Monday, April 03, 2006



Are We Barbarians? ( Mutual Funds )..1 Property Relations: A Historical LookIn a society that has been founded on theideals of theEnlightenmenton thephilosophes and thethinkers of centuries pastthere is no skepticism as to why reason flourishes to some degree. theall too typical political arguments rage furiouslybetween liberals and conservativesbetween libertarians and statists. Issues like gun control and abortion are arguedeach side tying together its different positions through sometimes inane connections and poor generalizations. There is a certain amount of diversity and disagreement in thepolitical arena. It was not theintention of theRationalist philosophers to say that reason leads all men to thesame conclusionsbut only that every conclusion or position must be guarded with evidencereasoningand logic. To support a government candidate without offering any proof for such support is as idiotic as it is unreasonable. So it happensthat thearguments in thepolitical arena follow a certain set of codea certain informal rule: if an argument is to have meritit must have evidence. Thoughts may be consideredbut can never be accepted without reasoning. Ideas may be proposedbut will never be believed without arguments.

Among theideas that are commonly debated in our modern societythere is theidea of wealth redistributionan idea that is largely associated with liberals and liberalism. Its essential definition is thetransferring of wealth from one part of society to anotherafter theinplace rules of economics have given wealth to one member or another. One of theprimary methods that wealth redistribution is enacted is through heavy taxing of therichand in turn using that taxes to fund programs such as college fundsbetter schoolsimproved social securityamong other social programsso that thetaxes of therich go to thepoorer parts of society in a more equitable way. Those who support wealth redistribution also support other things such as raising theminimum wage lawsincreasing health caredecreasing thework weekand other things that would otherwise aid theworking class and eliminate poverty. Howeverthese progressive reforms that are being implemented into our systemas much as they seem to take holdpovertycrimeand unemployment still manage to exist and infect millions of lives. Andeven beyond thisthese progressive reforms are highly criticized by conservatives as being destructive to theeconomy and antithetic towards ideals of justice. Not only are these progressive reforms ineffectiveconservatives arguebut they violate therights and liberties of people particularlythey violate theright to property of thepeople. theproperty rights of thepeople as they exist today I shall call property relations.
I am not going to make my views or opinions a mystery here. I firmly hold to thebelief that wealth redistribution isin factineffective. themost effective method of preventing povertyunemploymentand misery is by reorganizing and rearranging society so that thepublic is in ownership of themeans of production. That is to saythefarms that harvest thefoodthemines that bring up themetal orethefactories that manufacture theproductsthestores that distribute thegoodsand thevehicles that transport thevalue created by societyall of these things should be owned publicly. Just as public as theroadstherailroadsthehighwaystheutility (water and electricity) companiesand parks are publicly ownedso shall themeans of production be owned by thepublic. Regulation may be largely ineffectivebut no regulation at all simply allows for so much poverty and misery to flow through. While a bureaucracy might pose as a hurdle to theeconomya completely free market economy may be viewed as a wall that reaches to theheavensimpassable by those who love justice and freedom. It is only by an ownership of themeans of production by thepublic that theills of a Capitalist society can be remedied. It would require a complete revolution of theproperty relations as they exist.
But it is unjust! is thefirst cry uttered. theidea that property can be taken away from theCapitalist classwho has worked so hard and so diligently to produce thewealth that they have amassedis almost seen as theft. If we were to take thewealth of corporationsand put it under thecontrol of thepeoplewe would be violating theproperty relations of society! There is no doubt to thisas it is my intention to revolutionize theproperty relations of society. Howeverthere is still thecry that what we are doing is unjustwhat we are doing is immoralwhat we are doing violates a higherethical principle. Some people honestly believe that thewords Laissez Faire truly exist on some stone tablet in heaven (an opinion which I must admit is quite frightening). Why should anybody have theright to touch theproperty of anyone else? it is asked of usWhy should thepeople have any right to touchto manipulateto controlto operateor to possess themeans of productionwhich is thelegal property of investors and entrepreneurs today? These questionsI shall here answer.
2 Serf to Lord
Prior to therise of Capitalism and free tradethebelief that individuals are allowed to trade their commodities and goods with minimal restrictionthere was thesystem of Feudalismor what most historians regard as Manorialism. Feudalism was a term adopted by theFrench revolutionaries to classify those they opposed. It was believed in that day that serfs belonged to thelandand theland belonged to a vassal and a lordwho in turn had to face others in thehierarchy. thedifference between a slave and a serf was not all that enormous. Howeverthebrutality that was displayed against slaves in theAmericas was probably much more common than thebrutality given towards theserfs. theserfswhile they were considered to a large extent theproperty of their lordswere still somewhat free. Food was more common and work was notto my understandingas brutish as it would be for theAfrican slaves. It is believed by most historians that thesystem of Feudalism (or Manorialism) arose after thefall of theRoman Empirewith slaves living on large estates with their masters. These were theproperty relations of this feudal society.
Anyone who saw themiserytheabsolute wretched povertytheinjustice of this systemwould come to theconclusion that there was a time limit on Feudalism. theday would come when these property relationsand thegovernment (theforce) that supports themwould be smashed into oblivion. Of coursethose who predicted this believed in some form of posivitismbelieving that thecourse of mankind would through successive generations become more humanemore rationaland more gentle and kind in its manifestations. Just as we see so much support of slavery when reading theLaw of Hammurabi or Torahwe felt that such oppressive chains must be destroyed. Andso toowhen we look at thefeudal societywe feel that it could not last. In good timeenough men of boldnessenough men of couragewould gatherorganizeand some would sacrifice their lives and their libertythat therest of society may breathefreely.
If we were to offer these argumentsthoughto a Feudalistto a vassal or a lord or a king of this erathearguments we would receive would be plentiful. We might be told that a lord has theright to tell his serfs whatever he wants them to dobecause it creates prosperity and wealth for society. Among these argumentswe might hear thesame claim that has supported every brutal and vicious movementtheargument that god condones what is going on essentiallytheargument that only thekings and thelords and theknights and thevassals have theear of godand thepeasantsthepoorand theoppressed are deaf towards any sense of justice. Butamong these argumentswe will hear something else: thelords of themanor have theright to do what they like to theserfsbecause it is their right to property that they are exercising. It is theproperty relations of that society which allow this.
We would look at these argumentswith a few drops of suspiciona bit of disgustand ultimatelywith a fervent zeal that what these men were telling us was lies. If we were to imagine thetoils and thelabors of theserf classwe see essentially a group of people with few rights. Many of themfor a great deal of timebelieved that theway things were are simply theways things will always be a traditional argument of tradition. Butnothestate of things in Feudalist society are as unbearable as they are without any regard for justicehonoror truth. We firmly believe in our hearts that every man has theright to leave any piece of landthat they must be in control of their own lives and their own destiny. Any argument that claims they should be tied to landthat they should be chained to a masteris an argument for injustice and cruelty.
In what argumentthoughare we defending therights of theserfs against therights of thelords? Very bluntlyvery simplytheargument that we are proposing is one on behalf of justice. We believe that each and every person should be endowed to thesame rights and privileges. A person cannot be born into theposition of a lord or vassalnor can someone be born into theoppressive situation of theserf. Each and every man has faculties of thoughtof sufferingof happinessof sympathyof considerationof responsibilityand with these facultieseach person should be allowed their rightstheir freedomsand their liberty. With these as our argumentswe support theserfs right to no longer be a serfbut to be a citizenon an equal footing with a vassalwho is no longer a vassal but just a citizen. We believe that theproperty relations of thefeudal state were without justice. Those who agree with me haveeffectivelyagreed with revolutionizing theproperty relations of society.
3 Slave to Master
Slavery is a cruelbrutish system which has existed from thedawn of time and still exists today. theancient Sumerians believed and practiced slaveryas much as any ancient culture did. It was common practice that once a tribe conquered another tribe in warfaretheconquered became theslaves of theconqueror. So it seems that war is sparked by thedarker side of human passionit endures through a cruel instinctand it results with an unrestricted savagery on behalf of greed. Even todaynations that are conquered by other nations do not impose a slavery on theconquered peoplesbut a form of Imperialism and economic exploitation through mercantilism. theRoman Empire practiced a form of slavery between natural born Romans and those who have no relatives from thecountry. Several centuries agoslavery existed in theUnited Statesbut it was a form of racial slaveryof one race owning another race. Slaveryin all of its formsin thevarious regions and cultures and nations that it was practiced inalways differed. In some casesit was a difference between classas it was in Sumeror it was a difference between raceas it was in theUnited States In some casestheslaves were allowed some form of advancement in society. Even in theUnited Statesslaves were allowed to sell their goodsand use their money to buy their freedomthough this was susceptible to corruption by slavers. I think I can confidently say that there has never been a nation that has not had slaveryexcept perhaps with very few and very rare examples. Even today slavery still exists in third worldAsian nations that are under thecontrol of a military coup.
theproperty relations of a society that uses slavery are not that far from theproperty relations of a feudal society. There is a separation of classes. One class is subservient and another class is oppressive and in control. theserfs in thefeudal society were theoppressedjust as slaves in a slave society were theoppressed. thedifference is not all that great. In factone might argue that theprimary difference between these society is theterms and theculture or tradition that exist with them and those who argue for this are basically correct.
Since many people in America today are descended from slavesbut are now free citizensour society looks upon slavery as perhaps one of themost evil institutions. therights of masters over slaves was perhaps much greater than therights of lords over serfs. We have read and heard so many stories of slaves in thesouth being beatenabusedrapedsold from their familiesand exploited. We have read thetestimony of Frederick Douglass with watered eyes and a deep heart. It seems that themore we learn about theculture of a slave nationthemore we detest itthemore resentful we become of itthemore our hearts fill with passion to liberate theoppressed and vengeance to punish those who committed these crimes. I feel that it is quite unnecessary to defend Abolitionism or to argue for theend of slavery in this society. thereasons that I could offer would simply be ones that are well known to a people and a society that are familiar with thecruelty of this brutish and savaged institution.
I believe that thereason why we detest and abhor slavery is thesame reason why we rejected Feudalism as an oppressivecruel system. In both systemsthere is a class of individuals who are treated poorlywho spend theentirety of their lives in thechains of povertyand are given no right to determine their own destiny. thelords of themanor had a relationship with their serfs that was not entirely unlike themasters with their slaves. We believed in liberating serfs because they are conscious individualsthey have pains and sufferingsthey are capable of thought and emotion. Their minds are not at all different than those who govern themso we must say this: every person must be justly recognized as an independent entityallowed their own rightstheir own liberties. Andsotoothis is our response to thesystem of slavery: themaster must be demotedtheslave must be promotedso that they may look eye to eyeas citizensdeserving of freedomdeserving of rights. Perhaps one daywhen theoppressive systems that have been imposed on man by man have been destroyedall men can look at each other as kinand they can view all animals as brothers and sisters in different forms perhapsif theflame of liberation continues to grow and expandif we still feel hope when we grab our cheststhen one dayall men and women will regard each other as countrymen.
Yetthere is still something that must be realized in this. When we are crushing thechains that have kept serfs to land and slaves to masterswhen we are telling each person that they are free to do as their heart feels and as their mind thinkswe are engaging in revolutionary activity. In theslave societiesslaves are considered property. That is theproperty relations of such a society. By telling slaves that they no longer must answer to a welldressed savagewe are essentially revolutionizing theproperty relations of such a society. This is no mere small reform. We are not limiting thephysical abuse that a slave may be forced to endure. We are not limiting thehours a week that a master can push his slaves. To completely overthrow thesystem of slaverywe are becoming revolutionaries. Thusfarwe have two instances where we felt that it was necessary to completely crushdestroyand completely rewrite theproperty relations of society.
4 Woman to Man
Women were afforded theright to vote in theUnited States in theyear 1920. Yeteven after this datewomen still had to fight theevils of Sexism. Even though they were awarded theright to votethey still were paid unequally and treated by society unfairly. How Sexism has managed to survive for so longuntil theagitation of 60s and 70s Feministsseems to us so difficult. As humane and gentle thinkerswe look to Sexism and we see women who are treated poorlywho are given fewer rights than men; we see women being treated like second class citizens in a society that they are responsible for helping to build. We flip through thepages of history a few more timesand we are still puzzled. At leastwe are still puzzleduntil we read thehistory of other oppressed groups. theserfs were raised and brought up in a world that taught them thattheway things areis theway things should be. Any reorganization of society would result in complete and utter destruction: starvationfaminechaos. We read thehistory of slavesand even in theearly years of Frederick Douglasss lifewe read of how he was submissivetaught to believe that his position in life was deserving. With all of this knownwhen we look towards therights of womenwe can see plainly what may have eluded others. For a long timefor too longmany women believed that their place in lifein home and hearthwas deserving. When told thetraditionalist argumentthat theway things have been is theway things should bethey accepted it whole heartedly.
Upon reading these terrible storiesof theoppressed accepting their humiliating and miserable place in societywe want to grab their hands and tell them that they dont deserve what they have. We want to convince them that theliberty they deserve is sacred and beautifulvibrant and real. We want to convince them to stand up for their rights. As individuals who consider therest of theworld our kinthere is nothing more distressing and bothering than to hear of these cases of theenslaved thinking that they should be enslaved. Againtheargument of tradition reigns. So it happensthat a persons blind faith supercedes their own ability at reasonand this must be intrinsically connected to themisery that comes from their slavery.
In eras gone pasttheposition of woman has varied considerably. In some societiessuch as theEtruscanswomen were granted a place in society that was mutual to mankind. In Athensit seemed that they were more repressedwhereas in Spartathey were much more free. For a great deal of timewomen were treated simply as propertyfirst owned by their fatherand then owned by their husband. To think that so many millions of women were forced to endure such brutality is to almost unbelievable. Husbands beating wives to teach or punish them was considered a just actas it was considered their property. For a great deal of timewomen were not even allowed to legally possess property. theright to divorcein many cultures and many religionsis a right that has been given strictly to thehusband alone and not to thewife. In our modern worldwives who decide to be housemakers are entitledlegallyto some of theincome of their husbands. thehousehold is viewed as a twoparty systemwith thewife as a homemaker and thehusband as theworker. While I would not want this situation with any loverI must say that for those women who want to live as homemakerstheir rights are defended by their right to some of their husbands income. In times pastthis right was completely nonexistent. This is theway that so many civilizations of thepast have existedtheway their culture developed. In every part of theworldjust as we can find some roots of slaverywe can find theroots of Sexism.
thespirit of revolt would fill thespirit of theslave as much as it did theserf. Every person is a thinkingconscious beingcapable of thelearningfeelingsufferingand loving. Every slave has these very basic aspects of their physiology. Once their mind awakened to theinjustice that was given to themtheir hearts opened to thehope of liberation. Serf and slave alike did what they could as independent agents of society to overthrow thecurrent status quo. Sotoowe read thehistory of womens liberation. Mary Wollstonecraft defended therights of women as equal to therights of mankind. As early as the1800sJohn Stuart Mill and Emma Goldman worked as radical Feministspreaching therevolutionary idea that woman should be treated not as subordinantesbut as equals not as slavesbut as citizens. In this new societywith theproperty relations completely reorganizedwomen could expect thesame out of men. In love affairsa woman today governs herself and her own body; she is no longer theslave of a tyrant of a fathernor theproperty of a cruel and thoughtless husband. As mothers and daughterslovers and sisterswomen today can feel freeas their position in society is something that they are allowed to control.
Sothevotes of all humane thinkers today are unanimous: Sexism must be eliminated. Every woman must have rights that are equal to any man. No longer must we go through life thinking that a person can be forced to endure misery because of thegender that they had no decision in choosing. In doing thiswe are like every other case not just reformingbut totally revolutionizing theproperty relations of society. As it was a society of men who believed that women were simply a form of propertyby destroying this belief and creating a system where no human person is propertywe are reorganizing society. Not only thatbut we are rewriting therules of theproperty relations in society. By granting women therights that men have long afforded themselveswe are taking a step that is not much different than theserf attaining libertyor theslave destroying his master. Once againour defense of justice comes by actively revolutionizing societys conception of property relations. No longer would women ever be viewed as pieces of property.
5 Animal to Human
It is my fortunate pleasure to inform my reader that theprevious reforms have been successfulthat their results have created a rich culture and have nurtured thespirit of liberty. Yet here we approach an area that has had little to no improvement at all. It is here that I speak of therights and liberties of animal life. So many societies today have accepted thedisgustingcrudeand ruthless idea that animals can exist in one form: as theproperty of mankind. This opinion that is held of thelower creatures of earth is one that I must opposeas much as I oppose sexismracismor slavery.
Why do I support therights of animalsprimarily their right to life and liberty? For thesame reason that I support therights of woman to be treated equallytherights of slaves to become free citizens. They are consciousthey are endowed with thecapability of thought. They have nerves in their bodies that are identical to thenerves in our bodies. Too much heat will render them in pain and miseryjust as too much cold will. When their bodies are damagedor cutor bruisedit gives them painand they express this painand their closest of kin in theanimal world sympathizes with them. Just like any human beingan animal can feel miserycan feel pleasurecan feel theimpulses of wantsufferinglonelinesshappinesslust. Those very delicate and gentle parts of our psyche that we have considered for so long to be what made us uniqueactuallyare in a fully developed state in theother animals of theplanet. Rather than diminish thevalue of this qualityit actually surprises us with some beautiful and amazing truth: that these billions of animals all around theworld are capable of cultureof understanding each otherof empathy and those characteristics of charity that we once only thought human. Butjust as soon as we take in this factwe are attacked with another observation: these animalswho are just as capable of thought and emotion as any human beingare being killed by thebillions every yearon theplatein thelaboratoryin thecrosshairs of a gunin thefishing nets of ships... So it happensthat we believe in therights of animalsand oppose every form of animal exploitationwhether it is theeating of flesh foodor thepurchasing of products tested on animals.
I am not naiveand am quite aware that most of Americamost of themodern worldis opposed to these ideals of Vegetarianism. This can hardly be used as an argument against mefor most of theworld has harbored slavery at one point in timeand theroots of sexism have taken hold at least in every region once. thefact that serfdom was common in Europe does not defend theidea of Feudalism. In factit makes it all that much more appalling. Im sure I will be told of thedifferences of mankind and animals. theother creatures of theworld are given finspawsand claws instead of hands. Some breath with gills and are scaled. Some howlsome screatchsome screamsome are mute. Some show signs of high culture while others show just thesmallest and most simple signs of communication. Intelligence might vary from highly articulate to basic. YesI admit that these differences existbut I am not making any plea to simply sidestep these differences. Men and women differ. Butno Feminist ever saidIgnore thethedifferences of themale and female body pretend they do not exist. Nothese differences must be embracedjust like thedifferences between thewhite and black humans must be embraced. These differences cannot be used as arguments against us. These differences are irrelevant! Regardless of skin color or quantity of legsall animals are capable of thoughtemotionand sympathy. Yessothey must be granted therights that we have granted all humans.
If weas a societyare to eliminate thegreat cruelty and brutality that is being committed upon animalkindthen we would be taking a step not unlike theFeminists attacking sexismnot unlike theAbolitionists destroying slavery. We would be liberating an oppressed class that was just as deserving of therights to life and liberty as any other. With theliberation of this downtrodden class of individualstens of billions of themwe would be enacting a revolution that granted freedom and rights to themost amount of oppressed creatures. Yetby doing thisby allowing each creature its rights and its libertyby saying that we will not judge on physical appearance but by ones characterwe are in fact changing theproperty relations of society. For so longtheorganisms of theworld are considered merely theproperty of mankind. By recognizing them as independentswe are shattering theproperty relations that exist in our societysince we no longer recognize them as property. It is a matter of justiceof truthof a gentle and humane ethic.
6 Worker to Boss
Once thefetters of Feudalism were destroyed by thehands of libertya new system would develop. It would be thesystem of Free Trade and Capitalism. It endowed each and every person theright to do with their property what they would like. Prior to thedevelopment of highly advanced machinery and manufacturing plantsthis system have some effective value in eliminating themisery of thepeople and granting thepeople some rights. Howeveronce themeans of production became concentrated in factories and farmsand were in thehands of a few elitetheproblems of theold world would rise again. And this timewith much more ferocity. Cities would become overpopulated and unsanitaryworking conditions would become unsafe and dangerousand thepeople would continuously be told: work hard todaybecause heaven awaits you tomorrow. At this momentwe are in a world that is enveloped in Free Trade policy. Yeteven with this policymisery abounds. theghetto is full of poor people who have no reason to think that they can advance in life. theminimum wage laws that exist do not even meet thepoverty levels. A person could be working a full time joband still be homeless. And yetour economic organization is that of Free Tradesomething that seemed to liberate us oncenow it only burdens us. Those who defend Free Trade argue that thereason why poverty exists is because there is not enough Free Trade! What an absurdity! These economists sound like physicians from the1600sletting theblood of their patients. When their patient dies a miserable deaththey sayIt is because we did not let their blood enough.
There is no doubt that thelaborerstheworkerstheproletariat of theworld have come under attack by thedaemons of theelite class. Such a fact is as indisputable as it is well known. For so longthestate and theCapitalist class were one and thesame. Needless to saylaws were enacted that prevented workers from defending themselves. When workers organized into unionsthey were immediately arrestedmany of them imprisoned for decadesdenied theright to a public hearing. It was this combinationthese laborers working together to secure their own intereststhat greatly upset theelites of society. They thoughtWhen people come together to work for themselves and each othersociety will collapsewe will lose powerand our lives will become miserable and wretched. Like any dying beaststruggling to survivetheCapitalists lashed out. Butjust as we saw thepillars of sexismracismand Feudalism come crashing downso too would theCapitalist nightmare of perpetual misery. Todaythelaws reflect theopinion of thelaboring class stronger than thedeceit of theworkless Capitalists. It was once illegal for workers to form unionsbut now it has been legalized. It was once commonplace to force laborers to stay inside of unventilatedhazardous work placeswith their lives threatened every moment. We haveagain and again and againmade our assault on thesystem of Free Trade. Any economic system that allows for children to starve on a daily basis and workplaces to threaten thelives of workers is an unjust economic system.
Unlike therights of theanimalsthere has been some great and progressive reforms made on behalf of theworkers. For some timethere has been a minimum wage lawa law requiring overtime payantidiscrimination lawsantiharassment lawsand other laws that not only allow forbut foster theindependent development of unions. For a great deal of timesomething that was considered unpatrioticopposed to thecommon goodand otherwise inherently violentis now considered a part of our national pride. Andof courseI am speaking of unions herethecombinations of working men and women. By working together to secure our own interestsunions have been able to eliminate child laborto increase wagesto improve working conditions. theargument of theworking has beenand always will bethis: I am theworker. I produce thewealth of theworld. As theone who creates these products of societyI feel that it is a matter of justicethat I am rewarded with what I create. To say that a worker should work and only be paid what is needed to liveis no different than to hold a human being as a slave with chainsor to require a woman to submit to a mans willor to demand that a person accept theposition of a serf.
Yetwith all of these reforms that have come in thesystem of Free Tradethere are still many of us who are dissatisfied. People all over theworld are starving. Butwhen we look to our landwhat is it that we see? We see lands that are left uncultivated and untouched. We see so many people unemployedstarvingand without anything in their lives but loved ones. Yetno Capitalist has ever put them to work on these empty fields. Homelessness becomes a growing problem as millions fall into theclutches of poverty. Yetit is illegal to sleep in abandoned buildings that have no use. There is a large amount of poor peopleand yet there is a large amount of untouched land and untouched buildings. Capitalists dont feel enough motivation to develop theland and feed thestarving children. Nothey do not have any interest in it. Perhaps they feel they are wealthy enoughor that society can fend for its own. Whatever thereason for allowing these people to live in povertytheCapitalist class orders theemployed to build castles and palaces while a great portion of society cannot afford food to feed themselves! No matter how we look at itwe are living in a system that fosters perpetual poverty and misery.
As workers of theworldwe are entitled to theproperty that we produce. It is a matter of justicenot one of charity. It is a matter of what is rightnot a question of good will or generosity. By thejust principles of humanitywe feel that theland must be thecommon property of mankind. No longer should theright to workto feed ourselvesto clotheand house ourselvesremain in thehands of a few elite members of society. thefarmsthefactoriestheminesand all theproductive properties of mankind must become public propertyno different than theroadstherailwaysor thehighways. Such an ideologysuch a belief on thereorganization of society and mankindhas been called Socialismor Communism. Whether or not these terms fitis irrelevant. I support this idea. Call it Communism. Call it Socialism. Call it planned economy. It is irrelevant. I want theproductive property of theworld to be recognized as owned and operated by every person. thearguments advanced against such a theory are no different than those arguments against abolitionism or sexism. They will say that it is tradition for theworker to be in an oppressed situationthat theworkers are inherently thoughtless and stupid. Butjust as we didnt listen to these arguments when they defended sexismwe will not listen to them when they defend capitalism.
I can hardly think of any educated person who would look to these progressive reforms as putting new chains on thehands of thepeopleas an attack on thespirit of liberty. Yetwhen we look at theessential parts of this reformit is in fact a revolution. Particularlyit is a revolution in property relations. We are taking themeans of production from thehands of a fewand placing them into thehands of all. No longer will unemployment be caused by themegacorporations lack of interest in investment. No longer will poverty wrack theghetto and attack children. Butwe must accept this one fact: by enacting this reformby creating Socialismor Communismor whatever you like to call itwe are revolutionizing theproperty relations of society. We are doing this on a call from justice. Andwe are entitled to make this revolutionjust as theserfs who valiantly opposed their lordsor theslaves who ran away from mastersor thewomen who demanded their right ot be heard. Every revolution of property relations in thepast was based on thedemands of justiceon thepleas for fairness and equity in society. Sotoothis Communist revolution is based on revolutionizing theproperty relations of thecollective of men and women.
7 Ruled to Ruler
thethinkers of theworld who have openly adhered to theprinciples of kindnesstruthcourageand equity have done their best to eliminate oppressive relationships. By destroying thechains and tearing down thewallsthey helped to liberate thedowntrodden. In doing sowe have crushed theproperty relations of previous societies and allowed a little bit of hope and freedom into thelives of those people. Yetthere is still one last field that I have left untouched in this writing. I have not touched upon therelationship between theruled and theruler. It is here that there has been so much discussionso much argumentso much dedication and zeal. thepolitical philosophers of every era have offered their ideas and their observations on this matter. They have suggested reformssome progressiveothers regressivewhile many still defended thestatus quo of their own era. I must admitthat I am somewhat pleased with theinfluence that certain philosophers have had. While Thomas Hobbes set up a system that allowed for thegrowth of Fascism and TotalitarianismThomas Paine set up a system that maintained that thepeople were thedirect source of power for thegovernment. Other political philosophers offered similar ideasarguing that a people have theright to overthrow an unjust government. It is fortunate that those nations based on Fascism have tumbledfor themost part. While it is true that our own American government is based on theprinciples of just philosophersour government is still tinged with thebrutality of Fascism.
When we look to eras that are gone and pastand try to feel what it must have been like to live one hundredtwo hundredfive hundred or even one thousand years agothere is one brooding institution that we discovery. It is theinstitution of government. For too longgovernment has existed to keep theelites of society in power and to keep everyone else as a secondclass citizenwith fewer rightswith fewer libertiesliving in a system that was made to oppress them. Only by looking into thepast can we see themechanics of those previous governments. Monarchs and dictatorswho had to answer to nobody. They murdered their peopletortured political opponentsand created a reign of fear. thepeople who have inhabited this land for generations and generations were not allowed theone right that we hold today as indispensable: theright to control their own lives and govern themselves. Political autonomythebelief that a people have theright to be theones to decide thepolicies and laws that regulate their lifewas a belief that was advanced by every person who held liberation as thegreatest act and believed that revolt was thegreatest merit of any citizen. Philosophers taught thepeople that they must be in control of their own lives while revolutionaries took those ideas to thestate and demanded their rights.
It is something very terrible to imagine. thesociety that you live inyou have no control over it. You cannot say what laws should be enforcedwhat laws shouldnt be enforced. You cannot bring discrepancies of justice to others. You cannot publicly defend any of your rights to those around you. Not only does this apply to you in a dictatorshipbut it applies to everyone who is not thedictator. Revolution becomes themost obvious idea to any person who has a heart and mindbut then there is a great opposition to thefreedom movement. There are tens of thousands of soldiers who are defending therule of this dictatorcarrying out his orders against their own brothers and sisters. They have thegunsbut they dont have thenumbers. We immediately believe thisuntil we see themassive programs of thegovernment to convince thepeople that what they do is right. thedictator is hailed as theliberator of thepeopleand nothing elsebecause any newspaper that publishes even a slightly divergent opinion is arresteddestroyedattacked. As propaganda flows through thestreets and breaths in theairthepeople become convinced that they are liberated by thedictator. They become convinced that everything they are told is truebecause they cannot find a history book that would tell them anything different. thepeople become depressed and hopelessas they must look around their terrible conditions. And they start to believethat nothing will ever changeas their brothers join thearmed forcesas their sisters defend thegovernment with an ignorant smile. We have here thehorrifying reality of a police state. Rulers treat their subjects like propertybecause they believed they were simply property.
theidea of political autonomyas many of us today believeis that thepeople have theright to govern their own livesthat it is each and every person who must have a say in thematters of social organization. thesociety of mankind is made up of many partseach part a single persona citizen. And each citizen of this combination of men and women has their own intereststheir own desirestheir own concernstheir own idealstheir own thoughts. Since we are all mutually necessary to each other in this systemin this collection of menand since we aid each other as a society of brothers ought tothen every person in this collective must be allowed theright to determine thepath of thewhole. Every personliving a societyis granted theability by their own sense to see society for themselves. Similarlyby every persons own endowment of sympathyof understandingof concern and care for othersevery person wants to have theright to choose thepath that society is running on. Whether crimeunemploymentenvironmental damagewardroughtfamineor other natural disasters are attacking societyit is something that thepeople enduring these things must be allowed to speak aboutto tell to othersand then with thecollective ability of others help to eliminate these social ills.
This ideal of political autonomy has largely been accepted. Those who oppose it include Fascists and Totalitariansbut their numbers are dwindling still. There has been some progress for political autonomybut it has been poor and sluggish. We have erected a republic. Our leaders are electednot born into place. But even this system of a republic is still extremely ineffective. Leaders are prone to corruption and they follow their own interests. A ruler is a rulerelected or not. For this reasonwe will always have warpovertyand misery in society. As a peoplewe do not want to elect a person we want to vote for an idea! We must have a Democracywhere each person is allowed to choose thelaws that are enacted. Above allwe must have a leaderless societywhere each person is as much a citizen as they are a king. This may be called a system of Anarchy. Call it whatever word you like. It is a system that I am proposing and suggesting. Only through a rulerless society will we have a society where each person is truly allowed to voice their opinion and govern thecombination of mankind.
Howeveras we are inclinedas free mentowards theideal of Anarchismso it is that we are also destroying theproperty relations of society. No longer will any ruler be able to treat his subjects as forms of propertywhich is theessential premise of any form of government. We are Anarchistsbecause we believe in overthrowing thecurrent property relations of society. So long as an oppressed class existswe must work to overthrow it. So much as we are Anarchistswe are also Communists. These two ideologies are intrinsically connected. Anarchy argues that we should never be ruled by a kingjust as Communism argues that we should never be ruled by a CEO. Both are liberating ideologiesmutually necessary to each other if we are ever to accomplish a lasting revolution. If we are without a rulerwe will still be under thethreat of starvation by others. If we are without a Capitalist classwe will still be under theunjust rule of a leader. Just as we have in thepasttoday we must cut these chains. We must overthrow theproperty relations of societythat no person must suffer thebrutish effects of a slavery.
It is not charity but a rightnot bounty but justicethat I am pleading for. thepresent state of civilization is as odious as it is unjust. It is absolutely theopposite of what it should beand it is necessary that a revolution should be made in it. thecontrast of affluence and wretchedness continually meeting and offending theeyeis like dead and living bodies chained together.
Thomas PaineAgrarian Justice

A better world is possible...
.....punkerslut.com/ www.punkerslut.com
For Life,
Punkerslut


ABOUT theAUTHOR

Punkerslut (or Andy Carloff) has been writing essays and poetry on social issues which have caught his attention for several years. His website .....punkerslut.com/ www.punkerslut.com provides a complete list of all of these writings. His life experience includes homelessnesssquating in New Orleans and LAdropping out of high schoolgetting expelled from college for subversive activitiesand a myriad of other revolutionary actions.



((( top mutual funds )))
-ErLerC

 
  • Web Hosting