personal interrelationship wld also vastly differ in the two systems.
one of wld be or is now fiercely competitive-independent-warlike, the other wld strive to be more interdependent/cooperative.
more cld be said. thnx

You should talk to Americans and other rich people. They don’t call their Ipods, diet rich in protein, and other elements of imperialism “shit”.

Imperialism favors the empire and disfavors the colonies. Life for many in the colonies could be called “shit” but if one ignores the moral and spiritual imperative to not exploit others one can find the results of wealth accumulation quite impressive. The vast majority of people in rich countries do just that.

“No system of control can be maintained where a very small elite simply shit on everything. ”
Yes it can and it has for hundreds of years, at least.

“Brian, thanks for such a thorough reply. I don’t have time to go point by point in response to you but I’d like to state a couple of things. One is, it’s not all about capitalism. In your world view there seems to be no room for what is purely and simply, human nature. To use capitalism to excuse and explain all of the problems of the world is not only very black and white thinking but very naive.”

It’s quite the opposite. To use human nature to excuse and explain all of the problems of the world is not only very black and white thinking but very naive.

Capitalism has been an element of the human social reality for a very short amount of time relative to human history, and is only a reality due to it’s imposition through violence and enslavement. It has no place in a civilized world – a capitalist world is anti-civilized.

*Elements* of capitalism are reasonable, or can be made to be reasonable under certain political realities. For example, it’s reasonable for someone to own a toothbrush – and that’s capitalism in the sense that it’s private ownership of some element of capital.

When one moves beyond reason into ideology and philosophy, and states that far from reason, capitalism is a Truth, a Cause, and a fundamental reality that must be extended to extremes and kept in a “pure” state, then all kinds of problems occur, the kind of problems that the earth and everything on it has had the great misfortune to have experienced over the past several centuries. The kind of problems that mountains of corpses, human and otherwise, can attest to. The kind of problems that vast amounts of suffering, human and otherwise, can attest to.

Global socialism is not an ideology that is the polar opposite of the ideology of capitalism – it’s not a fundamentalist movement – it’s not a Truth or a Cause. It’s a structure – a conceptual understanding of the reality present when local communities control their own lives, and they benefit not only themselves but their neighbors and the world at large. Global socialism in it’s marriage with anarchism, which stresses *individual* control over one’s fate, will have many capitalist elements, such as private ownership of toothbrushes and many other things, as well as community ownership of many things, and regional ownership, and factory ownership, and so on. This movement might also take on the term “bottom-up capitalism”, since everything will be owned *selectively*. Everything will be limited or restricted in it’s relationship to certain political entities, be they individuals or communities or even non-human entities. So, for example, a dog might own a toy. That toy cannot be taken from the dog without a crime being committed.

“You wrote this “Sure – one cannot maintain a system of control unless that system either “helps” or in some cases actually helps some people (in some ways). Otherwise everyone would rebel all the time and the elite would not be able to control the world.”
No, everyone would not rebel. Far from it. And to imply that micro loans are some ploy to control people under capitalism is to me ridiculous.”

Micro loans are a ploy to achieve two things – profit and social control. There are many ways to achieve social control – one is to make people dependent. One way to make people dependent is to do things to them that they enjoy, such that they learn to trust and to expect more of the same.

Humans at the bottom of the human food-chain (in a capitalist world humans always feed on each other) do nothing but either riot or die (or riot and then die). Hence the food riots of 2008.

No system of control can be maintained where a very small elite simply shit on everything. That’s why the elite use the divide and conquer tactic so often, and give rewards to favored non-elite (otherwise known as the middle class). These capital rewards are bribes which buy loyalty – the middle class then serves as a useful slave class to keep the hordes of poor, destitute, and starving at bay. The propaganda tool called “Upward Mobility” is a perfect example of elite domination – make the poor believe they are something other than poor (I *might* join the middle class, with the right amount of discipline, a discipline defined by the elite itself!)

“One of the problems I have with Socialists, they are too messianic. Socialism is not the ultimate solution to the world’s problems. Possibly, certain elements of Socialism will contribute to a better society but not all of it.
The world becomes Socialist and you still have greed, hatred, anger, cultural differences that lead to bigger problems and on and on.”"

Human behavior is conditioned. In a capitalist world humans are greedy, angry, and hateful, and in a socialist world humans are considerate, helpful, and cooperative.

The reason socialist societies are always so successful and perpetual is precisely because they are so deeply aligned with human nature. Socialist societies, such as the Native Americans, had elements of capitalism present.

People who are ahistorical, who understand nothing of history except what the capitalist elite tell them, call capitalism “human nature”. Perhaps you can look at the face of Rupert Murdoch to see the smile whenever a human presents that view of capitalism.

The reason the system I propose has elements of capitalism present is because I think capitalism has some good ideas. Private ownership is a good idea that has been taken to a ridiculous extreme by the elite who profit by taking it to a ridiculous extreme.

One must understand that the elite are utterly insane. The elite are the kings of capitalism, and capitalism is an ideology, a Truth, if you will, of violence, coercion, and slavery. The elite deserve to either be put in jail, put in an insane asylum, or put to death. Instead, they enslave the world. The world we live in is literally run by madmen.

“Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see the American system upended, although it seems to be breaking down all on its own without the push of revolution (yet). However, the only true revolution is when individuals heal their own divided nature. And I am not implying a messianic movement with that, it’s certainly something anyone can do right here and now.”

“Heal their own divided nature” is a false notion. We’re always going to have a divided nature so long as we need to live in a capitalist world to survive but work towards making a socialist world a reality. We’re all schizophrenic until such time as a socialist world exists.

Naomi Klein describes herself as a “Keynesian Capitalist”. What a schizo fool!

You wrote this “Sure – one cannot maintain a system of control unless that system either “helps” or in some cases actually helps some people (in some ways). Otherwise everyone would rebel all the time and the elite would not be able to control the world.”
No, everyone would not rebel. Far from it. And to imply that micro loans are some ploy to control people under capitalism is to me ridiculous.

I also disagree with your explanation of the Taliban; too simplistic and again, denies human nature.

One of the problems I have with Socialists, they are too messianic. Socialism is not the ultimate solution to the world’s problems. Possibly, certain elements of Socialism will contribute to a better society but not all of it.
The world becomes Socialist and you still have greed, hatred, anger, cultural differences that lead to bigger problems and on and on.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see the American system upended, although it seems to be breaking down all on its own without the push of revolution (yet). However, the only true revolution is when individuals heal their own divided nature. And I am not implying a messianic movement with that, it’s certainly something anyone can do right here and now.

Crazy Amerikkkans like Joseph E. Schmitz of Blackwater think they are still in crusades. These people have a murderous mindset. Look at “puritans” who were also murderous and expansionist… even Quakers, supposedly peaceful people, supported Slavery. All of these sects are cults… different power grabs.. some hold more insane tenents than others… there were those ones with the KoolAid. and then there are the ones with the USAID.

True savages of the earth.

in israel we have extremely warlike people with extreme cultish views.
they are called “settlers” by antishemites so as to hide the fact that some of them are soldiers in civilian clothes who murder palestinians and rob them of their land..
but all religions are cults! thnx

“You say we need to crush the global elite. Assuming by elite you mean wealthy capitalists, then what do you propose should be done about those that are not elite yet hold destructive power over others? I am referring to groups like the Taliban who have done major damage to the people of Afghanistan, or those in the Congo who are wreaking destruction.”

These are proxy forces for larger criminal organizations. The world is a hierarchy, where small exploiters are controlled by larger exploiters. Washington D.C. is the top of this criminal hierarchy, although the top of the hierarchy is better described as a global confluence of the “West” (Japan, Western Europe, US, lesser agents). Would be dominative elites such as the Chinese and Indian states may be joining the West soon.

Major controllers of capital send that capital in the forms of tools of destruction (guns, ammunition, explosives) into Afghanistan, Africa, and other places. African leaders get their orders from the West or other major powers such as the Chinese and Russian states. These leaders have their own ambitions, but they are limited and constrained by the global political reality in which they are small fish on the global scene.

Also, large multinational corporations are so powerful that even single-handedly they can create crises in an entire poor country, through a combination of desire to control natural resources and the use of capital control (investment) to gain those resources, through political domination, murder, and whatever other means they deem useful.

Groups like the Taliban can never be accurately viewed as separate entities – one must always look behind the curtain to see who is THEIR boss. It’s more complicated than that implies since the Taliban have a popular following which bolsters and creates their usefulness to elites, but the elites are always the larger player in a capitalist world.

These elites all have their own ambitions. This can create divisions and arguments within the hierarchy, such as when some leaders of Western Europe disagree with the policies of the American government. The Pakistani government, though allied with the West, has in addition a separate agenda which it pursues when it can. Think of the small and medium fish of the world as dogs, who do what they will unless or until they are brought to heel by their master. The master, in turn, has limited resources and his hold on a slave can slip while he focuses on other slaves. For example, the Western hold on South America slipped while they were focusing on Middle Eastern domination, and the dogs of South America found some bite as a result, and are now better than dogs.

Politics is simple at it’s core. Whoever is in control of the world creates the political reality. Never look at the bottom or even the middle of the food chain and treat them as an active agent – in every hierarchy ALWAYS look at the top. Don’t talk about the “warriors” in the Congo or the Taliban – look at who controls them.

“You mention the elimination of sexism. Fine. But in the above mentioned places you have acts of brutality committed against women that go well beyond garden variety sexism.
How is it that this populist global movement will crush capitalism when one is facing all of the above issues?”

By crushing capitalism it will solve the problems created by capitalism, including the Taliban and the Western-funded crisis in the Congo. In turn it will create totally new problems, but those problems will be far more minor than large-scale wars, the perpetual possibility of nuclear holocaust, the utter destruction of the environment, the enslavement of the human race to wage slavery, massive bombardment by capitalist tools such as marketing and advertising, the annihilation of truth and it’s replacement by propaganda, and so on.

The Taliban are primarily a defensive force against imperialism – a desperate force, and desperate forces are usually fundamentalists of one strain or another. The rise of radical Islam is almost entirely due to rampant Western imperialism and the threat that presents to both the Muslim world and the Islamic faith.

“And to play devil’s advocate, there is abundant proof that capitalism can actually help improve these situations. For instance, the micro-loans given only to women in India so that they may start a small business or buy livestock or do whatever in order to improve their lives.”

Sure – one cannot maintain a system of control unless that system either “helps” or in some cases actually helps some people (in some ways). Otherwise everyone would rebel all the time and the elite would not be able to control the world.

Global socialism is an ideology, but more so it’s a political movement. It’s a political *structure*, a political reality for people’s lives based on community control of resources, alliances with adjoining communities, in a global link with the world. Global socialism is nothing like the top-down socialism such as was represented in the 20th century Soviet Union.

I’m disappointed that the left was so enamored of Soviet-style socialism than when they jumped off the Soviet ship they left behind the term “socialism”, and now fear to use it by reason of it’s supposed association with the Soviet Union. These supposed leftists need to stop being cowards.

There’s no need for the irrational abandonment of an accurate term – socialism IS a linguistically accurate term for the anarchic movement of global socialism. Perhaps if these leftists stopped caring about how they do in a debate with a capitalist and care more about how clear and effective they are in communicating with people they will overcome their linguistic prejudices.

Best to you.

The world is not set up to protect and encourage those that desire to not be a part of the mainstream.

“I don’t see capitalism or socialism as viable arguments. They are legacy arguments that have created a fiction which is not simply outmoded but horribly dangerous. The fundamental principles of life are fairly straight forward. It is the fragmentation, and lack of adherence to these principles which are at bottom our Problem.”

Bingo. Socialism has never really been applied successfully. We need a new way of implementation/application.

Thanks for putting my thoughts into words. :-)

capitalists DO love their ideology exactly BECAUSE they profit so much from it, and of course their power is preserved through that profit.

Converting once beneficiaries of the capitalist system into good socialists is about as probable as capitalist pigs developing guilt for their accumulated net worth, or the elite becoming compassionate with a desire to eliminate the economic gap between themselves and the poor.

Overcoming nationalism is a must as it only divides humans from other humans, counter-productive to collaboration. I agree with you on that. But trading one ideology for another is never gonna work, can you convince a Christian to convert to being a Jew or a Muslim?

The problem in the US is that its workers are some of the wealthiest in the world, as you mention. Giving up capitalism for many people will be like getting someone hooked on smack to just walk away and say no. Again, it’ll never happen. The only way to convince them is with a complete system failure. Then and only then will people who once lived comfortably see the need for a radical transformation, they will realize through their own personal experience, not based on what someone tells them.

Max accurately hits on fragmentation, society’s major obstacle. The whole is only as strong/healthy as its parts. Fragmented parts, fragmented whole, conceptually easy to understand. Capitalism has helped create this inner fragmentation (consider it spiritually or holistically) throughout society — fragmented by nationalism, religion, sex, race, age, class, education, competition, etc. Capitalism has cultivated the “me” syndrome, whereby my needs, regardless of practicality, take precedence over yours. Only when society as a whole realizes the importance of society as its parts, will there be a transition toward sustainability. This includes one of the most neglected parts, our natural environment.

Krishnamurti’s simplicitly summed it up best, “It’s no measure of health to be well-adapted to a profoundly sick society.” If we change, one person at a time, our connectivity to the whole strengthens, we realize and value the importance of all the other parts, and then the process of change is automated and instantaneous. The only way that your global movement theory will work, is if the movement takes place one person at a time, individually, only then can we work together with a global perspective. It is impossible to organize 6.5 billion fragmented people who are divided from one another, while 6.5 billion whole people would need no organization or unification, it would just be, without any effort.

Best to you.

what article did you read? Not very good with inference, eh?

Dr. Brasch,

great wish list, solid points, message well conveyed.

Best to you.