Interesting this video came my way on the week prior to my visit to Greece where I’ll be sharing the Copiosis RBE Transition Plan. PragerU, this video’s presentation is nothing more than western propaganda. I’m going to destroy everything related to “life’s biggest and most interesting topics”. This video features George Mason University Economics Professor Walter Williams explaining why capitalism is the most economically AND morally superior way to “organize economic behavior.”
What’s amazing to me, having spent now going on three years running Copiosis, is how ludicrous this video is. It is nothing more than capitalist propaganda. I am sitting here writing this, amazed that I couldn’t see these arguments for what they were. I offer a long rebuttal to the video, which I am pasting here. I’d be curious what you think about the video too. Feel free to comment.
This presentation is nothing more than western propaganda (propaganda: information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.). I’m going to destroy every one of these arguments for capitalism. Then I’m going to offer a far better alternative. Walter is not only an economist, he also is a professor and a renowned one. As such, he as a conflict of interest with regard to sharing this information and his bias shows in this video. Here are indisputable counter-facts.
First, capitalism is NOT economically superior to “any other way or organizing economic behavior.” This statement makes egregious and arrogant claims (arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one’s own … abilities [of awareness and knowledge].). To use the phrase “any other way” suggest the speaker is aware of and familiar with ALL FUTURE systems which may come to light. As in the start-up world, it is impossible to know what future solutions will come. No one predicted Twitter, Amazon, PayPal or Facebook. In the same way, you can’t – honestly – claim to know what future innovations may come, including economic ones. So it is not accurate to claim capitalism is superior to “any other way”.
It may be superior to other systems which have been tried IN THE PAST, but we can’t even say that honestly because capitalist incentives – including its own propaganda and amoral reward features – insured other systems didn’t survive.
Second, capitalism is NOT moral (Moral: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.) Nor is it IM-moral. Capitalism is A-moral. This means the system rewards producers NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO. For example, if I sell drugs and that activity destroys a community, I can be rewarded (with money) in capitalism for my “productive” behavior even though that “production” is on the ground, destructive and clearly not good. There are so many examples – on both the micro and macro level of “economics” which illustrates capitalism’s amorality. I am stunned that Walter can argue for capitalism as a morally superior system. Morals have nothing to do with capitalism.
Walter claims the system calls for voluntary actions in a free market. No coercion. Yet there IS no voluntarism in capitalism (except for the voluntary acts people do outside of the system as part of their moral alignment to churches or other charitable causes). Coercion is rampant in capitalism, we just don’t think of it that way because we’ve accepted the coercion as normal. Coercion in capitalism looks like HAVING TO EARN A LIVING. There is nothing that is provided in capitalism in abundance that frees you to volunteer. Even those doing something they love, often choose doing that despite the need to earn a living. No one volunteers to cut someone’s lawn in capitalism. They do it in order to obtain money so they can meet their needs. Without money, needs can’t be met. If there is volunteerism, then why do most Americans dislike the work they are doing? You call this volunteering? No, it’s not.
Because goods and services must be PURCHASED, and you can’t obtain such goods and services – even life-giving ones – without having money. You MUST work in order to live in capitalism. (this is NOT an argument AGAINST working, as you’ll see). It is NOT necessary to PAY people to have them serve their fellow man. There is another way to motivate productive behavior that (contrary to what Walter claims) is FAR SUPERIOR to capitalism. I’ll get to that in a moment.
A Federal Reserve Note (FRN) is NOT evidence of serving your fellow man. As I said above, capitalism rewards people (in FRNs in the US) for ANY productive behavior (productive: producing or able to produce large amounts of goods, crops, or other commodities) you can get away with. So when the grocer says “prove it” and the drug dealer offers a FRN, how has that drug dealer served his fellow man in a morally superior way? He hasn’t.
It is true that capitalism is NOT a zero sum game, but that is a simplistic answer. Capitalism and money doesn’t create a zero sum game, they create a SIMULATION of a zero sum game. That’s why every organization, from households, to companies, churches to governments must choose how they are going to use their money in capitalism. We can’t do all we want to do (like solve hunger, house everyone, provide jobs for everyone) because we don’t have enough money to do it all. So while everyone can enjoy big screen TVs and the latest episode of House of Cards on Netflix (if you call that winning) we LOSE because we can’t afford to do the things we really want to see happen: end homelessness, mental illness, joblessness, power inequality, pollution, end species extinction, etc.
Capitalism simulates a zero-sum game by conditioning us to believe we can’t have it all, when we can (but only without capitalism).
I’m not a fan of government. Yet, subsidies government creates, as well as laws, result from capitalism’s FAILURES as a system. Capitalism allows and rewards amoral behavior. Government tries to regulate or prevent such behavior, but sucks at it because it is subject to capitalism’s rewards, meaning, people (such as food stamp advocates, big business, corporate farming industries such as the Dairy Assn.) can successfully lobby government to rule in their favor…and win (receive rewards). Government is part of the problem, a necessary part, because of capitalism’s failures.
Capitalism does not require people to SERVE. It requires them to WORK. Walter uses the term “serve” (serve: perform duties or services for (another person or an organization).) as though it is an expression of altruism (altruism: the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.) or volunteerism (volunteer: a person who freely offers to take part in an enterprise or undertake a task.) or charity (charity: the voluntary giving of help, typically in the form of money, to those in need.). The statement that capitalism causes people to serve is propaganda. It requires people to work in order to obtain basic needs and service debt, which perpetuates the system. Yes, some people work in fields where they serve others, but most people are not working to serve, they’re working to SURVIVE.
I am not suggesting people have a claim on others in any way whatsoever. It is capitalist propaganda to claim that people “should not have a claim on others without first serving others (through work)”. This is capitalist CONDITIONING and is FALSE. People don’t have a claim on anyone or anything except in debt-based economies. There are no claims other than those which arise when resources needed for survival are inaccessible unless you have money. This is a subtle but profound paragraph I just wrote and deserves intense study.
“We the people” do NOT have market power sufficient to adequately punish companies in capitalism. Yes, it is possible to boycott a company, exerting MORAL pressure on said company. Yes, it’s possible to damage a company so significantly that is can be forced into insolvency in many ways. That does’t happen very often. But what I want to focus on is the INEFFICIENCY (completely ignored by capitalist propaganda) that takes place in “free markets”. It is resource inefficient to have competition. Having companies compete against one another ensures redundancy. Providing an amoral reward system guarantees resources will be consumed to depletion without government intervention. Redundancy is inefficient. You require government to regulate the “free market” because of capitalism’s inherent instability. A more efficient system would require no such regulation, so too would it provide incentives to conserve scarce resources and reward the use of substitutes.
Capitalism claims to do this, but it does so extremely poorly. More inefficiency. Competition requires legal protection to insure “fair play”. If capitalism is so superior, why do we need to use so many resources (legal institutions of all kinds, government regulation) to ensure protection and fair play?
It is absolutely a fact that the ambition and (mostly non-voluntary) effort of citizens drives the economy. But all this is happening in DESPITE capitalism. And this is the amazing thing about people: they are so willing to produce they will continue to do so even when their freedoms are being usurped right under their noses! Remarkable!
Last point: If people really were “shaping their own destiny” in capitalism they would not be working office jobs, pushing paper and counting FRNs, rubles or rupees, working manufacturing jobs assembling cheap shit people don’t want or need except for the capitalist propaganda (called marketing) that makes them think they need it, digging mines and making weapons to kill other human beings. They would be following their PASSIONS, their spirit-inspired path to their greater JOY. Yes, some would do things that look like ordinary work, but life on the planet would be far more extraordinary than it is.
No: capitalism is holding back human potential and Walter and his economist propaganda are reinforcing the brainwashing. I said I would offer an alternative far superior to capitalism. People who have looked into Copiosis (www.copiosis.com) are calling it the best alternative to capitalism they have seen. Our transition plan offers a “best in class” process for ending capitalism and creating a world where people are really honestly free, in a system that becomes increasingly efficient, and where markets, money and government area thing of the past. Copiosis is from the future. It has the best of all economic systems including capitalism and NONE OF THE PROBLEMS. All we need is to see capitalism for what it is: another successful way of running human society, but one with too many problems to allow it to continue when we could do so much better.
One last note concerning morality and this is after long thought (six months). The challenge that Perry has a “morally superior attitude” or is obsessed with ego is a huge misstatement and ignores the basic truth. If you support an amoral system that creates and allows corruption and Perry offers a totally moral new system of socioeconomics then it follows that Perry does have the higher moral ground and proves that he is morally superior in his thinking. If it looks, sounds, and acts like a duck, then it is a duck. If Perry’s ideas and principals are morally superior than the greed ridden corrupt system we live in now, then he has a right to claim that higher ground and your opinion anchored in a sandy foundation is flawed and narrow minded. Bob, or whoever you are, you need to study Copiosis in depth before attacking it with such weak arguments. You can not win this debate. You are backing the amoral horse in the race.
@Bob- Wow….this is clearly going to be an exercise in patience and self control…I suppose I will address your letter point by point as best I can to respond to it, because it certainly deserves response.
To begin with, its funny that you ask Perry who he is to judge, then you go on with this tirade to judge him time and again…. Why exactly is it judging that Perry has done here??? I dont see it as anything more than making an assessment… he casts no opinions as to the character or values or ways of another human being…. He states facts and gives supporting evidence for them. That aside, “judging” is a biological imperative. If you dont make a judgement on the person walking toward you, you will not be adequately protected or prepared if that person ends up being trouble… As for whether HE finds this type of thing (So while everyone can enjoy big screen TVs and the latest episode of House of Cards on Netflix (if you call that winning), POSSIBLY not winning (it was actually YOU that made that distinction, he left it open for debate) winning, that is HIS RIGHT. Who are YOU to interfere with that or question it? In no way was it “moral signaling and presumed moral superiority.”… although YOUR response CLEARLY was an example of that very thing.
My, my, my,… you are the quantitative hypocrite, arent you? You assess Perrys statement that “This is a subtle but profound paragraph I just wrote and deserves intense study” to be an example of an ego run wild…. Why exactly do you feel that way? The man had an opinion about his own comment that he found to be enlightening and noteworthy, and chose to apply adjectives to it to highlight its importance in the context of this article. Seems to me like YOU are the one that needs to read the book you cite, ESPECIALLY after reading ALL your long winded letter..
You must be one of those individuals that hasnt experienced real hardship or financial difficulty. Raised in a rich Southern family, were you Bob? No understanding of the common mans plight trying to live paycheck to paycheck? And no, Bob, life is NOT as “fair” as you think it is, considering the top 1% of the population control 95% of the income and the opportunity for the bottom 99% to MAKE their own income. And your comment that if we hate our jobs we can always quit? THAT is the short sighted and ignorant statement i expect from the conservative well to do in this country. Once again, you dont know what it is to live check to check and not always be able to find work as apparently readily as you are able to… meaning that most of us are always ONE check away from living on the streets. You also go on about how everyone gets what they put into the system… Again, you couldnt be more incorrect or blind to the facts or reality of the lives of many in this country. Minorities do not get the fair end of the stick… People of color are systematically trod on and kept pushed down. I have Bachelors degrees in Criminal Justice and Sociology and the statistics are frightening for those willing to actually do the work and find out… Ever heard of the cradle to prison pipeline, Bob? It is a very real thing that insures that 3 of 5 black men will go to prison at some point in their lies, and NOT because they are criminally oriented… Look at the non violent drug offender stats, which THANKFULLY some in government are starting to look at. Possessing marijuana wins some people YEARS in prison for something less harmful than LEGAL alcohol….. a damn shame…. I could fill this response with tons of citations and references to peer reviewed articles on the subject but not only do I not have the time, I think it more important for you to do the research yourself… it IS there. I would point you to my published research which you can find on ResearchGate.com, “Long term isolation confinement and Mental Health”. Instead, suffice it to say that your claims are that of a sheltered, ignorant, and woefully out of touch person that thinks HIS opinion is somehow more important here, when in fact, although you have the right to express it, it is nevertheless incorrect and not important as you think. But lets DO go on…..
“Charlie Munger says ‘ “the world is not yet a crazy enough place to reward undeserving people.”'”….. Really Bob? a self made BILLIONAIRE who made his fortune like every other wealthy miser… off the backs of the rest of us… You certainly are blind then…. I could give you a million references of people that do wrong and DO NOT deserve benefits they get…. Criminals that are made FAMOUS, police that are acquitted when the video SHOWS them beating black men to death, shooting them in the back, etc…. People like Trump are made President.. YES, I went there… It is PAINFULLY obvious you are a conservative, but your opinion of trump , if you favor him, is as ignorant as most of your response… the man is a maniac, a delusional, sociopathic, narcissistic asshole that is ONLY interested in making DONALD TRUMP GREAT AGAIN! But I am not going to argue this with anyone… The facts and evidence are all that is necessary. If you choose to close your eyes to that like everything else, I honestly feel sorry for you.
Lets use me as a further example that some do NOT get what they deserve. At 17 I was convicted of a sex crime I was NOT guilty of, and that the SORNA federal statutes have since stated I am not guilty of. I had consensual sex with my 14 yr old girlfriend when I was 17 yrs old. Granted we shouldnt have been doing it, but it doesnt merit ruining my entire life, nor making me a sex offender. Yet, because I cannot afford to go to court to be exonerated, I hve remained on the sex offender registry for the last THIRTY YEARS…. I spent 12 yrs in prison. I was raped, beaten, abused by inmate and guards alike until I literally went mad and was finally put in a cell 24 hrs a day for the last 4 and 1/2 years of my incarceration. I have since been out over a decade. I obtained the TWO Degrees I mentioned above. I have been clean and sober for 9 yrs… in ALL ways, I have rehabilitated myself from the damage that the SYSTEM did to me… I still deal with bipolar and PTSD disorders and take medication for them. Because of my record and mental problems related to my experiences, I have a hard time finding employment. I find a job like the last one at Amazon, am an outstanding employee in all ways, receive awards for perfect attendance for the year I was there, am promoted and when i report a safety issue and then report the supervisor for not dealing with it, I am fired two weeks later and made to look like I was a dreadful employee the whole time, even though, as I said, I was promoted two weeks previously and received awards. As a result, I have to live in an old camper trailer and otherwise live on the streets. Tell me, Bob, how is that fair? How am I getting what I deserve? … even though the statutes specifically say if the two are between the ages of 13 and 19 it is NOT a felony crime????? I am sure you will come along with some condescending, ignorant comment about what you think you know. I welcome it. I have MORE than accepted responsibility for the mistakes I HAVE made in life… but there is NO WAY IN HELL I deserve THIS! So, again, you just dont know what the hell you are talking about. You speak from your little protected bubble and dictate to others how YOU think THEY should be and what THEY should do, all the while calling THEM the ego inflated, judgmental ones….
Next we discuss mother nature and her coercing ways….smfh Bob….
Believe it or not, Bob, BEFORE there were roofs and electricity, people actually DID thrive and get along. Sadly its people like you that are incapable of imagining worlds not like the one of comfort you yourself live in now. This system of Capitalism is one in which a few control the means of production and DO INDEED force the rest of us to perform menial tasks at substandard wages while they make TONS of cash as a result when it is just plain old GREED that makes it that way… Why CANT they make a little less and we, THE ACTUAL WORKERS, make a little more??? WHO controls the price of things Bob? WHO is in charge? In a nutshell, Capitalism is the investment of wealth for the purpose of reinvesting wealth. Read ” A wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith, if you want to understand this better…..if you are capable of comprehending that level of reading. The fact is, there are sheep and there are wolves. And then there are shepards….youre a sheep, Bob… People like Perry and myself are attempting to be shepards but sometimes the sheep just enjoy being sheep because they have simple minds and cannot imagine any other way of existing.
Perry never said SOME KIND of work is not necessary.. He SPECIFICALLY referred to the predatory type of 1% vs 99% system we have here… OPEN YOUR EYES MAN!!
I notice you use a paraphrased reference in the bible… ““By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;”…. Since you seem to be such a bible scholar, lets go on to Communism and Socialism at this point….. Most of the people in this country believe the definition of the two they have been spoon fed to believe, rather than doing the VERY simple thing and just googling them…. Many will give examples of Lenin, Stalin and Moa of communist regimes… WRONG!!! Those were Fascist Dictatorships that rode into power on the PROMISE of those types of economic and social systems, because even the COMMON man can understand what they are…
1) Communism-a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs
2) Socialism- a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
3) And for those in the biblical know, the PERFECT amalgamation of the two would be found in Acts 2:44-” The believers had all things in common and shared all things as one another had need.” Believe it or not, Bob, Jesus was a Socialist! Why is it such a bad thing for common ownership to be a thing? For all to earn the same? For everyone to HAVE WHAT THEY NEED… not what they can or cannot earn???? Why does being born into this life REQUIRE a struggle? I will tell you why,Bob… because GREED and SELFISHNESS are also a part of the human experience, unfortunately, in part because people like you cannot understand someone elses existence and rights that are the same as your own….. REGARDLESS of how many dollars you can stack up.
Why CANT it be that Perrys “SINGLE BRAIN” has figure out the solution, or A solution? It MUST start SOMEWHERE BOB! Sadly, youre so self centered and such a know it all that you dont even give it a second thought or a chance to be a LIVING THING… You immediately poo poo it because it doesnt fit into your pre-conceived and biased notion of how things SHOULD be… WE call that COGNITIVE DISSONANCE, Bob….
And if you think The USA is the FREEST society on planet earth, again, you havent studied, nor are you willing to come out of your sheep bubble and look at the real world.
“A society which attracts millions of new people everyday. If you think our system is so flawed, how come there are people who risk their lives and break the law to come here?”…. Well thats strange , Bob.. because the stats I study in the field of research I am educated in says that in 2015 there were 43 million for the WHOLE YEAR…. Your claim is that more than 365 million come here… and the reason they come is because the US is a LIAR!!! It says you can be whatever you want to, have whatever you want,… the American Dream…. but just ask the 800,000 “Dreamers” in the country who are at risk of losing their DREAMS due to racist prick in office about that… The American Dream is DEAD, Bob. That being said, the US IS better than countries that let their people die in the streets, that are war ravaged, that are third world in every sense of the word… Are you SERIOUSLY that egotistical and self absorbed that you cant understand the TRUE answer to the ignorant question you just asked???? YES!!! There is an EVEN BETTER SOLUTION!!! At least open your eyes and ears and shut your mouth long enough to CONSIDER the possibility!
Sadly, you acknowledge the need to overcome capitalism, but then in every other word, you vehemently protect it and lambaste Perry for even SUGGESTING the possibility of change… I pity the close mind like yours Bob… And it is people like you that keep ALL progress from occurring, making you an enemy of ALL the people.
I must say, the propaganda in America is alive and well and corrupting the minds of the sheep willing to sit back in their easy chairs, watching their BIG SCREEN TVs AND NETFLIX,… who dont know there is a BIG BRIGHT WORLD OUT THERE, and an UNLIMITED POTENTIAL INWARD…. but people like you will never achieve it… at least, Bob, get out of the way while the rest of us DO change the world…….
“So while everyone can enjoy big screen TVs and the latest episode of House of Cards on Netflix (if you call that winning)…”
Some people may indeed call that winning. Who are you to judge? The statement inside of the parentheses smells a lot like moral signaling and presumed moral superiority.
“This is a subtle but profound paragraph I just wrote and deserves intense study”
Hahaha. Thank you for providing entertainment. Check out the book “Ego Is The Enemy” by Ryan Holiday.
Okay, on a serious note. You bring up some good points about how Capitalism has its flaws. And as a thought experiment, this website is quite interesting. However, from a realistic and practical perspective, this NBR concept is short sighted. It claims to bring a utopia down to us earthlings from the heavens, when in reality, life is more fair than you give it credit. As Charlie Munger says, “the world is not yet a crazy enough place to reward undeserving people.” You get what you put in. If you’re good or talented at something, people will notice. If you work hard, you will in the long run eventually get what you deserve. “In the long run, people eventually get what they deserve.” How is that not a system worth living in?
You claim that people are coerced to survive. You imply that they are forced by their fellow man to do so. In reality, you miss the point of who the real coercer is…
Mother Nature.
Imagine our world without roofs over heads to block the cold wet rain and howling wind at night. Imagine a world without electricity to heat our homes or light the darkness. We would have to fight to survive regardless. Unfortunately, just because us humans are smart, does not mean we have an automatic claim on existence. Mother Nature is far more coercive than Capitalism. You are correct that people have to earn money in order to buy food, and that is akin to “survival” in the modern day. However, people would much rather deal with that type of competition compared with fighting storms that ruin farmlands or beasts that lurk at night waiting to eat you. And by the way, people can always choose to leave their current job if they hate it. They can choose to gain more skills and knowledge and eventually find a better situation where they are more comfortable. Of course those changes to a better situation don’t happen over night. People know life is challenging and that’s why most people just settle for what they’ve got. But considering all states in America are at will employment, you can’t say that people are forced to work. Remember, they would be forced to “work” even if they went to live in the forest. That work would entail, finding and cutting firewood all day, bringing water, building a place to dwell, protecting youself from the elements. In other words, everyone will have to work in some way in order to survive. “By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”
You claim you have the solution. That you, your single brain, has solved the puzzle of how to have utopia. That your solution somehow beats out 200+ years of the most free society on planet earth. A society which attracts millions of new people everyday. If you think our system is so flawed, how come there are people who risk their lives and break the law to come here? Forget the millions of people who are desperate to come here legally, but also the millions of people who are literallly dying to come here. Are you saying they’re wrong? That there’s an even better solution? If that’s the case, then why aren’t millions of people flocking to NBR land?
Are you going to persuade those people to follow your solution? With what simplistic explanation? Reading your HOW IT WORKS page is not an encouraging start to changing our entire civilization.
Hats off to you for being bold to take on Capitalism. You might enjoy the work of Slavoj Zizek. “It’s much easier to imagine the end of all life on earth, than a much more modest, radical break from capitalism.”
But unfortunately, this project may be too much to bite off.
Hi Bob,
You wrote a lot. Thanks for the humor. Your comments are insightful. And they seem to indicate a certain line of thinking I may be familiar with, having spoke with hundreds if not thousands of people about Copiosis. Very few come up with original objections. Hopefully my response will add to our conversation. I’m re-posting excerpts of your comment so you don’t have to scroll up to re-read them.
You write (quoting me): “So while everyone can enjoy big screen TVs and the latest episode of House of Cards on Netflix (if you call that winning)…” Some people may indeed call that winning. Who are you to judge? The statement inside of the parentheses smells a lot like moral signaling and presumed moral superiority.”
You ask: “Who am I to judge?” First, notice that you’re judging my judging. I think that’s pretty humorous 🙂 Who are you to judge me? hahaha.
I know that we are all here to judge. That’s how we make decisions and improve society and the world. Who am I to judge? A human being with a consciousness and intellect, a passion for life and a dream. That’s who I am!
I know people come into the world destined for greatness. What makes people settle for “wins” like Netflix binges, and social media addiction, are small and large traumas experienced early in life at the “hands” of a socioeconomic system and accompanying indoctrinations which cause them to lose sight of their grand dreams. We are all potential greatness. My quip pokes at dreams numbed, in hopes of reviving them.
So who am I? Better question: WHAT am I? I am a powerful human being, borne of All That Is, who has not succumbed to mediocrity, whose dreams still live and breathe. That’s who I am. That’s WHAT I am. I refer you to this
You write (quoting me): “” This is a subtle but profound paragraph I just wrote and deserves intense study” Hahaha. Thank you for providing entertainment. Check out the book “Ego Is The Enemy” by Ryan Holiday.””
Ryan doesn’t understand the nature of humanity. This is obvious because he claims something inherent in what it is to be human is an “enemy”, which is ridiculous. All of nature (including the ego) is created in grace and virtue and is inherently valuable. It (the ego) is not something that must be “conquered”. That’s just “human performance movement” gobbledegook. To call anything in Nature an enemy is a massive distortion. So I’ll pass on checking out that book and its silly title. Thanks.
You write: “Okay, on a serious note. You bring up some good points about how Capitalism has its flaws. And as a thought experiment, this website is quite interesting. However, from a realistic and practical perspective, this NBR concept is short sighted. It claims to bring a utopia down to us earthlings from the heavens, when in reality, life is more fair than you give it credit. As Charlie Munger says, “the world is not yet a crazy enough place to reward undeserving people.” You get what you put in. If you’re good or talented at something, people will notice. If you work hard, you will in the long run eventually get what you deserve. “In the long run, people eventually get what they deserve.” How is that not a system worth living in?”
Yeah, capitalism has flaws, but despite them it has served us mostly well. I’m not against capitalism. I’m FOR something better. We can do better. It’s interesting you begin your serious notes offering a judgement about what you’ve read. I don’t shy from anyone’s judgment. As I wrote above, it’s part of being human. It also is interesting you use words like “realistic”, “practical” and “utopia”. My experience through talking with hundreds of people who have written quite similar statements to yours usually have no clue about “reality” and how things actually happen in it.
At the most basic level, you do realize that pretty much everything spectacular we have today was once labelled “unrealistic”, “impossible” and a “pipe dream”, right? “Reality” comes from someplace. Where does it come from? It comes from people who dare to dream. It comes from things thought impractical….until they become…reality. There are hundreds of things that started out seemingly unrealistic, impossible and impractical, but today are commonplace. Copiosis is on that path.
Now, another interesting thing: you write that “life” is more fair that I give credit. I think you have misconstrued a couple things. I do not at all think “life” is unfair. I don’t make any complaints about “life”. In fact, everything you wrote about life (meaning your own opinions, not Munger’s quote) I agree with.
But Copiosis is not about doing something about “life”. It’s doing something about capitalism. Which is far different than “life”. What I find peculiar is how strong proponents of capitalism, and the status quo, will conflate an economic system with the nature of All That Is (life), when in fact, the two are VASTLY different. Same thing when these same people conflate capitalism with free enterprise, or America or freedom. Capitalism is not synonymous with any of these.
I never said Copiosis was utopia by the way. That’s a word thrown about by people who haven’t considered what they are thinking. I know this because, as I’ve said, I’ve spoken with a LOT of these kinds of people.
Charlie Munger’s statement is idiotic. Now, he is certainly a successful man. But even successful people say stupid things, assuming he really wrote or said such a thing.
First of all, he is attempting to judge some people as “deserving” and others as “undeserving”. That is stupid thinking. Everyone is deserving, period. That’s why they are alive. Does Charlie get an extra share of the sun’s light, or of the oxygen on the planet as some more-deserving person than others? Does his partner Warren? Does Nature treat either of them differently because some how they are more deserving than others? On what basis does he determine who is deserving and who is not? If what you said above about life is accurate (and I believe it is) then Munger’s statement is idiotic. Life is more than fair, meaning, it treats everyone and everything the same as deserving all they desire.
But capitalism is different. The essential dilemma with capitalism is: it creates living situations wherein most people can not afford the time to do as you say: “to explore themselves to discover their talents.” Let alone sharpen them to the point where they are influential for others. I have a sense you get that. If you do, then you can see the folly of that ludicrous quote. Munger’s statement is flat wrong if he is referring to the natural world when he uses the word “world”. If he’s not referring to the natural world, what is he referring to? Capitalism? If so, then he’s right. And that’s the problem. No one should be deemed undeserving nor do they have to be in a natural world full of abundance. Unless of course you create a system that layers over that abundance a false sense of scarcity. Then…you have a problem. Which is where we are today with capitalism.
And this is the reason for Copiosis. Because some people have absolutely no idea how valuable each human being is. Instead they judge others as not worthy or at least less than them, then restrict those others’ opportunities. Not intentionally, but as a by-product of scarcity-consciousness borne of “economic theory”, which again, is idiotic. I understand, however, how that theory became widespread: through the help of government, markets and money.
You’re right: Life as a system (that’s how you described it above) is worth living in. It’s the only game in town! So of course it’s worth living in. But here’s the thing: we have the capacity to improve the frameworks and systems we have created to support civilization. And I strongly believe Copiosis is an improvement. Not on “life”. But on what free enterprise (and a large number of other things) can look like.
You write: You claim that people are coerced to survive. You imply that they are forced by their fellow man to do so. In reality, you miss the point of who the real coercer is…Mother Nature.
No….I don’t make that claim that people are COERCED to SURVIVE. The claim I make is people are generally forced to work jobs in order to afford necessities. That this system has been created by men and that the system, while having been beneficial, comes with so many negative effects, it’s not worth keeping. Especially if we can create something better (and we have and are).
You say “mother nature” is forcing people. Frankly (but with kindness): have you taken a deep look at “mother nature”? Nature (to use a shortened non patriarchal, gender-neutral term) bestows life-supporting essentials in massive abundance of sun, air, land….more than that….capacity to reason, imagine, dream…the ability to probe multiple dimensions, vast worlds too innumerable to count…all in abundance!
Just on this planet alone, Nature has provided an unending Source of elements, creatures, plants and more all sustaining one another in a vast web of cooperation! It wasn’t Nature that created money, markets and government. Well, it was, because man is an intrinsic part of Nature. But man can do better. And we are working on that.
So no. Nature doesn’t force anyone or anything. It is this ruler-made, man-made system, composed of money, markets and government, that pits human against human. It gates necessities from people, then requires they work doing things they don’t want to do to get the things they need. That is not natural.
Your statement about “mother nature” perplexes me. It leaves me thinking you haven’t looked deeply at what is happening in Nature, including the nature of what it means to be human. But…it (your statement) is quite consistent with your references to “utopia” being “realistic” and “practical”: It represents an old, extremely narrow way of looking at the world around us. No offense.
You write: “Imagine our world without roofs over heads to block the cold wet rain and howling wind at night. Imagine a world without electricity to heat our homes or light the darkness. We would have to fight to survive regardless. Unfortunately, just because us humans are smart, does not mean we have an automatic claim on existence. Mother Nature is far more coercive than Capitalism. You are correct that people have to earn money in order to buy food, and that is akin to “survival” in the modern day. However, people would much rather deal with that type of competition compared with fighting storms that ruin farmlands or beasts that lurk at night waiting to eat you. And by the way, people can always choose to leave their current job if they hate it. They can choose to gain more skills and knowledge and eventually find a better situation where they are more comfortable. Of course those changes to a better situation don’t happen over night. People know life is challenging and that’s why most people just settle for what they’ve got. But considering all states in America are at will employment, you can’t say that people are forced to work. Remember, they would be forced to “work” even if they went to live in the forest. That work would entail, finding and cutting firewood all day, bringing water, building a place to dwell, protecting youself from the elements. In other words, everyone will have to work in some way in order to survive. “By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.””
I get the intent behind all this. Again, it reveals a misunderstanding…a distortion of what is happening in physical reality. First off, everything living has a claim on existence. Why do you think they exist??? It’s because they claimed it! Secondly, what if nature involves not a single shred of competition? What if it instead is a massive cooperative endeavor? It seems to me you think that without capitalism, people would be sleeping out in the rain and cold. And yet, before capitalism, some of the finest civilizations existed, with many of the modern amenities we have today (accorded to their time, of course).
Humans have a claim on existence. They also have a claim on innovation and creativity, which the beings that came into the physical world as human brought with them. (as an aside “human” is a by-product of “beingness” which is an eternal consciousness, a vital intelligence separate from “human” which makes “human” possible. So “human” comes into physical reality with exactly the claims you seem to think humans don’t.) Just because you think humans would be living out in the cold if there was no capitalism, doesn’t mean that is the case. IMO, that’s a pretty narrow view.
You’re right though. People could choose to leave their jobs. Why do you think so many – the vast majority – don’t? Why do you think that vast majority stay in jobs they hate? There must be some perception combined with actual circumstances preventing them. For again, you’re right they can leave. But something is keeping them there. Could it be debt? Obligations to make money to provide necessities for their families, necessities they can’t get otherwise? Their need to keep a roof over their heads and electricity in their homes? Addictions and compulsions, habits and false desires borne from constantly being told through marketing that they are not good enough, not worthy perhaps?
You’re right: people settle for the life they have. Their dreams more often than not are numbed into nonexistence in return for some kind of “american dream”, that turns out, for the vast majority, to be mind-numbing 40 years of working in the E quadrant, with little to show afterwards.
Bob, I’m not arguing that people should not work. I’m suggesting a better system can be offered that provides more supportive frameworks allowing people to do exactly what you’ve written: “To choose to gain more skills and knowledge and eventually find a better situation where they are more comfortable”, one aligned with what they’re “good or talented at….[something], people will notice.”
That can’t happen for most people saddled with debt and indoctrinations which keep them stuck in jobs that barely make ends meet; or struggling with situations wherein they are dealing with psycho-social pressures borne literally from the system they are in. Let alone people in impoverished countries.
The interesting thing about your assertion about people working in Nature in order to survive is, it doesn’t account for the nature of what it is to live in Nature. Nature is a cooperative endeavor. Notice aboriginal beings aren’t “working” the way modern man works. The vast majority of their time is not spent working. Very little time is spent feeding themselves. Perhaps you have an odd perception of how people living in harmony with Nature live. It is not like people work today. It is just a natural part of living within Nature. By the way, much of the time, that “work” is being informed by a larger cooperative reality (eternal consciousness, that vital intelligence I referred to earlier) that is showing these people where to find food and water as well as other life essentials. There are hundreds of stories of aboriginal people describing how nature “spoke to them”, telling them what plants were edible, which were medicinal, where to find game etc.
I’m not romanticizing living in harmony with Nature. I’m simply attempting to dispel what appears to be a wholly inaccurate perspective you have of how people live in Nature. It is far less harmful than living in modern society.
You write: You claim you have the solution. That you, your single brain, has solved the puzzle of how to have utopia. That your solution somehow beats out 200+ years of the most free society on planet earth. A society which attracts millions of new people everyday. If you think our system is so flawed, how come there are people who risk their lives and break the law to come here? Forget the millions of people who are desperate to come here legally, but also the millions of people who are literallly dying to come here. Are you saying they’re wrong? That there’s an even better solution? If that’s the case, then why aren’t millions of people flocking to NBR land?
Here again is where you’re making incorrect assumptions. First off, you’re thinking that I have created some kind of utopia. Again we don’t make that claim. Copiosis still has problems in it, but those problems offer far more opportunity than problems existing in capitalism. And they’re all solvable. Capitalism’s problems aren’t solvable by capitalism. Second, you claim it is my “single brain” that has solved some sort of problem. The solution I’m offering, number one, is a result of many people contributing to it. It benefits from a legacy of people thinking the way I do. Some of these people you know, for they are very famous. Others are obscure, choosing to live humble lives. And of course, it is informed by eternal consciousness, that vital intelligence I referred to above. So no, it is not my “brain” from which this idea springs. It is from a Source far greater than that.
By “the most free society on planet earth”, I presume you’re referring to the United States of America. Is that right? These studies would disagree with you:
https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-freest-countries-in-the-world.html
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-11-29/these-are-the-freest-countries-in-the-world
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article105618381.html
Where on earth are you getting the data that supports your claim that America is the most free society on the planet? By what measures?
Yes there are a LOT of people coming here. There are also a LOT of people fleeing the Middle East and flowing to Britain and other EU countries. There are a lot of people fleeing to India from their home countries. And to Canada. The reason people are coming to places like the US and the EU isn’t necessarily because the US and the EU offer awesome opportunity, it’s because they offer better opportunity than where they’re coming from. That’s a big distinction.
But even if America was as good as you say it is, which it is not, does that mean it can’t be improved? Of course it doesn’t. America was presumably founded on free enterprise (but not really, it was really founded on indentured servitude, then slavery). But let’s say it was founded on free enterprise, which has within it the idea that if you have something better, offer it, and see what happens. That’s what I’m doing. And if you’re right about America when you write: “If you’re good or talented at something, people will notice. If you work hard, you will in the long run eventually get what you deserve.” Then it seems to me that continuing doing what I’m doing is the right thing to do. Doesn’t it?
After all Bob, there are millions of people who think like Slavoj. Thank goodness there are just a few people who think like me. I count among us Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Pablo Picasso, Juan Miro, Robert Goddard, the Wright Brothers, Ayn Rand, Jesus, Buddha, Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill, Ghandi, Saladin, da Vinci, Mohammad Ali, JFK, Rosa Parks, Vladimir Putin, Werner Erhard, Walt Disney….and many more…people who didn’t listen to the naysayers, followed their intuition…and changed the world. I know I’m in good company. How about you?
This…is the most comprehensive rebuttal I’ve ever read. I agree with you, capitalism has it’s problems; but you, we have the solution
Really……..I hear this crap day in and day out as I live in a real red neighborhood. “There is no other system so make the best of what you got” is their mantra. I also heard that from my Dad (rip). Thank you for laying out clear concise replies to the half truths and propaganda they spew.