proposing that reality and the meaning of life are elastic, subjective and interpretive, and each individual determines an adaptive individually customized ‘reality’, ‘meaning of life’, ‘ethical principle’ and ‘moral code’. The existential proposition of individualism serves as the foundation from which the modern secularist contends it is not appropriate for society to determine moral values for the individual. However, the existential proposition of individualism also serves as the foundation from which the modern secularist contends it is appropriate for society to recognize, respect, protect and preserve the liberty of the individual (and that is why the modern secularist advocates organized law enforcement, court systems and a military).

The two aforementioned elemental principles of existentialism exist in direct opposition of one another and as is the chronic case in all existentialism, modern secularism and liberal economics, the superstitious zealot fundamentalist always resolves every philosophical hypocrisy with INTUITION. Clearly, by existential standards, without a foundation in absolute quantifiable material reality, INTUITION ‘DOES NOT EXIST’, and this accounts as the logically fatal flaw that discredits existentialism in its entirety and exposes it for the irrational childish impulsive psychopathic rationalization that it is, along with all of its logically fatally flawed offspring such as modern secularism and liberal economics.

The superstitious zealot existentialist wants to observe unrestricted individually determined ethics and morality in an independent reality without the meddlesome interference of society, and when something threatens that then the superstitious zealot existentialist wants society to meddle and interfere in order to provide, protect and preserve the ‘independence’ of the ‘individual’. The independence of the existentialist is dependent, the individualism of the existentialist is homogenization and the absolute quantifiable material reality of the existentialist is intuitive. With such tortured logic, the existentialist advocates the perfect utopian model of antisocial society practicing amoral morality, and this is why in modern secularist liberal economic civilization, deprivation is the product of ‘prosperity’, compulsory labor is the product of ‘liberty’, dispossession and displacement are the products of ‘justice’, collusive consolidation is the product of ‘competition’, and the meddlesome interference of invasive authoritarianism is the product of ‘individualism’.

From within the corrosive pandemic of intuition so pervasive in the existential philosophies, the core ‘values’ of independence, individualism and liberty amount to nothing more than simplistic trite hollow sentiment without logical or philosophical substance. With existential origins of intuition and sentiment, modern secularism and liberal economics are textbook examples of superstitious faith, and as ostensibly philosophical foundations of civilization, they ascend to the level of religion. Liberal economics is not a logical, philosophically coherent set of ethical principles and moral codes. Liberal economics is a random compilation of arbitrary directives for religious ritual and superstitious tradition, supported exclusively by a foundation of intuitive belief with a resounding rejection of science.

Immanuel Kant and the Categorical Imperative

With a firm foundation in conventional philosophy and moral theory, Immanuel Kant emerges as among the most prominent of moral theorists. If existentialism proves anything, it proves that amorality is an arbitrary moral value. Kant recognizes such paradoxes as indicative that ultimately, no society can ever call itself a society and avoid institutionalized moral values, and Kant also recognizes arbitrary moral values, even including amoral values, as inherently tyrannical. Kant resolves the issue of moral value with scientific methodology, and this is what essentially sets conventional moral theory apart from the brutish unsophisticated intuitive sentiment of existentialism.

Kant proposes the ‘Categorical Imperative’ as a scientific methodology for determining the morality of an action, and theorizes that by measuring the intent of the action against the result of the action, (with the intent and action presumed universal), if the result is opposite the stated intent this establishes the action as ‘immoral’. A popular example introduces profit as hypothetical intent and telling a lie as hypothetical action and with presumed universality of intent and action, the example proposes…

If the intent is to profit by telling a lie, and everyone universally intends to profit by telling a lie then every prospective profit will always account as the product of a lie that only presents a deceptive appearance of potential profit thereby precluding the possibility of profit by telling a lie.

We might just as easily conclude the scenario that fails the categorical imperative is illogical and in fact, that is precisely what Kant establishes with the categorical imperative but for what in all likelihood occurs by personal sensibility, Kant evidently prefers the more provocative and inflammatory ‘immoral’. In any event, with truly objective scientific methodology, Kant proposes a model for the establishment of socially institutionalized moral value that even if ‘wrong’, is at least philosophically logical and universally consistent without self-contradiction and hypocrisy. The desire for the perfect utopian civilization filtered through the illogical intuitive sentiment of existentialism has produced only the confounding self-contradiction of antisocial society with the universally hypocritical value of amoral morality. Clearly, logic and consistency represent a dramatic improvement. When we subject modern secular politics and liberal economics to categorical imperative, we ought all easily recognize a recurring theme by our established familiarity with the ‘profit by telling a lie’ example exercise, and easily conclude…

If the intent is to prosper from disproportion and every fellow human universally intends to prosper from disproportion then every interaction always presents only potential for unfavorable disproportion thereby precluding the possibility of prosperity from disproportion.

We cannot all benefit disproportionately. We cannot all profit. We cannot all exercise exclusive privilege. We cannot all contribute nothing and have everything we want without effort. The vernacular of the existential philosophies universally fails the categorical imperative on all counts. Profit, special interest, competitive wage, competitive price, private property, private enterprise, political party, independence, individualism, liberty, freedom, justice… In the context of existential origins, these concepts are universally illogical, self-contradictory and hypocritical.

Humans are inherently honest because humans instinctively recognize the illogical nature and self-revocation of dishonesty -- (categorical imperative: should all humans always lie and all humans know all humans always lie then no lie ever conceals anything and every lie always exposes an obvious truth) -- The reason isolated individuals profit by telling lies is because the majority of humanity predictably will not attempt to profit by telling lies, and the proposition based on a lie stands in juxtaposition to the proposition founded in truth. In the imbalance between isolated anomaly and predictable homogeny, the potential to profit by telling a lie occurs in perpetuity. The ‘philosophical’ ‘logic’ of the existentialist branches of modern secular politics and liberal economics is recognition of the perpetual potential for disproportion from the imbalance between the anomalous minority and the homogenous majority. Just like the anomalous liar can profit by lying to a predictably honest homogenous majority, the anomalous competitor can profit by competing with a predictably cooperative homogenous majority.

Existential modern secular politics and liberal economics amounts to a proposition to eternally postpone logic, planning, preparation, organization and cooperation in favor of eternally perpetual chaotic imbalance, and all the cherished philosophical principles of independence, individualism, liberty and prosperity always only apply to an anomalous minority. Existential modern secular politics and liberal economics is a proposition of illogical, unplanned, unprepared, disorganized, uncooperative perpetual chaotic imbalance in which, an anomalous minority of individuals always benefits disproportionately by the abusive subordination of the homogenous majority of society.

( LINK to Wikipedia biography and overview of philosophical works of IMMANUEL KANT )

COOPERATIVE APPORTIONMENT:

The sophisticated cooperative society recognizes, in the form of positive affirmation, unconditional universal rights of the individual as originating from the natural expectations of the individual, and this is as specifically opposed to superstitious belief in the form of negative intuition, that the rights of the individual originate from the mere imposition of limitations on the authority of government.

Superstitious belief in the stated intent of individual liberty through the action of limitation of governmental authority constricts social regulation of conduct with prioritization focused not on protective rights but on rights of entitlement. Consequently, individual liberty in the form of rights of entitlement precludes the possibility of individual liberty in the form of unconditional universal protective rights, and while exercising no regulatory authority over private conduct and private relationships, simultaneously offers no protection from the potential abuses of private conduct and private relationships.

Positive affirmative recognition of fundamental rights such as privacy, as originating from the natural expectations of the individual, defines the right as an absolute and unconditional protective instrument that applies at all times under all circumstances, as opposed to an entitlement the individual is free to exercise or ‘consensually’ forego by personal discretion. Contemporary examples include most conspicuously, ostensibly ‘consensual’ relationships between the individual and the employer or between the individual and the mortgage lender in which the individual commonly and routinely ‘consensually’ surrenders fundamental rights as a condition of a ‘private’ relationship established under the ‘entitlement’ of ‘individual liberty’. These ‘consensual relationships’ originate subsequent to the exclusion of the individual from natural inhabitation of a privatized Earth, and the essential foundation of these relationships is the potential for conditional inhabitation of a privatized Earth. The relationships between the individual and the employer or the mortgage lender hardly qualify by any remote stretch of the imagination as ‘consensual’ relationships, rather these are invasive, intrusive, obstructive, coercive relationships originated and sustained by a terrorist threat of punitive dispossession and displacement that would in all likelihood never otherwise occur under any other circumstances. The individual liberty and limitation of governmental authority practiced by the modern secular liberal economic society grants a right of entitlement to the employer and the mortgage lender to accumulate disproportionate ‘private property’ then engage in unregulated ‘consensual relationships’ with a general populace stripped of universal unconditional protective rights.

Categorical Imperative:

Compulsory cooperation precludes the possibility of cooperation

(… and coercive consent precludes the possibility of consent)

The sophisticated cooperative society constitutionally establishes universal unconditional protective rights that apply at all times under all circumstances without distinction between characterizations and relationships thereof, such as ‘government’, ‘society’ and ‘individual’, enforced by the regulatory authority of representative constitutional cooperative apportionment. Recognition of the entitlement of individual liberty endures in the right of the individual to reject society and live independent of the cooperative terms and conditions of society.

The concept of private property is the superstitious product of the economic mythologies of creation, heroism and miraculous transformation based on irrational reverence for ‘extraordinary’ action or quality of character. Economic theology recognizes ownership not as a proportionate natural expectation but as an entitlement of extraordinary feats of creative, heroic or transformative action, and subsequently, logically reduces common ordinary action to a position of unappreciable value unworthy of reward. The common ordinary production of food is no less creative, heroic or transformative than the actions performed by the surgeon, and though the production of food may not require years of specialized training or save the lives of those threatened by illness, it is no less essential or important nor is it of any less value. The belief that specialized training and extraordinary action are of greater proportionate value than common generalization or ordinary action is precisely that -- a belief -- and a superstitious one at that. The common ordinary production of food SUSTAINS LIFE, and the advanced specialization of the extraordinary creative transformative hero is entirely dependent on, and does not occur without, the common ordinary production of food. The production of food is a specialization every bit as ‘special’ as brain surgery. In the practice of specialization, we contribute specialized actions with the collective motive of decreasing the degree of natural difficulty inherent in life, and the denial of proportionate reward for common ordinary action precludes the possibility of decreasing the degree of natural difficulty inherent in life.

The apportioned society recognizes the value not of extraordinary specialization but of proportionate action. All contributory action is of equal value, and reward is proportionate only to accumulative contribution without regard for any level of extraordinary expertise. The formula equally accommodates both extraordinary ambition and extraordinary ambivalence. Nothing prohibits the extraordinarily ambitious from collecting extraordinary reward proportionate with the performance of extraordinary accumulative contribution, and the extraordinarily ambivalent collect minimal reward proportionate with minimal contribution. Material reality imposes obvious limitations on the potential for extraordinary reward as well as the potential for extraordinary idleness, but those limitations are not the product of arbitrary value judgment or superstitious religious belief, they are the product of natural conditions and sophisticated moral imperative.

The apportioned society does not compel humans to compete for a limited number of available occupations then punish those that fail to prevail in contest with dispossession and displacement, and the apportioned society denies participation to no individual ever under any circumstances. As the accumulation of factors such as population and the advancement of technology diminishes the necessary sum total of contributory participation, the reward for contributory participation increases proportionately for every individual hypothetically up to and including unlimited reward without effort (should technology hypothetically advance to such an exaggerated extent).

The natural inhabitation of the Earth without the imposition of arbitrary conditional obligation is the natural expectation of every biological life form, and the apportioned society accommodates this material reality with cooperative apportionment of the Earth. The individual establishes a private habitat simply by selection of a designated parcel and satisfies no qualification other than demonstration that the individual is a living human. Society exercises no regulatory authority over the private habitat other than as might be determined by practical consideration limited to such criteria as prohibition of the establishment of a private habitat upon a public right of way, park or hazardous location as cooperative process might identify. The private habitat constitutes an unconditional universal protective right that endures for the natural lifetime of the inhabitant expiring upon the death of the inhabitant to the absolute exclusion of all other imaginable circumstances. Nothing prohibits individuals from entering into ‘private’ agreements that impose conditions on the private habitat but the cooperative society does not enforce any such agreement, and individuals that enter into any such agreement do so at their own risk with full knowledge the agreement is unenforceable.

The apportioned society compels no contributory participation and imposes no arbitrary conditions or qualifications but through a process of constitutional representation, socially plans, prepares, organizes and coordinates all apportionment of contributory action and proportionate benefit. Every individual is under no obligation and is free to participate in any degree independently determined or to reject society and all cooperative apportionment in their entirety, in favor of an independent individualistic life (which is in fact, a completely realistic option under the conditions of natural inhabitation of an apportioned Earth without the imposition of conditional obligation). The apportioned society recognizes the right of the individual to participate or to reject cooperative society but does not recognize any entitlement of the individual to participate in cooperative society and collect disproportionate reward at the expense of society through antisocial conduct and coercive relationships.

While the establishment of the private habitat enhances the security, the privacy and the sanctity of the individual in the home, the individual is not entitled to accumulate disproportionate private property and use it as a weapon against the rest of humanity to threaten, intimidate and coerce the collection of profit. In the cooperative apportioned society, the reward for the production of food is food, the reward for the production of consumer electronics is consumer electronics, all rewards are proportionate to actual contributory value, and no reward for anything is ever unlimited fabulous riches and treasure or entitlement to interfere with the privacy of others and profit from their misfortunes. The sophisticated cooperative apportioned society of the future does not regulate individuals, behavior or actions, the apportioned society of the future regulates conditions.

All conditions of cooperative apportionment described herein are completely realistic and plausible under the current terms of constitutional governments, and require not revolution or drastic action but simply refinement and collective affirmation.

( LINK to expanded article featuring COOPERATIVE APPORTIONMENT THEORY )

Principles such as cooperative apportionment represent credible potential foundations for the ethical society of the future and the advancement of the ethical treatment of people. In the future, we will recognize the futility and wasteful squander of unfocused hyperactivity for the sake of wage, and we will appreciate idleness and inactivity as a premium of exceeding value. As the role of automation and advanced technologies expand in the production of material goods and the provision of services, we will share the reward of proportionately diminished activity and proportionately increased benefit.

Fear of ‘communism’ is superstitious fear of a WORD. The philosophy of Karl Marx divides neatly into two major essential components: economic theory and political theory. The economic theory of Marx is an undeniably great scholarly work and relatively unique as well for its emphasis on ethical principle and moral imperative (as opposed to the most influential works of liberal economics in which, consideration of ethical principle and moral imperative occurs not at all if not perhaps in the form of a distressingly indirect and unqualified ‘intuitive’ presumption that motivation and belief are uniform). Conversely, the political theory of Marx easily qualifies as unorthodox if not eccentric or even bizarre. For reasons that in all likelihood will remain an enduring mystery, Marx theorizes the transition from ‘bourgeois’ economics to socialism can only occur through a specific series of incremental steps commencing with the inaugural step of the dictatorial ‘strongman’. Many other great scholars produced great works on the philosophy of socialism but Marx composed a step-by-step instruction manual for the conversion process and for that reason, virtually every attempt at communism in the modern age has conformed to the Marxian game plan commencing with a dictatorial strongman. The obvious flaw in the plan is that the average dictatorial ‘strongman’ is probably most enamored with the dictatorial strongman elements of Marx’s theories and not necessarily so much with the economics, as painfully demonstrated by numerous dictatorial strongmen. Liberal economic advocates love to say, “History has proven Marx wrong!” but like one-hundred percent of everything else such characters say, it is opportunistic, contextually selective and philosophically dishonest. History has proven Marx wrong about the dictatorial strongman but with the condition of privatized healthcare in the United States, the condition of socialized healthcare elsewhere and with the sophistication of first grade arithmetic, history has resoundingly proven Marx right about the economics.

The economic theories of communism adapt consistently to any form of government and a dictatorial strongman is by no means a necessity. History has proven strongmen don’t care about economics and will exercise dictatorial powers in any conditions under which they think they can get away with it, without regard for economics, and this applies equally to communism, liberal economics and even a complacent constitutional democracy. We fear the word communism because we think it automatically implies secret police, reeducation camps, indoctrination programs, authoritarian bureaucratic central committees and dictatorial strongmen but despite historical trends, none of those things automatically accompany communist and socialist economic fundamentals anymore than they automatically accompany anything else.

Everything we do in modern secular liberal economic societies is already ‘collectivism’. Our occupations are not a part of self-determined lifestyles; they are specialized contributions to collective productivity. We do not directly produce the articles we possess with direct comprehension of the effort required to produce them versus the benefit of possessing them; the articles we produce constitute collective value. No proportion establishes or determines the ratio of value between our contributions and our rewards. The occupation we perform, the house in which we live, the car we drive, the clothes we wear, the pastimes and activities in which we engage, are all the product of distributions and exclusive privileges determined by the collective. The shareholders and executives of the corporations for which we work, the investors and administrators of the financial institutions that hold mortgages on our homes, and the myriad other enterprises that comprise a ‘market’ and determine prices, wages, interest rates, schedules, protocols and policies are arbitrary authoritarian bureaucratic central committees that dictate our actions, our rewards and the conditions of our lives. These are the very bureaucracies and central committees; the very collectivism we have feared for so long. Everything about us -- our occupations, our educations, our homes, our cars, our activities -- are not the proportionate products of our direct actions; they are the product of the collective, and all distribution thereof is the arbitrary determination of bureaucratic central committees.

We fear abuse at the hands of the dictatorial strongman, and theorize that individual liberty and the diffusion of governmental authority are appropriate preventative measures, but unregulated individual liberty and diffuse governmental authority produce perfect conditions for the abuses of dictatorial strongmen, not in government but in the private sector, and leave us unprepared and incapacitated as a society with inadequate authority to regulate and intervene. The potential for abuse of authority is more hazardous in the hands of the unregulated private individual,  and current conditions in western civilization are not endemic of an authoritarian government but of the infiltration and commandeering of a weakened impotent government by an unregulated private sector that identifies government as both a potential obstruction and an opportunity to exploit.

The diminished, weakened and impotent governments of the west are not the guarantors of universal individual rights and egalitarian principles but the compliant tools of the private enterprises of dictatorial strongmen exercising unregulated individual liberty and subjecting greater humanity to a litany of abuses. Our fanatical obsession with individualism and liberty has not produced a protective nurturing society that respects and preserves the universal rights of every individual; it has produced the entitlement of every individual to exercise the unlimited unregulated abusive powers of dictatorial strongmen.

The argument that history suggests the authoritarian government is the greater hazard is a misinterpretation. The authoritarian government is more an example of a society commandeered by subversive private enterprise masquerading as ‘government’.

YOU ARE ALREADY A COMMUNIST. You have always been a communist. You became a communist the moment you performed your first specialized occupational function. You became a communist the moment you recognized yourself as a part of a society. An organized society and specialization are fundamental principles of collectivism. Our society is collective, our behavior is collective, everything about us and everything we do is collective. We are collective. The only thing we do not do collectively is determine the distribution of value. We bear all the responsibility and liability of the collective, and the charade of liberty, prosperity and individualism has only stripped us of the rights and entitlements of the collective, and concentrated them under the arbitrary authority of bureaucratic central committees orchestrated by private enterprises and dictatorial strongmen. When we overcome our superstitious fears, abandon our childish irrational grandiose expectations of entitlement and regain our sense of proportion, we will recognize our greatest degrees of true universal liberty, true universal prosperity and true universal individuality will come from less liberty, less productivity and less individualism by realistic recognition of who we are and by the responsible exercise of our collectivism with respect for the fundamental principles of the ethical treatment of people.

Transition to apportionment is not a shift toward collectivism - It is a shift toward reduction of collectivism.

Cooperative apportionment is the society of the future - Dictatorial apportionment is the society of the present.

( LINK to Wikipedia biography and overview of philosophical works of KARL MARX )

A PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE APOLOGY TO RELIGION:

It is not the intent of PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE to disparage or suggest by comparison that religion is inherently superstitious or barbaric. On the contrary, PeTP recognizes Immanuel Kant as an important contributor to the fundamental principles of the ethical treatment of people, and Kant was a devout congregate of a major traditional religion whose philosophical theories arguably demonstrate significant religious influence. Moreover, PeTP recognizes religion as fundamentally more closely related to scientific methodology than economics by virtue of the close relationship between theology and philosophically oriented moral theory. It is the intent of PeTP to disparage and suggest that economics is an inherently superstitious and barbarous form of religion due to its rejection of moral theory, and its fanatical emphasis on antisocial and misanthropic themes with suggestive violent undertones.

Visit the

PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE

Message Board

and express your approval (or disapproval)
Post your email address to join the PeTP mailing list

Print the

PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE

Membership Card

and be the first on your block to own one

Print the

PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE

Advisory Memo

and spread the word to friends, family and elected representatives

PEOPLE for the ETHICAL TREATMENT of PEOPLE

concludes with a joke to share with your friends.

The Fundamental Difference between Republican and Democrat:

The Republican believes liberty entitles the private enterprise to practice slavery.

-

The Democrat believes liberty entitles the slave to kind and considerate treatment.