Remember, I'm blue-skying
>Robert Howes wrote:
>In theory you would patch up your own house or get the trades persons in to do it, for free. But with a >couple of billion homes to maintain and in many millions of cases to build from scratch for the millions >that are at present homeless or living in squalor will take a massive army of brickies, chippies, >electricians, plumbers, roofers, labourers and so on. Also the supply of building materials would have to >be stepped up greatly. And that is just to carry on as we are.
Mike Morin replies:
Here in the Peoples' Equity Union (PEU), I believe that freesocialism is not immediately possible, if ever at all. What the PEU with its partners Community Betterment Organizations (CBOs) is a Capitalist and State Restructuring (even among us, it is prudent not to use the word reform for it implies legislative activity) of the current Capitalist money system and the various National Treasuries, worldwide.
A big part of the grand plan is the rebuilding of communities to make them more ecological, more oriented towards a quality of life starting with the most needy and maintaining for many and "downscaling" for some. It would take an almost absolute consensus on the principles upon which fund were to be allocated, and self-governing economic democracies set up in every community and within and across each economic sector that were inculcated and strongly believed in the principles of the world unity socialist organization.
Rebuilding humane, sustainable, quality of life environments would be problematic from a standpoint of natural resources. Would there be enough building materials and builders, locally placed, to carry out the mission? Wood products would be problematic, as they are generally not reusable and the need, if we chose wood as a building material would be at high risk of exceeding the sustainable harvest of the remaining forests. Stone products would probably be more resusable and deconstruction and reconstruction would brobably be a booming busyness, given the existence of willing and able workers who had the knowledge, equipment, and energy to carry out the necessary tasks.
With respect to Robert's concern about having built for nuclear families, I think that rebuilding, whenever possible should favor shelters that house extended families (whether they be extended families or not) and community living arrangements. The nuclear family has proven to be dysfunctional, leading to the atomization and a world filled with isolated and alienated individuals (just what the Capitalists want). However, physically adjusting for the nuclear family build out should probably not be an immediate priority, at least not in the more western United States. We need to concentrate at building more community centers so that supply side reallocation of goods and services can physically take place (i.e. rebuild our neighborhoods so that the things people need are within walking distance of their home thereby greatly reducing the amount of precious fossil fuels used on the terribly squandering daily consumer automobile forays).
If we could unify in mission, principles, and dedication to the allocation of resources such a socialist eutopia could be worked towards.
Those are ridiculously huge IFs, but I've come this far, so voila...
Mike Morin
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Why I Carry On...
Torgun and "World in Common" Friends,
Maybe we should change the name of the discussion group/initiative to "World in Despair", or maybe "World in Common Despair". Maybe that would attract the attention that we need to bring to the human condition and the cause of socialism. Almost everyone is living in despair, yet most would attribute it to their personal situation.
To the extent to which Capitalism and the ascription to it is the cause of so much unhappiness is beyond measure, but more importantly probably beyond repair. The former is inevitable, as Capitalism is such a dominant paradigm and has been for centuries, replacing feudalism and slavery as the oppressive force of a ruling "class". The reality that the damage caused by Capitalism is beyond repair is reflected everywhere we look.
I don't know the situation of others on this list, but I have been put in a situation where all my time is my own (an early retirement, if you will). I have had a lot of time to study and contemplate the world and the economic situation. Most people have to spend their entire lives niche-seeking and niche-living within the status quo. Their own brand of despair is thus intricately tied to their personal predicament and the soulless existence that they probably had to adopt to adapt to a soulless Capitalism.
Like all rationalists, for me it is a constant battle against hopelessness. That is why I join discussion groups like "World in Common". It is an exercise in felicity, finding common cause with others who have similar and diverse perceptions and perspectives, but a common wish to make the world a better place. It is almost like a religion.
What Jim wrote about contributing to the consciousness and eventual triumph of socialism certainly requires a great amount of faith. We believe in what we are doing, and feel good about moving those agendas forward.
A friend said "keep doing what you're doing, although you think that you are not making a difference, you never know, maybe you are having a positive impact on others and are just not getting the feedback on it". Let's keep trying as long as we have the time and the outlet, I'm so far past the motivation of looking for another job. It has reached the point of impossibility for me. There is not a good fit between my values, my integrity, my interests, my skills, etc. and the niches offered by the Capitalist system. For what it is worth, the structural unemployment problem within Capitalism is growing at an accelerating rate, so there is will be more of a pool of potential ascribers to the World in Common message, though it is doubtful that we will ever logistically be able to reach those millions, those billions. Even if we could, what would we tell them? It is not necessary for us to resolve that question, but if the world were approaching unity and communicating about a "world in common", we would be a very long way closer to our goals.
Mike Morin
Maybe we should change the name of the discussion group/initiative to "World in Despair", or maybe "World in Common Despair". Maybe that would attract the attention that we need to bring to the human condition and the cause of socialism. Almost everyone is living in despair, yet most would attribute it to their personal situation.
To the extent to which Capitalism and the ascription to it is the cause of so much unhappiness is beyond measure, but more importantly probably beyond repair. The former is inevitable, as Capitalism is such a dominant paradigm and has been for centuries, replacing feudalism and slavery as the oppressive force of a ruling "class". The reality that the damage caused by Capitalism is beyond repair is reflected everywhere we look.
I don't know the situation of others on this list, but I have been put in a situation where all my time is my own (an early retirement, if you will). I have had a lot of time to study and contemplate the world and the economic situation. Most people have to spend their entire lives niche-seeking and niche-living within the status quo. Their own brand of despair is thus intricately tied to their personal predicament and the soulless existence that they probably had to adopt to adapt to a soulless Capitalism.
Like all rationalists, for me it is a constant battle against hopelessness. That is why I join discussion groups like "World in Common". It is an exercise in felicity, finding common cause with others who have similar and diverse perceptions and perspectives, but a common wish to make the world a better place. It is almost like a religion.
What Jim wrote about contributing to the consciousness and eventual triumph of socialism certainly requires a great amount of faith. We believe in what we are doing, and feel good about moving those agendas forward.
A friend said "keep doing what you're doing, although you think that you are not making a difference, you never know, maybe you are having a positive impact on others and are just not getting the feedback on it". Let's keep trying as long as we have the time and the outlet, I'm so far past the motivation of looking for another job. It has reached the point of impossibility for me. There is not a good fit between my values, my integrity, my interests, my skills, etc. and the niches offered by the Capitalist system. For what it is worth, the structural unemployment problem within Capitalism is growing at an accelerating rate, so there is will be more of a pool of potential ascribers to the World in Common message, though it is doubtful that we will ever logistically be able to reach those millions, those billions. Even if we could, what would we tell them? It is not necessary for us to resolve that question, but if the world were approaching unity and communicating about a "world in common", we would be a very long way closer to our goals.
Mike Morin
On Despair (to the folks at "World in Common")
>united by our opposition to capitalism and the state and by our search for practical >alternatives.
As long as there is hope in your minds and an outlet for your thoughts, your project can never be considered a failure.
I am just projecting my personal disappointment because my attempt, which I put a lot of work into, to develop practical alternatives to Capitalism have turned out to be not practical at all.
I am cynical about the prospects for the human race. Don't let my cycnicicm get you down. If you see there is positive work to be done, then by all means do it, and please share it with me because having even the tiniest shred of hope feels better than complete and utter despair.
It makes me feel better to write this note. Here in Eugene, OR, USA, the population is totally atomized. There is no hope, only despair in the culture. People just drive around all day (consuming?, looking for work?, joy riding?), and others on the street are really down, if not out. That's how I feel down, if not out. The economic culture is impossible and it is collapsing, one person at a time. There are no productive facilities for the workers to take over, everything is made somewhere else. They have created a consumer culture, which is now failing, and I see no avenue out of that failure. I treied to devise and organize, but I have failed and I don't see a magical coalescence of free socialism on the horizon. Such would be nice, very nice, but the chances of it happening are nil, or to keep hope alive, next to nil.
Workers here work almost exclusively in distribution. They are so alienated by the environment of their work that they have no desire to own those means of distribution. Even if they did desire such, their understanding of the economic hiearchy under which they are marginalized, precludes in their minds any hope for such worker ownership to ever take place.
You see, there is a lot more to the economy, especially one whic is so globalized than owning the means of production. Even if that were to be the goal for workers, it would not benefit the local workers here. Owning the means of distribution in a fair trade arrangement with worker owned means of production would take a massive organizing effort. Workers are not even the slightest bit organized, nor does it seem likely that they could be made interested and believe that such could be successful.
Even by the far-fetched possibility that it could, we would still be creating market socialism. Just how we would go that additional giant step to free socialism has never been made clear, at least not to me.
Thank you WIC for trying. I hope that I can find the felicity to keep trying, as well.
Most sincerely,
Mike Morin
As long as there is hope in your minds and an outlet for your thoughts, your project can never be considered a failure.
I am just projecting my personal disappointment because my attempt, which I put a lot of work into, to develop practical alternatives to Capitalism have turned out to be not practical at all.
I am cynical about the prospects for the human race. Don't let my cycnicicm get you down. If you see there is positive work to be done, then by all means do it, and please share it with me because having even the tiniest shred of hope feels better than complete and utter despair.
It makes me feel better to write this note. Here in Eugene, OR, USA, the population is totally atomized. There is no hope, only despair in the culture. People just drive around all day (consuming?, looking for work?, joy riding?), and others on the street are really down, if not out. That's how I feel down, if not out. The economic culture is impossible and it is collapsing, one person at a time. There are no productive facilities for the workers to take over, everything is made somewhere else. They have created a consumer culture, which is now failing, and I see no avenue out of that failure. I treied to devise and organize, but I have failed and I don't see a magical coalescence of free socialism on the horizon. Such would be nice, very nice, but the chances of it happening are nil, or to keep hope alive, next to nil.
Workers here work almost exclusively in distribution. They are so alienated by the environment of their work that they have no desire to own those means of distribution. Even if they did desire such, their understanding of the economic hiearchy under which they are marginalized, precludes in their minds any hope for such worker ownership to ever take place.
You see, there is a lot more to the economy, especially one whic is so globalized than owning the means of production. Even if that were to be the goal for workers, it would not benefit the local workers here. Owning the means of distribution in a fair trade arrangement with worker owned means of production would take a massive organizing effort. Workers are not even the slightest bit organized, nor does it seem likely that they could be made interested and believe that such could be successful.
Even by the far-fetched possibility that it could, we would still be creating market socialism. Just how we would go that additional giant step to free socialism has never been made clear, at least not to me.
Thank you WIC for trying. I hope that I can find the felicity to keep trying, as well.
Most sincerely,
Mike Morin
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Letter to Friend Vanessa (In Venezuela)
Hi Vanessa,
Good to "hear" from you.
Sorry that you are going through hard and/or traumatic times.
I hope it all works out for you and soon...
I read about the displacement of the indigenous in Peru and the fighting that was going on. In the news report we got in the USA, the headlines said "9 Policeman Killed in Peru". You had to read deep into the story to see that 31 "Indians" were killed and many more injured. Same attitudes that John Woolman had to endure, I guess.
The people in the United States are still consuming gasoline with a fervent madness and they either don't know, don't perceive it that way, and/or don't care about the injustices that go on: Peru, Nigeria, Iraq, Afghanistan, elsewhere, and the injustice that they are doing to the children of the world, including their own.
Two reports just came out, one regarding how much money is being spent on military supplies and operations ($1.46 trillion), with by far the most by the United States, and another discussing the world hunger situation and the dire prognosis of over 200 million more people falling into "absolute poverty". It isn't that we can't produce the food (especially if we reallocated military spending to humanitarian (i.e. food, housing, education, sanitation, resource conservation, etc.)), it's that within the Capitalism system, many people can't pay for it (Can't pay, can't have).
We need someone like Hugo Chavez to make a proclamation regarding the absurdity and irrationality of the above mentioned dichotomy, and to call for world unity among the people and the leaders of the world for a fundamental shift from Capitalism to socialism in the way that resources get allocated. It would be great if Hugo, Obama, the leader of Iran, and the leader of the Peoples' Republic of China all got together, with the support of other leaders, and made such an appeal and commitment. I'm sure that the people of the world would strongly support such leadership.
We need a world economy that is based on the principles of meeting the needs of people, equity, humanity, inclusion, quality of life, peace, and sustainability rather than one that seeks to maximize profits for a minority, and seeks infinite growth on a finite planet and promises trickle-down benefits to workers and totally disregards the poor.
Count me in on "Thee Socialist Friend" magazine. Let me know how I can contribute.
Great to "hear' from thee...
Let's keep in close touch.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
Good to "hear" from you.
Sorry that you are going through hard and/or traumatic times.
I hope it all works out for you and soon...
I read about the displacement of the indigenous in Peru and the fighting that was going on. In the news report we got in the USA, the headlines said "9 Policeman Killed in Peru". You had to read deep into the story to see that 31 "Indians" were killed and many more injured. Same attitudes that John Woolman had to endure, I guess.
The people in the United States are still consuming gasoline with a fervent madness and they either don't know, don't perceive it that way, and/or don't care about the injustices that go on: Peru, Nigeria, Iraq, Afghanistan, elsewhere, and the injustice that they are doing to the children of the world, including their own.
Two reports just came out, one regarding how much money is being spent on military supplies and operations ($1.46 trillion), with by far the most by the United States, and another discussing the world hunger situation and the dire prognosis of over 200 million more people falling into "absolute poverty". It isn't that we can't produce the food (especially if we reallocated military spending to humanitarian (i.e. food, housing, education, sanitation, resource conservation, etc.)), it's that within the Capitalism system, many people can't pay for it (Can't pay, can't have).
We need someone like Hugo Chavez to make a proclamation regarding the absurdity and irrationality of the above mentioned dichotomy, and to call for world unity among the people and the leaders of the world for a fundamental shift from Capitalism to socialism in the way that resources get allocated. It would be great if Hugo, Obama, the leader of Iran, and the leader of the Peoples' Republic of China all got together, with the support of other leaders, and made such an appeal and commitment. I'm sure that the people of the world would strongly support such leadership.
We need a world economy that is based on the principles of meeting the needs of people, equity, humanity, inclusion, quality of life, peace, and sustainability rather than one that seeks to maximize profits for a minority, and seeks infinite growth on a finite planet and promises trickle-down benefits to workers and totally disregards the poor.
Count me in on "Thee Socialist Friend" magazine. Let me know how I can contribute.
Great to "hear' from thee...
Let's keep in close touch.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
Friday, June 12, 2009
Over-Supply Side Economics
I think that what we are seeing is not just the bursting of the housing bubble, but the bursting of the entire supply-side economics paradigm, by a couple of generations of Capitalists who thought that they were infallible, in good part because of their "victories" in WW2 and the Cold War and were riding a wave of ASSUMED success.
The presumption of success had momentum and affected the business culture to the point that credit and equity flowed freely and foolishly.
Now, reality is setting in. Over-supply side economics cutting its own throat by paying no attention to how their worldwide dominance of financing low wage Capitalism, a race to the bottom for the working class, was undermining effective demand for their over-supply of low quality, of marginal utility junk. The over-extension of credit "helped" for awhile, at least until all the overly materialistic fools had filled their over-priced luxury and common-place homes with a plethora of unnecessary toys, including those gas gluttonous opulent ostentations in their driveways. Then the bills came due and the over-supply economy was so over-supplied and credit so maxed out that it ceased to be able to grease the wheel of the assumed insatiable wants economy.
The price of gasoline and other fossil fuel products contributed in helping to weaken effective demand for what would have to be seen as an impossible continuation of mindless commerce.
In order to sustain wealth, people have to produce items of value. Other than the computer industry, it's all been speculation, more speculation, more speculation, more speculation, fueled by greed and accelerated by foolish arrogance.
Mike Morin
The presumption of success had momentum and affected the business culture to the point that credit and equity flowed freely and foolishly.
Now, reality is setting in. Over-supply side economics cutting its own throat by paying no attention to how their worldwide dominance of financing low wage Capitalism, a race to the bottom for the working class, was undermining effective demand for their over-supply of low quality, of marginal utility junk. The over-extension of credit "helped" for awhile, at least until all the overly materialistic fools had filled their over-priced luxury and common-place homes with a plethora of unnecessary toys, including those gas gluttonous opulent ostentations in their driveways. Then the bills came due and the over-supply economy was so over-supplied and credit so maxed out that it ceased to be able to grease the wheel of the assumed insatiable wants economy.
The price of gasoline and other fossil fuel products contributed in helping to weaken effective demand for what would have to be seen as an impossible continuation of mindless commerce.
In order to sustain wealth, people have to produce items of value. Other than the computer industry, it's all been speculation, more speculation, more speculation, more speculation, fueled by greed and accelerated by foolish arrogance.
Mike Morin
One Cooperating "System"
If only it were so simple as "two competing systems".
Socialist critics of the USSR and the Peoples' Republic of China call such countries "State Capitalism". I think that is partially what Quinny is referring to when he talks about "the Soviets" falling for the "higher living standards' dogma of Capitalism.
I'm not so sure that it was consumerism that toppled the "Soviet" Empire, although the old adage, "how ya' gonna' keep 'em down on the farm once they've seen the lights of the big city" was certainly a greed based propaganda weapon of the Capitalist "West".
The Soviets and the Chinese found that they had serious quality of life issues and that the reality of socialism was harder than the theory and they found themselves in an expensive arms race because they recognized that they needed to counter the Western economic and military hegemony (and the "West" (read USA and the wimps of NATO) recognized that the Communists seeked a worldwide (international) counter-hegemony).
Since the fall of the USSR, the USA led Capitalists have proven their worldwide hegemonic intentions.
Who knows what the Chinese are doing? Any and all information about that country needs to be filtered through the lens of Western propaganda. Maybe they are beating "US" at our own game.
Regardless, the future is not ours to see in China.
What the world needs is "one cooperating system". That is what socialism is, in theory.
Socialist critics of the USSR and the Peoples' Republic of China call such countries "State Capitalism". I think that is partially what Quinny is referring to when he talks about "the Soviets" falling for the "higher living standards' dogma of Capitalism.
I'm not so sure that it was consumerism that toppled the "Soviet" Empire, although the old adage, "how ya' gonna' keep 'em down on the farm once they've seen the lights of the big city" was certainly a greed based propaganda weapon of the Capitalist "West".
The Soviets and the Chinese found that they had serious quality of life issues and that the reality of socialism was harder than the theory and they found themselves in an expensive arms race because they recognized that they needed to counter the Western economic and military hegemony (and the "West" (read USA and the wimps of NATO) recognized that the Communists seeked a worldwide (international) counter-hegemony).
Since the fall of the USSR, the USA led Capitalists have proven their worldwide hegemonic intentions.
Who knows what the Chinese are doing? Any and all information about that country needs to be filtered through the lens of Western propaganda. Maybe they are beating "US" at our own game.
Regardless, the future is not ours to see in China.
What the world needs is "one cooperating system". That is what socialism is, in theory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
