mental health problems
more lord mcalpine
more jimmy savile
these babies can read
first contact alien ufo
free charles bronson
my windows 7 advert
november tipping point
sex offenders register
beyonces better place
i facebooked your mum
mice and snakes
forty years on
free social bookmarking
war criminals out
obama dont multitask
hes got herpes
hamster fight video
carradine dead
european socialism
hi de ho from moscow
hello sooty
institutional racism
child abuse
credit crunch teens
portsmouth fa cup
white star cider
war sex traffic
first black president
michael todds apology
jersey child abuse
prozac bebo internet
kate gerry maddy
tiger tia copland
crimes against poetry
god bless 511
celebrity doss house
ten years on
hamsters attack
angry nhs doctors
ive been stabbed
rosa parks day
slave trade
you need terror
she wants it
its a whitewash
the deal is
move along
pedo loving sluts
wot no asbestos
i am not spastic
my toothache
ten years on
my tooth hurts
child killer
stop the terror
israels jfk
are you terrorist
your government
the cast
came for the porn
paedos out
catholic bankruptcy
farewell fucktard
is it jesus
margaret hodge
new deal
blairs pedo sex rings
the brazilian
fuck id
its all over
cia car bomb
hilda murrell
newspaper spies
james rusbridger

Your Baby Can Read - Free Instant Download
name : email:


When looking at the structures of any nation, their respective economies, and leaders, we encounter the ideologies that such people uphold in their relationship with those within that structure by way of their actions. Falling under the three basic categories of capitalism, socialism, and communism, with varying degrees thereof, we can gauge the level of development of the person upholding such principles, by their very actions:-

Looking at the above diagram, we can see that whilst the three basic ideologies of capitalism, socialism, and communism sit one atop the other, in practise however, the ideologies must be ignored in order to look at what the controller of the structure actually does, and how they maintain and interact with those within that structure.

In order for any human being to interact with others at a level that would require them to be at a respective level of development of 60%, then that individual must be at a level of development of 60%. If they are merely at a level of 30%, then they can only be expected to interact with people at a level of 30%, and no more.

Looking at the example of a marriage for instance, whilst it is generally accepted that such principles, whilst maybe not the highest in the world, are of a relatively high nature, especially so, in comparison with an example of an abusive relationship along the lines of rape perhaps, this won't stop the controller of any such marriage hauling that particular relationship down to their respective level of development. Therefore we cannot assumed that just because someone is married, that they are therefore capable of interacting with whomever they are married to at the required level that is generally assumed to be that of a good marriage. In order to make such ascertations with regards the controlling individuals current level of development we must, as always, ignore their words, and look at their actions.

The same examples are forthcoming from the world of politics on the basis that whilst, as explained above, the principles behind the respective ideologies of capitalism, socialism, and communism, are of an increasing nature as we travel up the evolutionary scale, we must ultimately look at the actions of whomever controls the structure in order to gain a true measure of the controlling individuals current level of development.

For example, in the instance of China, we see that despite their claims to the contrary, they are not a communist state, more a socialist one, and as explained above, whilst the ideology itself is higher than that of capitalism, the very manner in which the government interacts with its people, which is shown in their appalling human rights record, reveals that they are no more developed than any of their capitalist counterparts, in which case they'd be better off sticking to just such an ideology.

Ultimately the easiest manner in which to grade the effective level of development of the controller of any national structure, is not through the ideology that they claim to uphold, but as mentioned before, their management of the economy, and the manner in which just such actions are ultimately upheld. For example, just how much of a democracy/dictatorship is that structure? How big is the gap between rich and poor? How does the controller implement his will upon the masses? Are the police armed? How much power do they (and ultimately the government they represent) have? Is the law forced upon the masses at gunpoint? etc.

The basic principles underlying the ideology of capitalism, are those of private ownership. And, as such, amounts to nothing more than a frenzied free for all. With private business, and all that entails namely profit margins, flourishing within such a society, it is no wonder that all levels of development, occur at the slowest possible rate, with exceptionally high levels of both riches and poverty to be experienced by those within such a structure.

Looking at its implementation within a theoretical village, all aspects of that village will fall under private ownership, and subsequent control, by the business man, allowing him to indulge himself in his unhealthy appetite for profit.

For example, the business men, and subsequent companies that they form, controlling the water, power, housing, food, clothing, medicine, entertainment, etc. will all be expecting a healthy return on their investments, a return which must, as always, come from the customer, i.e. the residents of the village who, within such a society, are existing as nothing more than mere fuel, for the business mans greed, as they set about abusing their fellow men.

As a direct result, everyone within that village, will find themselves with every single economic transaction that they make, paying the maximum incomings, in return for the minimum outgoings, of the business man, as he exercises his implementation of the basic high incomings/low outgoings equation that makes up the core of the basic ethics of business. Though the story doesn't end there, in order that such people may acquire such money with which they may purchase such goods and services in the first place, they must go through the same equation once again, as they receive the minimum outgoings, or at least part of, from the business man, in return for their labours.

Technological advancements within such a society, as is expected, occur at the slowest possible rate, owing to the basic principles of consumerism which tend to come hand in hand with the very business structures which flourish under such and ideology, hauling alongside it, the primary motives behind any business mans actions, the acquisition of wealth.

We see, once again, perfect examples of consumerism, when looking at the electronics industry for instance. In the case of the humble video recorder for example, such amazing new machines were thrust upon the public at large, in a basic form, only to be thrown out, whenever the business man needed the same customers to come back for more, with novel new features like long play, stereo sound etc. Such advancements being clearly minimal, and occurring only as and when they have to, they could have easily been made that way in the first place, but business being what it is, there was no reason to, aside from making the machine better. More recently, we see similar examples along the lines of the optical disk games/video machine (CD-I), again the same pattern emerges, in that as and when the public at large have been coerced into purchasing such products, they will then find themselves being forced to dump their much loved machines in order to purchase the all new optical disk games/video machine, only this time with the amazing new feature of being able to actually record on the disk. With the same pattern with regards consumerism occurring yet again, why aren't such machines available at present? Because the business men haven't finished screwing the non recordable variety yet. Rest assured, as and when they have they will then, no doubt, crank up their advertising campaigns, calling all their old customers back, in order that such customers may offer themselves forth in sacrifice once again, and purchase such a new fangled product, only to have to come back in two years time to play the same old game again, and again, and again.

The basic principles underlying the ideology of socialism are that of state ownership. The result of which means that the state owns pretty much everything. Housing, factories, shops, farms, banks, television, newspapers etc.

It is therefore within the boundaries of socialism, that we encounter the possibilities, and consequent application, if the controller of the structure so wishes, of a static economy. With the state directly owning all business, it is therefore possible for the state to control directly all the respective incomings and outgoings of those within the structure, by way of wage rises/reductions, and price rises/reductions, thereby allowing the controller of the structure to keep all the respective incomings and outgoings of the individuals within that structure, constant throughout the lifetime of that structure, leading to the possibility of zero inflation, as a direct result of the greater levels of efficiency within such a structure. For example, it is quite possible to increase income tax, by way of reducing the wages, of any given group of workers, or any sole individual within that grouping of workers, whilst leaving the effective levels of income tax for everyone else untouched, a practise which, whilst theoretically possible within a capitalist structure, would no doubt ultimately prove highly unworkable as everyone within that structure would undoubtedly find themselves being swallowed up under the mountain of bureaucracy that such principles would entail.

It is therefore also possible, to scrap all forms of taxation, on the grounds of efficiency. There is clearly little or no point in giving anyone within that structure money, only to then take it, or some of it back. Though this needn't sound as attractive as it first seems, as all aspects of incoming and outgoing taxation, have been nothing more than replaced by the states ability to control such figures directly, as explained above, by raising lowering peoples, or any grouping of peoples wages, and raising/lowering the prices of products/services, or groupings of products/services.

The direct benefits of socialism over capitalism, can be seen in the recent examples within the United Kingdom, of the selling off, of prime state assets, water, gas, electricity, etc.

With such structures handed over on a silver platter, to those within the business community, eyes glazed over, foaming at the mouth, penises pulsating with delight, we see that these companies suck literally billions and billions of pounds out of the economy, each and every single year, as they set about increasing their incomings and or/decreasing their outgoings, in the name of profit, screwing the customers along the way for every penny they can get.

The same company is offering the same service, to the same customer, employing the same workers. There is therefore no legitimate reason why those companies could not have been run that way in the first instance, with the state retaining a 100% shareholding, and therefore retaining 100% of the profits. Furthermore, if the state is genuinely representative of the people, there is no real reason why, as in the above taxational instance, you can't abolish all such utility bills, on the grounds that there is clearly little or no point in making, or even attempting to make, a profit out of yourself. In which case you merely substitute such bills for higher taxes in order to provide the necessary running costs for such services, which are then provided free of charge.

Looking around at the various business structures that exist within todays capitalist society, and the billions of pounds that they individually extract from the national economy every single year, we see that it is a blatant sign of gross incompetence, and rank stupidity, within present day government, that they are prepared to sit around with their proverbial thumbs stuck up their proverbial backsides, when business men run around like rats, sucking unbelievable amounts of money out of the economy, in the name of self gain.

The technological achievements capable under such principles as socialism, are really quite phenomenal when compared to those forthcoming from capitalism. Looking at the theoretical case of socialist principles being adopted by the United Kingdom, with all business falling under the direct ownership of the state, and all the subsequent profit that that entails, merely by looking at the facts and figures, we see technological advancements simply not possible under capitalism, allow themselves to be forthcoming.

For example, within such a capitalist modern day society as the one in which we live, we invariably hear such claims as "We estimate that we are ten years away from a cure for cancer". What is actually being said, is that at present rates of investment, and taking into account the number of people we have working on the problem, they will achieve a cure within a decade. Therefore with ten times the amount of investment, comes ten times the amount of effort, therefore decreasing the estimated arrival time for that particular cure to one year, double the investment, and subsequent human effort again, and that time comes down to six months, and so on and so forth.

Such phenomenal sums of money needed for such activities to take place, simply aren't within the scope of private business, though assuming all profits generated by all business land 100% into the pockets of the state then such outlays are entirely feasible. A few cases in point being microchip, and space technology. If such technological development was simply left to private investors, then they simply would not have been forthcoming. Such huge leaps in technology only came to be with the respective governments concerned getting their cheque books out, with the sole desire of writing off all development costs. Something business men simply, in the case of putting such large sums of money up front, could not, and in the case of writing such sums off, would not do.

Sitting at the top of the political spectrum, comes the holy grail of ideologies, communism. The basic principles of which are that of community ownership of all things within that community.

With the onset of such an ideology, not only do we wave goodbye to the business man, and all his unsavoury practises, but also everything that comes with it, riches, and with that poverty, unemployment, hunger, homelessness, crime, prostitution, in short a virtual end to all the artificially induced forms of human suffering that are present in modern day society.

With such principles as the community owning, and therefore having direct control over everything within that community, they therefore have the opportunity to do just about anything they want to do. If they fancy having some form of swimming pool for instance, they simply build one, a bar, again they build one, bowling alley, fun fair, anything. And once such buildings are actually built they are there for everyone within that community to enjoy at their leisure, free of charge.

With exterior forms of control being lifted from the masses, there is therefore no legitimate need for money. With money being nothing more than a manner in which large numbers of people may be more accurately placed and controlled within any society, it is therefore rendered as being useless and nothing more than it ever really was, paper tickets. Paper tickets cannot build a community, nor can it maintain any community to any particular standard of living. Such activities require effort, human effort. If that community requires a twenty four hour pizza parlour, then the required amount of man hours required in order to run such an establishment must be forthcoming from that community, a certain amount of electricity, again a certain amount of effort, with the total amount of effort required to sustain that community's chosen way of life, being shared out equally amongst the working members of that community.

With the removal of the state as a governing, and therefore ruling entity, we see the emergence of the state as a nation of member communities, each doing their own thing, and living together in co-operation. And with the abolition of such a governing entity comes the abolition of that entity's law and order, and subsequent rules and regulations. Leaving any such communities existing within such a nation, to deal with their own problems, as and when they arise., and on their own merits.

The technological developments available under such an ideology are greater still, that that of both capitalism, and socialism. With the example of capitalism such advances will only be forthcoming as and when they have to, and not before, owing to the ethics of business. In socialism, such developments were made greater still with the ability to plough phenomenal sums of money into such actions, combined with the ability to completely write off large proportions, if not all, of the development costs concerned. And in the example of communism, we see that within the constrictive boundaries of the lower ideologies, the only reason such advancements were forthcoming, was because the respective controllers of such structures permitted it. In ploughing money into such actions, they created jobs in such areas, and with those jobs, come people performing those jobs, bringing with them the most powerful problem solving machine known to man, the human brain.

Implementing such an ideology within society, brings with it the abolition of all the unpleasant aspects present within the world of business and the desires of the men within that world, consumerism, advertising etc. etc. each being nothing more than convincing people to buy non descript products which they very probably neither want or need, diet milk shakes, insurance's, pensions, crap products which will only need replacing once everybody has bought such a product etc. When the true needs of man are taken into consideration, food, water, shelter, power, clothing, stimulation etc. the amount of effort involved in providing such products and services, are surprisingly small, especially so, when such things as profit margins and overindulgences are abolished, even more so when the true nature of such an ideology shines, co-operation.

For example, with each community living together under one flag, as a family, greater levels of efficiency are achieved in almost all aspects of their daily lives. Cooking for instance, whilst it takes a certain amount of effort for one hundred people to cook themselves one meal each, the amount of overall effort is greatly reduced, when those one hundred people get together, and cook collectively for one hundred people.

Therefore with minimal levels of effort being exerted by the people of such a society, comes a greater level of leisure time, for each of those people to indulge themselves in whatever form of stimulation they see fit, a trip to the bowling alley, the cinema, swimming pool, pub, amusement arcade, educating themselves in the subject of their choosing to the level of their choosing, anything they want, completely free of charge.


<<< back

next >>>

© Sean Copland 1995-2014
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16

best blogs