The Cancer of Capitalism
By Christian Marx
Capitalism by its very definition is exploitative. It relies on winners and losers. At its most basic definition it can be defined as the exploitation of an individual or group of people for financial gain. Modern day capitalism has been in existence for approximately 400 years.
In that time it has been the direct cause of hundreds of millions of deaths and the suffering of many hundreds of millions more. Almost all wars are fought for financial gain, in the past 100 years the wars have concentrated around natural resources such as fossil fuels and other minerals.
The entire conflict in the Middle East can be traced to the extraction of oil from poorer Arab countries via U.S imperialism. In order for the West to manufacture consent for the Iraq and Afghan wars, propaganda and blatant lies were told to the populace of Western countries. Lies, such as, “these countries had weapons of mass destruction”, and that “Islam wants to destroy the West and needs to be contained”. The populace was manipulated and divided by fear, through a corrupted corporate media and various puppet governments. The real enemy was the West itself, one again raping and pillaging sovereign nations for their corporate backers.
These two wars are just the tip of the iceberg as far as capitalist imperialism is concerned. Here is a list of just some of the capitalist wars waged by The U.S and their allies, and their corresponding death toll:
- Iraq and Afghan wars: More than 2 million
- Angola: 500,000+
- Cambodia: 2.5 million
- Chile: 3,000 murdered by the CIA backed Augusto Pinochet
- Cuba: 2,000-4,000
- East Timor: Indonesian government backed by the U.S: 200,000 dead
- Al Salvador: U.S financed puppet government to kill its own citizens protesting against austerity and fighting for social justice: 75,000
- Indonesia: 1 million Communists murdered
- Iran: 262,000
In all, 37 sovereign nations have either been invaded or attacked by foreign backed, corrupt puppet governments. These puppet governments have been installed by the U.S. in a bid to smash socialist movements and protect U.S profits. (Global research, 2015).
While imperialism is responsible for the overwhelming amount of deaths attributed to the capitalist system, it is not the only source of misery and death.
Austerity measures have contributed to an astonishing increase in suicides in the U.K and the U.S. A study conducted by Scientists, Stuckler and Basu confirmed that a spike of over 10,000 suicides and over 1 million cases of depression have resulted since the introduction of austerity measures in the U.K and the U.S (Guardian, 2013).
Some 5 million Americans have gone on to lose their healthcare insurance, as a direct result of their job loss, and a staggering 10,000 U.K families are now homeless (Guardian, 2013).
Stickler goes onto say “If austerity was run like a clinical trial, it would have been discontinued. The evidence of its deadly side effects – of the profound effects of economic choices on health is overwhelming”. (Guardian, P.1, 2013).
The media also has to shoulder much of the blame for the lies and propaganda that they feed to the masses. How many times have we heard the blatant lies and rationalizations for more tax cuts for the wealthy and less services for the needy? Just today Scott Morrison is using the new tax slogan “The taxed and the taxed nots,” and hitting the most vulnerable yet again!
Not only does capitalism, and in particular Neoliberalism champion war and attack social systems, but it also now destroys jobs! Offshoring of our manufacturing industry and now even some of our service industry is the order of the day. Compounding this, are both major political parties’ slavish devotion to the causualisation of the workforce. They then wonder why consumer spending is down! The mind boggles at the craven stupidity of these lunatics.
Austerity and offshoring is not only deeply flawed but highly immoral. On the one hand they destroy jobs, and then they attempt to shift the blame on the unemployed whose jobs they wantonly destroyed! Casualised jobs keep the workers desperate and compliant. Off shoring jobs, exploits cheap labour in foreign countries and maximises CEO bonuses.
Ultimately infinite growth on a finite system is suicide. The only organism that replicates this system is the cancer cell. Just like cancer, capitalism will ultimately destroy its host.
References
Henley, J. (2013) Recession Can Hurt, But Austerity Kills. The Guardian, 16 May.
Lucus, James, A. (2015) U.S Has Killed More Than 20 Million People In “Victim Nations” Since World War 2. Global Research, 27 Nov.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
67 comments
Login here Register here-
Kevin Brewer -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
nexusxyz -
Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.com -
Carol Taylor -
Harquebus -
mark delmege -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Michael Taylor -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
Matters Not -
mark delmege -
Möbius Ecko -
michael lacey -
Harquebus -
Michael Taylor -
townsvilleblog -
Harquebus
-
townsvilleblog -
The AIM Network -
townsvilleblog -
jimhaz -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
jimhaz -
Zathras -
Harquebus -
mark delmege -
strobedriver -
Miriam English -
mark delmege -
Harquebus -
Miriam English -
Miriam English -
Harquebus -
Miriam English -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
mark delmege -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Harquebus -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Miriam English -
Miriam English -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Miriam English -
Harquebus -
Michael Taylor -
Harquebus -
Harquebus -
Michael Taylor -
Harquebus -
Christian Marx -
Amy Vale -
Harquebus -
Rob Holmes -
jimhaz -
Jack Straw -
Freethinker -
jimhaz
Return to home pageCambodia you blame on the US? I suspect your history is at fault there. The Khmer Rouge managed quite well to kill a very large number of people, and they were good old nasty hard line so called communists. The only play the US had was to attempt to stop the communists Vietnamese intervening on behalf of the Cambodia people to stop the murders. They were joined in this chorus by the Fraser Govt. And you left out Vietnam, where a very large number of people died as a result of the war the US fought there, a war that had a predictable result given what had happened to the French in 1954.
You also forgot to include under Indonesia the genocide that is ongoing in West Papua, the result of JFK insisting the Dutch hand the province over to Indonesia to keep them on our side: 500,000. The US also handed over the details of more than a million PKI members to be murdered by the Indonesia army. But there was internecine murdering within the Indonesian state as Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims all revenged themselves on each other that accounted for perhaps another 1,000,000.
As for oil, Afghanistan was not about oil. There is no oil, nor anything of value in Afghanistan. Opium is not something to be encouraged, although the Taliban are quite the capitalist drug cartels in ensuring the middle classes of the west get their recreational drugs.
A lot of these wars have very little to do with resources and a lot to do with the grotesque failure of American strategic thinking since WWII, and with a desire to ensure not too many other countries fall outside their system. But that system broke the day the US became a nett debtor to the world, during the Presidency of Ronald Reagan. The only two wars America has won since WWII are a fight they picked with Grenada, and one they stoked with Panama to get rid of Noriega.
Thanks Christian Marx,
for identifying the day to day realities of how Capitalism has grown to be the enemy within.
When there are ever-widening cataclysms between the haves and the have-nots, or as Snotty Morrisscum so unempathetically puts it, “The taxed and the taxed-nots”, it is seriously time for an overhaul on this Neoliberalist system that prays at the altar of Capitalism, and at the expense of grassroots people’s rights to meaningful, secure employment and standards of living.
Kevin Brewer – you should go do some research. There are immense reserves of minerals in Afghanistan (many Trillions). Confirmed by both Russian and US geologists. Also from a geopolitical perspective the US indirectly threatens Russia. Actually the production of drugs declined but the return of NATO saw production rise.
Very true. In its purest form (i.e. without external regulation), capitalism results in a single entity controlling everything. One of the main roles of government is regulation, but there is a significant difference into how much effort various political parties put into such. The largest problem that we now have is that there are a large enough number of multinational companies who have more power than many of the worlds countries, and thus can undermine the various national legal jurisdictions by locating in tax havens etc.
National politics has failed to deal with this reality, and is becoming increasingly ineffectual in controlling these entities. Climate change is a very clear indicator of this failure of governments to control commerce.
Nexusxyz, precisely. “In July 2000, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar, collaborating with the United Nations to eradicate heroin production in Afghanistan, declared that growing poppies was un-Islamic, resulting in one of the world’s most successful anti-drug campaigns. The Taliban enforced a ban on poppy farming via threats, forced eradication, and public punishment of transgressors. The result was a 99% reduction in the area of opium poppy farming in Taliban-controlled areas, roughly three quarters of the world’s supply of heroin at the time. The ban was effective only briefly due to the deposition of the Taliban in 2002.”
Yet if you read the American version of ‘history’ it was the Taliban who were the ‘drug barons’ and not themselves. The Taliban wanted farmers to grow food, not opium, so America stepped in.
Wot’s goin’ on? Two articles in two days from theAimn that I totally agree with.
“Ultimately infinite growth on a finite system is suicide.”
This is the bottom line. Most of our problems can be traced back the absurd pursuit of infinite growth. If our politicians continue in this quest which, is most likely, the economy will eventually be overcome with debt, our environment will continue to be destroyed and pollution will continue to worsen, inequality will continue to increase and we will experience shortages in just about every resource resulting in the breakdown of services.
Suicide is putting it mildly. Pursuing growth at this time is sheer bloody lunacy.
“By imposing austerity to pay for the debt the Troika since 2010 has forced the Greek government to extract income and wealth from its workers and small businesses-i.e. to exploit its own citizens on the Troika’s behalf-and then transfer that income to the Troika and Europe bankers and investors.”
“For the capitalists, the bottom line is far more pressing than the fate of the planet or those who live on it.”
“The exploitation at the heart of capitalism also gives rise to a wholly oppressive system that is not simply economic. Exploitation cannot function without an accompanying ideological and legal apparatus backed up by the armed might of the police and the military.
At its heart, capitalism is an exploitative system driven by competition for profit. These features cannot be reformed away. They can be overthrown only by the working class collectively taking control of the means of production and wielding them to create a society in which profit and competition are no longer our masters.”
https://redflag.org.au/node/5450
Kevin I wont go over all of your errors and you made many though you do make some useful points. You started with Cambodia forgetting how the US carpet bombed there for years.
Afghanistan was about a number of things – strategic location, oil and maybe gas pipelines and of course opium – which was pretty near nil production by the end of the Taliban time of control but has increased pretty much every year since the US invasion – opium is now pushed into places like Iran and Russia – I’d argue as war by other means. Russia’s current AIDS epidemic is largely a result of needle use rather than gay or bi infection. Afghanistan is also home to huge reserves of minerals. The war on Afghanistan was began by Pres Carter when he began to arm the fundamentalists against the then emerging Socialist Government.
The US’s war in Afghanistan didn’t start with the post 9/11 event any more that the US war against Iraq started with George Bush the younger. Or even events in Syria today. They have been decades in the making inflict crime after crime on generations of people.
It won’t nit pick you further or Christian Marx who could have added many more to his list of crimes. Such as Syria today. Nor will I mention further how it matters zilch whether the crimes were committed by Republican or Democrat Presidents. I’m not even sure if it has much to do with capitalism but rather the very nature of Empire itself. Though of course it is the very biggest of companies that benefit most – from military and security procurements and the profits and booty extracted following war itself. It is also the biggest of the companies that fund the think tanks and probably research by universities who promote war itself and who benefit most from CIA and NSA spying.
Well, that means we’re all agreed. So start working out the solutions.
Two in two days, H’. That now makes it three in three years. ?
A few of us are guilty of finding fault with articles written by others who gather and analyse facts and develop arguments.
To be honest, I think we should stop finding fault with the argument builders who dare to state a case like this one, and more find fault with the bastards that cause division between right and wrong and the middle-ground in the first place and after that.
The nuances actually matter most.
Michael
I’d like to respond to that but, I keep laughing too much.
Thanks.
“This is what the cynics just don’t seem to grasp; we are dealing with a group of narcissistic psychopaths organized around a cult ideology and with nearly unlimited resources at their fingertips.”
“The globalists will be defeated because there is no way to quantify every single threat to their utopian framework. As long as people continue to fight them, physically and with information, regardless of the personal cost, their weaknesses will be found and they will fall.
This will not be accomplished, however, without considerable sacrifice.”
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/2988-how-the-globalists-will-attempt-to-control-populations-post-collapse
Keep up the good fight.
Actually I find ‘mark delmege’ on the money. His posts and references invariably cause me to seriously rethink my assumptions. I always look forward to his posts, even though he demonstrates my ‘naivety’.
A very, very serious contributor. He ‘teaches’ me much. But please provide some links so I can explore further.
Thanking you in anticipation.
anything in particular MN?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations
http://www.alternet.org/story/39416/america's_100_years_of_overthrow
Kinzer’s book is a good read and it reminded me the US invasion of Hawaii at the behest of sugar barons should be on the list.
Democratic socialist governments have to work within the framework of a capitalist system. The capitalist system has systemic failure built into its structure. Constant boom bust cycles every 3 to seven years, deteriorating to non-existent social structures, employment in crap underpaid jobs, a population with increasing dependence on welfare even with jobs, endless money sucking wars and the neglect of those traumatized by it, an election circus every three or four years to elect a capitalist or follows the capitalist dogma, money laundering and dirty dealings by banks that is ignored, a media that is bought and paid for by the elite and I’m told that socialism has failed, well anything would fail in this climate! The decline is happening now and no bandages will save it. We will be all Greeks soon enough! With a small elite group overseering us in some totalitarian capacity!
Att: theAimn
Any objections to me posting a link to this page on reddit?
I can answer that H’. No objection whatsoever. Would love you to. You can simply click on the Reddit icon below the post and it’ll take it from there.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-11/corporate-tax-minimisation-costs-governments-1-trillion/7587092 While Australia has this situation in reality it means that the LNP govt does not exercise any substantial regulation over corporations. If we working class people decide that democratic socialism could be the answer, as practiced in Nordic countries, how would we go about changing the ALP from being social democrats to democratic socialists as it reads in their party constitution?
Hey Michael.
I forgot about this one. That makes four.
Perhaps a follow up on this is due as well.
Thanks and cheers.
JMS HOW VERY TRUE however H has bought something useful to our thought group today, his link is a must read I think.
Harquebus, Michael was wrong. It wasn’t three in three years, it was four (now five): he forgot that you wrote a guest post.
michael laceyAugust 26, 2016 at 7:05 am, I wish we had a ‘like’ key!
Kevin is a lot more correct in context than Mark is.
The thing I hate about the Religious Communists article is the use of out of context history in order to create falsely assumed guilt – same trick the religious use.
Thanks Harquebus and townsvilleblog,
for the link. It is an eye-opening article and I like how it ends on a promising note for us.
I’ll just quote someone else’s post on another site.
“The casualty counts for various wars and regimes are pretty solid. The reasoning used to attribute these deaths to the US is absurd.
The website basically adds up the deaths from every war and dictator that the US was ever tangentially related to starting in 1945 and then blames every one of those deaths on the US. For example, there’s this gem under Cambodia:
Over the years we have repeatedly heard about the Khmer Rouge’s role in the deaths of millions in Cambodia without any acknowledgement being made this mass killing was made possible by the the U.S. bombing of that nation which destabilized it by death , injuries, hunger and dislocation of its people.
So the U.S. bears responsibility not only for the deaths from the bombings but also for those resulting from the activities of the Khmer Rouge – a total of about 2.5 million people.
Yup, because the US bombed Cambodia and Pol Pot took power in that country afterwards, the US is 100% responsible for the genocide committed by said dictator. Or another one, the US is responsible for 3 million deaths in Korea because North Korea invaded the South and the US defended it. Therefore, every death in a war that the US didn’t start is the fault of America.
That’s like saying that Gandhi killed over 5 million people because he led India and Pakistan to independence and the two would later have religious pogroms and wars.”
The Vietnam conflict had a lot to do with the US getting access to their off-shore gas fields.
The US secretly armed Ho Chi Minh and General Giap with half the surplus WW2 carbines that had been stored at Okinawa for a possible invasion of Japan to help them overthrow the French but the liberated North Vietnamese later reneged on the deal. (The other half went to South Korea).
In effect, the US help create the Viet Cong, like Al Queda and ISIS.
During the war US private vessels seismologically mapped the sea floor off the Vietnamese cost and were ready to bid for the leases that were auctioned off by the Vietnamese after the war ended.
Likewise they helped overthrow democratically elected governments in Iraq and Iran to preserve their own oil interests and replaced them with the despotic regimes that later resulted in today’s extremism, not to mention their political adventures in South America.
An overview of some of their intentions can be found at http://www.addictedtowar.com as well as the writings of Smedley Butler who called out war for what it really was – a racket to make money for the rich.
“Limits to growth means a shrinking piece of pie for everyone. Capitalism can only justify the huge disparities in wealth distribution the constant propaganda that we all have the potential to become billionaires (especially if the government stops regulating businesses and taxing the rich).”
“Capitalism is lauded as the best political and economic system, but in reality it’s just the most successful at extracting energy and natural resources the most quickly to enrich mainly the top 0.1% of the population, future generations be damned.”
http://energyskeptic.com/2016/limits-to-growth-2016-united-nations-report-provides-best-evidence-yet/
I’ll be back later to check out the links posted by others.
Thanks in advance.
Kevin was right about the US role in Indonesia, Marshall Green was the Ambassador there then and was Ambassador here when Whitlam was removed.
This is an excellent and succinct observation. I would add that at no time in the history of the United States of America (US) it has never got more than 15% if its oil/energy from the Middle East, so therefore there has never been any viable reason whatsoever to invade the countries of the Middle East in order to sustain/maintain the US’ oil needs–the US gets most of its oil from the South Americas. To put this in context, one of the (major) reasons the US invaded Iraq was e is to gain a greater level of influence over Japan and Germany who import as much as 70+ percent of their individual energy needs from Iraq, and when the US–,and the relevant and obvious private contractors– becomes involved, it is able to exert a much greater degree of control/influence over oil imports and therefore, influence the marketplace overall..
I think a lot of the ills pointed to above stem from greed. We really need to be careful of definitions.
Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
Communism: a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs. (I like to omit communism from consideration because I don’t think there has ever been a truly communist society and I think it is actually unworkable in any large scale for more than a very short time. It always quickly degenerates into either dictatorship or a kind of bureaucratic feudalism.)
Feudalism: a social system in which the nobility (aristocracy) hold lands from the Crown (monarchy) in exchange for military service, and vassals are in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) are obliged to live on their lord’s land and give him homage, labour, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection.
Theocracy: a system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god.
Dictatorship: government by a dictator who has absolute authority.
Bureaucracy: a system of government in which most of the important decisions are taken by state officials rather than by elected representatives.
Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
Socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be regulated by the community as a whole.
Each of these major systems can produce all the evils listed in the article above, though socialism and democracy are probably the most benign because they are almost the same thing and make available the greatest number of checks and balances.
Capitalism works really well if it operates under a truly democratic and socialist system. If properly controlled it can be of great benefit to society. It can deliver a lot of technological improvements. That’s not to say they can’t be delivered through other means (e.g. the kind of sharing the open source movement enables), just that it can produce great good.
The problem comes when capitalism is unregulated. Pure capitalism is suicidal because it always tends toward non-competing monopolies, and in its purest form degenerates into a kind of inefficient bureaucratic feudalism that is almost indistinguishable from what communism ends up as. The biggest problem with USA is that they are no longer (perhaps never were) a true democracy and have few social controls on the capitalist forces that are ruining the world around them.
The problem at the heart of many of the world’s ills is greed — greed for power. It’s not money, directly.
For the obsessively greedy money is a really way of gaining power, whereas for the rest of us money is unfortunately a requirement to survive. Money is a tool. In a world afflicted by scarcity it is far superior to barter, but in a world of plenty there should be no need for it at all. In a world of plenty it turns out that people like to share. This has become a major point of conflict for out-of-control capitalism and wider society.
Scarcity is now unnecessary for perhaps the first time in human history, but old-style capitalism is built on the idea of deriving value from scarcity. In reality capitalism doesn’t really need scarcity and could work perfectly well in a time of plenty for all, but short-sighted, obsolete mindsets prevail in corporate circles. It is this old view of capitalism that has made itself the enemy of society. There is a slowly growing culture of capitalists who understand the need for plenty, for socialist controls, for capitalism to be divorced from politics. Sadly they are few in number.
In summation, capitalism itself is not the problem. It is an old view of unbridled capitalism as superior to all else that is a the cause of many of the world’s current ills, just as theocrats think they should have all control, or dictators think they should, or monarchs and aristocrats or bureaucrats think they should. No. All those forces are too easily corrupted and should be regulated and controlled by the population as a whole under democratic socialism, though even that can go astray too… it is simply the safest of a lot of broken systems. Maybe one day we’ll find a way to reliably manage our societies safely. Until then, none of the small, easily corrupted sectors should escape regulation by the population as a whole.
Apologies for the long post. I put off posting for a while as I knew this would happen. 🙂
Miriam English scarcity remains a problem. Here there is a scarcity of good jobs, water, public services etc but for most of the world there is a scarcity of most things that prop up living standards. We also have an over abundance of people with more on the way crowding out all other living creatures.
Capitalism doesn’t exist anymore than communism (or even dictatorship) ever did. If you look at the US as an example of capitalism it is a failure in a pure sense quite simply because the US Govt military/security budget crowds out all other expenditures. The most complex and widely used products stem from Government funding of research and development.
So called Democracy of course also takes many guises. From (the con of) first passed the post to Mixed Member Proportional electoral and every thing in between. From single to bicameral for fixed terms to semi or non fixed, with or without recall provisions. And then there is the relationship between the executive and the rest of parliament and the bureaucracy. No system is best for all societies.
The human condition is the real f*cker in all this. As you say Greed (for money or influence etc) is common in all systems and how to keep that in check is one of the biggest problems.
“And we learned in 2015 that the government stole so much private property from its citizens that the total amount exceeded the value of all property stolen by every thief and felon in America combined.”
https://www.sovereignman.com/trends/heres-how-the-government-is-stealing-more-than-ever-before-20086/
“What rose onto its hind legs on the African savannahs was, from the outset, death: the destroyer of worlds.”
“Is this all we are? A diminutive monster that can leave no door closed, no hiding place intact, that is now doing to the great beasts of the sea what we did so long ago to the great beasts of the land? Or can we stop? Can we use our ingenuity, which for two million years has turned so inventively to destruction, to defy our evolutionary history?”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/24/humans-diminutive-monster-destruction
Note: All of the many links that I post, I have read.
Cheers.
Mark Delmege, I agree with what you say.
I should note that I said that for perhaps the first time in history we don’t have to have scarcity. I didn’t say that we don’t have scarcity. We have sufficient means to provide plenty for all. We in the developed world just have to stop consuming hundreds of times what we need.
The military all around the world are key in this. They consume an incredible amount of funds and resources. If we took about a 50th of the funds from the military worldwide we could eliminate starvation — currently 16 million people die each year simply because they don’t have enough food to put in their mouths.
If we took the great step of halving the funds allocated to military then poverty would cease and we could really have a chance at solving a lot of the problems plaguing humanity. For one thing, the end of poverty would also bring an end to the population explosion, because when people have a good standard of living they produce less children.
And there’s Harquebus posting more libertarian doom and gloom. Don’t you ever learn?
People want solutions. We already know things are bad. Do you have financial interests in antidepressant pharmaceuticals or something?
Miriam.
The solutions are simple. Getting others to accept them is the hard part.
Quotas for energy and resources, population reduction, a gold standard and large scale reforestation.
People aren’t yet frightened enough to accept them with the myth of renewable energy being a major limiting factor.
Harquebus, I wonder if you are misguided, or pigheaded, or stupid. Renewable energy is clearly not a myth. Plants have been using solar energy successfully for more than 2 billion years. Animals have been piggybacking onto that renewable energy source for almost as long.
Wind energy capitalises on the sun moving air around and turns that energy into electricity. Wind farms get out about 20 units of energy for every unit of energy that goes into making the turbines and maintaining them.
Photovoltaic solar panels are less efficient than wind farms, but still deliver nearly 10 units of energy for every unit that goes into their manufacture.
I think you like to be alarmist. You certainly enjoy scaring people. You get a buzz from it. If you were interested in fixing the world you would be talking about solutions, but you never do. You just attempt to paralyse people with fear. You want the world to go down.
Are YOU a libertarian, Harquebus? Isn’t Leyonhjelm a libertarian too?
If one can somehow equate your philosophies to his political cynicism by association, just shut up.
Miriam
Please refer to the peak food page.
Paralyze with fear as compared to inaction through complacency. We don’t have time. I want the world to wake up now. Our world has limits and we have breached them.
Am I a libertarian? Most definitely yes.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/libertarian?s=t
Harquebus and Miriam,
stupid as this might be, how about extend your rivalry to include the rest of us Plebs?
And when you do that mere important thing, please explain how your particular philosophies address the need and the means for emancipation of ordinary, everyday, Grassroots Australians.
Jennifer.
Apologies. Miriam and I have been slugging it out here.
https://theaimn.com/youve-heard-about-peak-oil-but-what-about-peak-food-and-peak-water/
Because, we seem to consistently go off topic.
I am not sure about your question. The priority lies in saving us from ourselves otherwise, what’s the point?
Jennifer Meyer-Smith libertarians aren’t as bad as you might think and my guess is – if you are flexible you would agree with much that they say. I’m not one myself – in that sense – and certainly don’t agree with their social policy as put my the American right but they are open to other matters that would surprise many. Me from the left and libertarians from the right object to much that passes as the middle ground and we can agree with much that we see wrong with the world.
Unfortunately Harquebus,
you have now revealed yourself as someone I could not support, if you exalt Libertarianism. That’s sad coz much of what you say seems to make sense but not if it is a shield to selfish grounds that lead to neoliberalism when put in the wrong hands.
mark delmege and Harquebus,
I too like to be a person of Liberty but that should not negate the rights of others which is what Libertarianism can be if left unabated.
Jennifer.
I am disappointed. Did you check out the dictionary reference that I provided.
” noun
1. a person who advocates liberty, especially with regard to thought or conduct.
2. a person who maintains the doctrine of free will ”
I am proud to hold these principles.
Perhaps you are confusing it with neoliberalism.
Harquebus,
no, I was not confusing it with Neoliberalism.
Libertariarism is an example of a word that has been hijacked and shaped into something almost opposite to what it’s pure meaning is.
When one person’s liberty and strident view that their liberty is paramount, even if it means another person’s loss of liberty, dignity, or entitlement, then that Libertarian view of liberty is flawed.
In that case, I find both Neoliberals and Libertarians questionable, flawed and undesirable.
Jennifer.
Thanks for that. I’ll stick to the dictionary definition and stand by my libertarian ideals.
I most certainly not advocate loss of liberty or dignity to favor another however, entitlement is another matter.
Are we still friends?
Cheers.
I admire you, Harquebus.
I see you in my mind as my ideal of a true and resilient hippie who cares for idealistic and rightful living and sustainable principles.
Jennifer.
Same to you.
I have been following your conversation over on Trish’s Taxed Nots page.
Goodonya.
Hippie type is not far off.
Cheers.
Hippie type works for me.
Harquebus, Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a libertarian as someone “who believes that people should be allowed to do and say what they want without any interference from the government”.
I don’t think you’d find many people who would go along with that here.
Considering that you so delight in the idea of an unavoidable apocalypse, you reject out of hand renewable energy (using petroleum-advocate arguments) just as you also reject any other solutions that can address humanity’s many pressing problems, you have a distinct propensity for reading right-wing survivalist and conspiracy theory sites, and you name yourself after a kind of muzzle-loading long-barrelled gun (“Harquebus”), I have to say I’m puzzled that you visit AIMN. It certainly doesn’t appear to be a birds of a feather thing.
I can understand a certain amount of pessimism when faced with the array of problems facing humanity, but what gets under my skin is your absolute refusal to consider solutions. You’ll say you do have solutions, but you don’t really — they’re just more of the same bleak apocalypse you seem to want so much: dictatorial control over (other) people’s ability to breed (possibly even sanctioned mass murder), dictatorial control over (other) people’s food, dictatorial control over (other) people’s energy. Those aren’t solutions; they’re simply restating the problem.
I wonder if you’re so invested in an apocalypse because you have a “Boy’s Own World” illusion that it would give you a kind of Wild West world where you can finally do and say whatever you want.
When I was a child I grew up in the bush. I used to like walking for miles to one of my favorite places where I’d stand on a hilltop to look 360 degrees around me and not see or hear anything of humanity. I enjoyed imagining I was the only human on Earth. But I understood that it’s only nice if I can go home to eat and read and see my family and friends again. I get the feeling that you never came to understand that last part.
Sorry Jennifer, I didn’t mean to ignore the rest of the people here to focus on Harquebus. I guess his constant hammering of “there’s no hope and we’re all doomed” just really got to me. I’ll try not to be lured by his bait anymore.
Miriam,
your commentary is always highly anticipated and respected.
Harquebus is understandably critical but having Harquebus in our awareness is a necessary thing.
I just don’t quite understand why YOU and HE don’t see life the same way???
Thanks Jennifer. 🙂
I’m interested in solutions.
He deliberately fosters despair, encouraging people to think we’re screwed no matter what we do. That’s dangerous because it entices people to give up, thinking we might as well party now while we have the chance since there’s no point in trying to fix things. He is anti-renewable energy and suspiciously uses the fossil fuel industry’s fake arguments.
Sometimes I think he’s relatively clueless and doesn’t realise what he’s doing. Other times I get the feeling it’s a deliberate ploy.
My response just went down the theAimn rabbit hole.
Starting again.
Nothing caught up in spam or awaiting moderation.
Thank you Michael.
Back soon.
Miriam
My Webster states: Libertarian;
One who holds to free will.
One who advocates full civil liberties for the individual.
I will argue in favor of these ideals any place anytime. Note the word “civil”.
“so delight in the idea of an unavoidable apocalypse”
Not so. This is only how you like to think of me.
Yes;
I reject completely the concept known as renewable energy. It is a fallacy.
I reject completely delusional solutions to humanity’s problems. There is no magic techno utopian fix that can save us.
Harquebus likes to take aim at bullshit whenever and wherever he sees it. Yes, H is he.
I do hang out in fora with like minded people but, they are already aware. That is why I come here. To warn and to raise awareness.
“absolute refusal to consider solutions.”
Viable solutions will be considered. You just don’t have any.
“seem to want so much: dictatorial control over (other) people’s ability to breed (possibly even sanctioned mass murder), dictatorial control over (other) people’s food, dictatorial control over (other) people’s energy.”
Dictatorial? (other)?
You are letting your fantasies about me get the better of you.
For what it is worth Miriam, I am respected, doomsday predictions and all, by my family, friends, neighbors and local community and they know me a lot better than you do.
The pristine places that I used to visit for solitude and to fish from are no longer pristine. They are now filthy polluted cess pits.
http://qz.com/753603/as-of-today-we-have-used-up-all-the-earths-resources-for-2016/
“relatively clueless and doesn’t realise what he’s doing.”
This can also apply to yourself. Holding out for some baseless dream to come true only delays doing what is required.
If you are right, I can go away and only feel embarrassment but, if you are wrong, can you face the bloody consequences?
“That’s why I come here. To warn and raise awareness”.
H’, do you think we don’t know that the planet is a screwed place? Of course we know it. No need to warn us about what we already know. However, there is much more to talk about and we quite enjoy doing that.
Michael.
Someone who was called Nero and a fiddle comes to mind.
That is not me.
Seeyatermorra.
Wow, it seems that a Libertarian has hijacked my thread. Not cool. 🙁
Libertarianism is Social Darwinism.
Harquebus, Libertarians are the worst kind. Libertarians do not believe in social safety nets, do not believe in the right to affordable health care, if you do not have the money for health treatment, too bad, you are left to die. poverty is the fault of the person, they can starve, who cares and there are no basic human rights. Libertarianism is survival of the fittest (richest), everybody else gets left to fend for themselves.It is the most evil, twisted and sick ideology. They have NO social compass
Re: Libertarian.
I am only going by the dictionary definitions. They sound good to me.
Capitalism would not be so evil if it had not been captured by neo-liberalism.
[Capitalism would not be so evil if it had not been captured by neo-liberalism]
Yep. Capitalism has probably created 2 or so billion more lives than otherwise by driving technological competition.
The problem is more about the usurping of government policy by the wealthy and vested interests, leading to a distinct lack of actual “governing” such as long term planning and regulation, and also interference and corruption of basic market economics that protect those who should have failed.
You would be a Libertarian Harquebus-Jimhaz.
jimhaz September 1, 2016 at 11:11 am
[Capitalism would not be so evil if it had not been captured by neo-liberalism]
Yep. Capitalism has probably created 2 or so billion more lives than otherwise by driving technological competition.
Capitalism created poverty, inequality, extended the life of those that have and shortened the life of those that have not.
The problem it is not capitalism or socialism it is greed and affect all the ideologies, it is a “cancer” in humanity that delaying development.
[You would be a Libertarian]
Nope. I once thought that libertarianism was fine, but the more I looked into it the more it seemed to be about the most capable at earning income just wanting to do whatever they might like, including using and abusing others. It would be liberty only for the top dogs and a nightmare for others.
I want regulation not monetary interference in markets to prop them up in order to avoid recessions.
Regulation – one definite policy would be to only allow a single level of derivatives limited to exports goods. Regulation – recreate State banks to keep the bastards honest. Regulation – cut all excessive bank charges. Regulation – separate banking from investment banking, not allowed to do both. Policy – build public housing and releases land to keep housing inflation as low as possible, up bank loans standards and make them consistent over time. Regulation – much tougher stance on advisors, limited range of products with safety options built in. etc. Policy – once regulation is in place let recessions happen as per historical norms
[Capitalism created poverty, inequality, extended the life of those that have and shortened the life of those that have not]
Nope, it has extended 95% of lives and reduced poverty and inequality on an overall basis.
That’s not to say I don’t hate the current combination capitalism, globalisation, internationalism under increasing plutocratic and propaganda run governments. It is not to say that there are not better ways such as increased levels of socialism in areas that are essential – energy supply, education etc.
[The problem it is not capitalism or socialism it is greed and affect all the ideologies, it is a “cancer” in humanity that delaying development]
Yes, agree fully. Greed is intrinsic in our animal natures. We need to learn to be moderate. Many of us are once basic needs such as reliable housing are achieved. I’d definitely be taxing the rich far, far more than at present – I hate how investment income is taxed lighter that income earned by actual effort.
In relation to regulation I would take steps to limit advertising aiming to cut it in half and cutting back on the areas it has expanded into. Advertising is one of many factors that drives greed into excessive territories.