By

John Wright

To be blunt, I was wondering just what tack to take in Part 2 of this Global Nonsense article. I thought, incorrectly, that I had already stated most of what matters. I am pleased (unfortunately not really) to state that I now have more ammunition to make my case about the fragility and ultimate demise of those who might believe there is a free lunch, arrived at by socialist political principles. That belief, besides being naive and thus silly, is utter garbage.

Let me begin with a comparison of values opposite hard life realities that I and many others I know learned as children, adolescents and especially as young adults ... when we became responsible for our well being and our life success as independent individuals. Okay, maybe that sounds too self serving, and in truth it is, because we inherited advantages that our ancestors had to create from far fewer opportunities and far fewer useful materials.

You might say I am now simply looking at the inner drivers in people to improve their life circumstances via personal effort as opposed to looking for handouts or easy solutions in a world of socialism. My thesis is that the disconnect between our individual knowledge bases on what to do, why and how, compared to the physical advantages we enjoy, most of the time, is a killer moving forward in time. Oh, yes, in one sense it is the same story as presented in the first part of this article ... if/when you become obsolescent and thus ignorant of how to create your environment, you are getting ready for a very big fall in quality of life.

Contrary to popular belief in some circles, when you become the age of an adult, there is not really any mommy or daddy to care about your future well being. The political surrogates pretending to be your followon parents are providing for you by spending someone else's money. Well, isn't that a hoot? Hey, if they can do that, well, why not enjoy it? Now, if you are dumb enough to believe that last sentence to be reasonable, and you expect that condition to last for your life, I pity you.

The best (worst) part is that you will not grasp the stupidity as long as the dole continues. When it stops, or more accurately, when the quality of your life and that of your children continues to decline, you will start to understand. Or maybe you won't. You may be so misled that you will find bogeymen to curse, and your would be leaders will present bogeymen to you in great numbers, never acknowledging the failures of their own beliefs and methods of managing human society. You may even become a replica of some of today's worst failures ... Islamic jihadists. You best think about that carefully.

What this amounts to relates back to simple commerce. We each bring something to the table that the other person wants. We bargain for relative amounts based on perceived value of each item. When we both believe we will be ahead of the game we gladly trade. That is the basis for living together cooperatively. But now let's compare that well known historical practice with what is happening today to stimulate commerce.

We are stimulating commerce by creating and borrowing money from out of nothing to give people who do not create anything of commercial value the ability to purchase goods and services. But the actual goods and services of essential value (ergo, not something elective, like entertainment) that are produced by the few take ongoing effort and investment, and the motive to continue is based on profit. There is nothing wrong with conducting business to make a profit, provided a company does not overcharge for it's products. Here is the rub ... Creation of money out of nothing drives inflation, and companies comparing the purchasing power of their profits to previous profits in terms of buying power find they need to increase their prices just to stay even. Thus, the created money becomes less effective, which obviously stimulates the demand to create more money to make up the difference.

Anyone who thinks about it realizes the fundamental basis for commerce is violated when only one of the parties is producing a product of value. That then is the economic basis for claiming that broad based socialism is unstable and will always, ultimately, fail. Another way of stating it is this ... When I have to share my goods with you and you produce nothing I want, then I quit making goods beyond my immediate needs. I no longer have a valid incentive to produce for other people. But that isn't the end of the story. Read on ...

If you need me but I don't need you then I will find a way to satisfy my essential needs without doing extra work for you, whom I find to be useless. I may achieve that situation without paying consequences, but more likely you will steal from me and/or kill me out of anger (think about the fate of South African Dutch farmers). You will definitely use socialistic government authority to try to make me produce for you. Either way I will produce little or nothing and you will starve. I may also starve. Understand that the use of force will destroy the will and then the ability to produce, my ability, not yours, for you have no ability of any fundamental value to feed, clothe or house yourself or provide transportation or medical services or even manage a social circle.

There is a counterargument related to the mechanization and automation of all tasks necessary to produce what all of us need. The problem is who will create this environment and then also maintain it? Fools see robots building other robots to produce and to maintain everything for us. There is circular logic in that belief, like Churchill's example of standing in a bucket and trying to raise yourself by lifting the handle. The idea is that the development of sophisticated devices to do "everything" requires major brilliance possessed by only a very tiny portion of humanity, and many decades or even centuries to automate everything noted. Can you actually believe you can make slaves of the very few brilliant people, to serve your own ends? Are you even limiting your populations to try to make a potentially nice future even possible? Perhaps now you can see yourself standing in the bucket. If not, you are hopeless.

The implication of automation is that the vast majority of citizens will be mentally incapable of creating new technologies via application of scientific research. While that has been true in the past as well as the present, jobs have always been there for the less capable to earn their daily bread. When you add together the effects of people in general becoming less competitive/useful and the gradual decline of national average IQ you wind up with a large population of aimless people unable to do anything substantive except consume food and non-renewable resources like petroleum.

Now return to the question about the purpose of life. If as a species, all but a few of us become irrelevant to our physical maintenance, then what does the future hold for the masses? Do you want human gods to rule over masses of ignorant people similar to the make believe god of the Bible or the Koran and maintain their ignorance forever? Is that a worthy goal? The all too human "gods" who are herding you into becoming meaningless via socialism are not your friends. People are not functionally equal, period. You are being lulled into mental inactivity, which makes you weak, and being sadly misdirected into hogwash about accepting the values and behaviors of people from failed cultures.

Imagine yourself looking at a feedlot filled with cattle. Now think of yourself as one of them. How does it feel? Would you do almost anything to rise above that circumstance? I bet you would, for no one wants to be in a totally subordinate position where you get no respect and have no logical basis from which to demand it. Turn that around and approach life as an independent individual who provides for himself through his own labors and learned wisdom and what do you have? Yes, you have legitimate self-respect, and the respect of others like you. You will, of course, have to protect what you produce from those who only consume.

I need to note at this point that the potential future of a world run by robots and machines is silly. We do not have a fundamental driver to cause us to make all of us totally obsolete, and that means we will stop that process before it can become reality. And we have plenty of time, for if you look at the confused mess of the world politically, you will understand that such technical progress as we are making in areas like telecommunications and AI won't carry the day to create a uniform world run by non-human things.

The apparently "gee, whiz" stuff of AI and modern search engines providing us near instant useful information is not a sign of computers or robots taking over. Instead, it is mostly the logical equivalent of the printing press, which massively changed the future of humanity by making information relatively easy (possible) to obtain. We have simply improved the method to go from printed documents to electronic documents on most any subject ... if you know how to ask the questions. AI is a great way to improve the running of equipment to produce what we need. But it has no will or ability to generate ideas, and for those reasons it is to be embraced as a next level improvement, not as a future dominator of humans. So yes, we have time to take an alternate path that makes fundamental improvements to the human animal. And we don't need half baked political systems to solve our problems or to provide opportunities.

We in fact have to shut down socialism, political correctness and multiculturalism before they pull almost all of us into powerless and meaningless mediocrity.

If you have read any of my earlier thoughts in Destiny or in the Destiny articles you know exactly where I am headed. If you are a true humanitarian, not a socialist or a hyper-capitalist, you will press for enhancing us via genetic engineering, both physically and especially mentally. That is the path, the only path, for taking humanity to the next level in the seeking of all the answers about the origin and meaning of life ... and creation of the future. And note that we do not need more people. We need less, so as not to destroy our physical environment as well as quality of life on our finite planet with finite resources.

Let's grow up and discard socialism and hyper-capitalism. Embrace true and substantive improvement of the human animal, all of us.