Best Insurance Quote Online Save on your auto, home, life, health insurance!

IL Affordable House Insurance

A Point of View 1

A view

Andy Cox

A philosophy

Happiness is the living flower

living in a mud lived.

Our humanity is a fertile ground for the coming

but we are the beneficiaries

others disappeared below us or.

Thus death by living legacy is undone,

continually so in our common ground

our community, in which the release of a

apparently brings them.

- No reincarnation:

Only other telling us how we teach others -

that we get valuable purpose.

Dark weeds among us can be

that would deny our community and leeches

because there are some that would set itself apart

in clean beds damaged with sterile soil.

Neither recognizes the give and take.

But it is our ties to free us -

to know what makes us us unbind.

And if one day this religion

then we can the ability to enjoy

every time a bud opens

2002

                  

 

It's like this was for a good many years, my head has a pot for a type of intellectual stew, the ingredients that made it, their different identities To keep even if they have become a little moist over time. A splash of good wine has certainly improved the taste: (In vino veritas, no doubt). And many a good Argument has provided the seasoning, adding nuance of creation. I say creation, but in fact, none of these novel ingredients: One or two of these old roots has been around since ancient times. What interests me, but their interaction, the seductive possibility that they, so to speak, are mutually reinforcing. Their integration in something greater, a belief, if you will, is the thesis of this polemical exercise. Five of the larger units in this stew, which I intend to Disc apart are:

• Analogy as a false source of knowledge.
• The non-survivor idea that we have no identity or to have existence after death.
• Atheism
• The idea and the ideal of a penniless, stateless persons, property-less world in which everyone has free access to the Products of humanity, and contributes to their ability and inclination.

This I would argue, contribute to a fifth ingredient, namely:

• An ethic that one tells to the lives of others.

But before I begin this pan, there is something that I feel must be said: Man, I think, is doomed to be a philosopher. No one can escape bar those without abstract thinking that fate. Among all the internalized trivia, under the layers obtain knowledge that it is the mind crowds, a philosophical construction of managing the very nub of his own existence, whether recognized or not, whether this construction formed on the hard anvil of critical thinking or is just a chain of traditional answers to the big questions of life. In other words, everyone has a world view. In presenting my own, I'm just expose a philosophical construction that seems to make sense to me. To be honest, I'm not unquestioningly certain of all, it tilts in places and contains many flimsy rivets. But it is related enough to my own need to understand the world around me . Satisfy

So here is a foretaste of the intellectual stew: I have absolutely no idea why we should be on this earth, or why the earth here in the first Place. Any suggestion that our existence and the universe some purposes are more than begging a few questions. What I think draws people in this kind of thinking is a deep-seated, almost reflexive tendency to analogical thinking, which explains a phenomenon by the comparison and similarities with others. It seems to me that in our ordinary life - if they do not philosophical discourse busy - we are sometimes implicitly informed by all sorts of delusions, and truths that we consider not to, pause, and out of the mud our earthly existence, extracted mainly by the mechanism of analogy. Our everyday world is the basis from which we peregrinate to philosophical excursions. One could argue that the philosophical basis of self-occupied territory. But the philosophical basis of our daily existence necessarily implied, and "out of mind": When we engage with the ordinary, we are rarely driven to philosophical reflection. Philosophy, in any case, competes with many other disciplines - psychology, Biology and economics, among others - in reference to our tendency to abstraction. I do not claim that analogical thinking is without use: All I am suggesting is that if you are under many scratch course ideas that reside in our heads, you may also have analogies that do not withstand scrutiny have been taken is. Sometimes you may not even realize that an analogy is drawn, let alone that an analogous mistake in thinking somehow that the comparison proves something is the case, could be explained as the phenomenon in question - is suggested rather than just committed - Typically in a graphic or pictorial manner. Moreover, in some cases, the Analogy clearly erroneous. Nothing exemplifies this better than some arguments that claim to prove God's existence. The argument from design, for example, has it that the order beauty of the universe and show that it must have been designed. Not only is the premise of this argument is questionable - Order and beauty are not unique in general available and could be rather attributed to the eye of the beholder, but the conclusion is simply a non sequitur: It refers, of course, an implicit Analogy with, say, an artisan creates a nice artifact - a microcosm of events that is somehow meant to as a parallel to serve a macrocosmic events, the creation of the universe. But,

(A) It is not simply follow what is in the microcosm of the situation - namely, that the artifact itself has been made manifest by someone - is in the macrocosmic situation where one is confronted with an infinite universe. Perhaps one could allow a conclusion is made. However, this requires comparability between these situations that are simply not the case, is a microcosm of the situation craftsmen responsible for only a limited number of products in a world of countless objects, including other craftsmen. The supposed God in the macroscopic situation is created to have everything on his own.

(B) The analogy So for that reason is flawed, but also because in the microcosm of the situation that produces the artifact craftsmen from materials at hand, as wood. But God is the to believe religious apologists create the universe from nothing, from nothing.

For these and other reasons - such as certain forms of due Order instead of the evolutionary forces - the argument from design is entirely convincing. But it is important to note that it is basically unfair to draw conclusions on the basis of an analogy, and the poor condition of the analogy that undermine this argument. Moreover, as is the case with all the philosophical arguments, there is a sense to solve the problem, even before the logic must be called into question is: What exactly do we mean when we say that God created everything ex nihilo? I venture to suggest, that the whole idea is not understandable, and that any attempt to clarify, what is meant by this is likely to leave even more unjustified conclusions from more faulty analogies drawn. Simply stringing together a number of words in a grammatically correct sentence, as in "God created everything 'is the illusion of Meaning, but grammatically-generated sense is no substitute for conceptual clarity. In any case, it is the kind of analogical thinking that permeates our language and reasoning. It Not surprisingly, it characterizes a lot of talk about the dreaded subject of death.

Death is personal: We in the West, there is something that consumes the can our inner lives as safe as it consumes the chaff, we call our body. It is the raison Detre for so many things in life, a rallying point, a border inspection post Everyday world. It is a concept shot through with strong emotions: fear, anger, disgust, sorrow, love. And it is also something that is conceived in terms of analogies. Already have I unknowingly fall back to analog thinking in my references to our inner and outer hulls life: I have raised the ghost in the machine. I could also suggested that the death like a sleep and have added the corollary that, in the sleep of death, dreams', that a life of varieties waiting for us "when we shuffled This Mortal Coil". But on what basis I would have come to this conclusion? The crux of the matter is that this belief founded primarily on analogy, and the bottom it can be a deeply rooted fear of losing the self, a fear which is caused mainly lie of the individualistic Ethos of the so-called developed societies. I would suggest instead that we look at the quiet alternative, namely that there is no afterlife. I would suggest that when we die, no heaven or hell awaits us, because to put it simply, we are not. This being the case, we can not give rise to fear of death, because they will not affect us on our total annihilation. I am aware, of course, that is, for someone like me, the product of a Catholic Education haunts, a weak fear this construction to the death. But this hardly affects the argument. It is surely better that the head and the heart must be right, but how an old couple, the two faculties will not always meet eye to eye.

Although deeply personal, death is also a social phenomenon: On a small scale there are the survivors, of course, is not only a sense of loss, but their lives more or less subtly or significantly changed. These effects can cascade far and wide. For example, a death loosen ties, or bring people together, and that the pattern of connections and interactions of the Affect the generations to follow. Macrocosmic Even death is something to fight with the society as a whole has. I'm not referring here to, say, the concerns of the various Organs of the state with morbidity indices and the impact these have on government spending. I'm more referring to a deeper way, in society with the Phenomenon of death is taken: the fact that death is something that is "culturally mediated. "Without going into a discussion about the nature of culture - it has several than with the symbolic and designed acquired aspects of society, as something from nature, as something of the social structure as something of an ideology or as a way of life - In the present context this term refers to a social resource to give importance to what is drawn in a sense, an incomprehensible event and are the rituals that are re-established order and normality. Death, especially if it's unexpected and dramatic, is often very different, and has the potential to thoroughly play down the construct we know as society. We see this sometimes manifests itself in a phase of withdrawal and replacement with someone, actually dying. And death, of course, you take out of the reach of the company. Society must assert itself - of culture - from the fight confusing the meaning of life too insignificant, goals and ambitions to pointless and irrelevant standards that can potentially accompany the experience of bereavement. This is something that proactively during socialization, than to live as one, in general, rather than how one is to cope with death is particularly directed, is the focus of attention. As far as society is concerned, is that which is not required to believe that individuals grow up, that, as it not make sense of life, they can take what they want from life, and yet they act do, regardless of the consequences. The company could not just run to nihilism as a collection of egoists. In other words, society abhors anomie, much as nature abhors a vacuum. If you look at the company decided in some sense reified speak as its own existence, one might say, that if its constituent members not to a certain extent, subscribe to a set of common beliefs and values, then the fabric of society could itself to unravel. Back on mourning, one might say that if, because of the death of a person to close it, people were feeling that life is meaningless or that anything worth pursuing, then they may not adequately fulfill their social roles, and this too could be all sorts of effects on others;. not only emotionally insecure latter If death occurs, people need to feel that "life goes on." in some sense, The comfort and support of friends made available to strengthen this message and subliminal impression on the bereaved, that they belong to a network of other social beings continue. The colloquial expression about someone falling apart the world in the aftermath of a death often summarizes the experiences of grief. If culture is used to hold the world It is above all a particular component of culture is, with this task, and the component known as a religion

Now I'm not saying that religion is necessarily the Play, when someone dies. But this seems the most time and occur in almost all societies. Religion is of course the most important (though not exclusively) Sponsor of the idea that we somehow survive death. In addition, religion in general area also explained that what happens to us after death is the way in which behavioral we determined in life. There can be little doubt that in promoting such ideas, religion serves society by immunization of persons against anomic tendencies in the face of death. His priests and preachers, mullahs and rabbis for centuries served the rituals of death, and comforted with the promise of paradise left behind. However, There is a lot more about the relationship between religion and society than that is the one in most cases, the former generally is used for mass conformity with the most social to facilitate standards by pressing ethical agenda in the last line, which - at least in the Abrahamaic religions - is that if you are good you go to heaven and if you are bad you go to hell. In addition, religion and state are institutionally diverse in most countries involved: In theocracies, they are virtually indistinguishable. In the West, religion may have retreated to the back benches, but still manage to place themselves under varying degrees in the political life of the countries, sometimes in a moderating way. Even in avowedly atheist state, fills a kind of quasi-religion of the break with absurdities like Kim Jong-il in North Korea adopted God-like status. Sun religion plays a role in addition played a sacred aspect of the mundane business of execution of the state. It is also hard to deny that for many, many people, the religion of a balm, a comfort, an "opiate," and as such, takes something of the pressure from the state, which might otherwise unmanageable with to fight level of social unrest. In fact, one of the ironies of modern history that there have been many times in the pre-atheistic States, former or existing, may find solace was mostly looking very, noted that religion has a more conventional character flourished as mushroom in the shade. Why should religion be an opiate is not difficult to see: If life is relentlessly bleak as it is for the vast majority of people around the world, and denied them a significant political or social leverage to a change in their situation, then it makes sense for these people, to console themselves that at least after death, there will be some compensation, some Righting the wrongs. Psychologically, too, such a thought also to the lack of self-esteem that so often accompanies poverty, relative or otherwise: It is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than it is for a camel to pass through the eye plays probably the most religiously-inclined poor many teeming barrio. And the promotion of another world orientation, religion can be a daunting effect on political activity have, especially in conservative societies in which religion and the state work closely together.

However, religion and its relationship to society are changing all the time: in some parts of the world, religion is in retreat; in other parts, it is resurgent. In addition, its comforting feature is sometimes belied by a preference for politicization, as indicated by the liberation theology in Latin America or the activities, the various Islamic movements. But other social and economic developments obviously cloud the picture also: side, however to add a Sunday and there is a chance that you'll huddled on the odd image of poor people in some Third World country with advertising hoarding praise Deluxe Objects of desire, a picture symbolizes something that more and more prominent, which is that today more than ever before is striking, despite material wealth is out of reach supported by so many. Materialism has become a kind of quasi-religion, it is Episcopalian priest, this opacity style gurus whose parishioners are the readers of magazines and it is more fundamentalist minister, the glaze-eyed business leaders intoned the mantra "greed is good". What's more, the gospel of the market - inexorably Advertising - now permeates the sanctuary of the house lower than ever before, subtle mind forming any future generation through television and other mass media sources. Consequently, rising aspirations, and if that fails, anger results. This anger may find expression in a variety of ways, from mere self-interest in various types of crime policy Measures nationalist liberation struggle, terrorism, trade union activities and protest, just to name a few. And in some cases feeds into political action by religious groups, vide my reference to liberation theology and Islamic movements. Nevertheless, religious dissent of this kind are still above ground on its reference point. In fact, there are more than a few religious groups want to enforce some revenge in a "side" agenda in this world, either through bloody violence or the use of mass media.

But of course there is a major philosophical fault with the religion that their credibility is concerned, and that is - as already indicated - that they were arrested on false analogies. One might ask whether religion can still survive a convincing refutation of this analogical reasoning. I think can not. For me, these analogies in the heart of any religious apology. That such arguments should be used at all demonstrates the poverty in this Sorry. You do not have to provide analogical thinking to the existence of tables and chairs (I fear for the physical security of the philosophers, such things Doubt prove) you do if it so convincingly shown the existence of a supposed unity that can not help to prove there. In addition, can be addressed only by the invisible, or with respect to what is seen. Of course there are other categories of evidence went to show those that God exists. But I think that argument is the analogue of crucial importance, because in the absence of direct empirical evidence of its existence, "informed" analogy of context Picture we have of God. Whether as an old man with a beard and flowing robes, a mighty warrior seen over-swinging a hatchet, a huge bird, or some nebulous Power God has likened by him to observable phenomena have been described. In short, by the use of analogy. And because the analogy is not as proof, the entire deck of cards is that religion comes crashing together with a map in which the premise of a religious afterlife. If it starts to dawn on people, then, of course, the contribution of to sink religion, the social order begins. There are other problems with religion, many of them are psychological as opposed to philosophical. Take, for Example, the peculiar and somewhat hypocritical attitude religions point to the "sins of the flesh": Although they may argue that they are more with less Sense-bound feelings, are involved as such as joy and despair, finally religions recognize implicitly the hedonistic principle that people of the need to seek to avoid pleasure and pain are driven. (This I would regard driving as ancillary to the profound need us: the desire for happiness). The extremes of such experiences, after all, are supposedly granted by heaven and hell respectively. Although it is argued that these are states of mind or "planes of existence" and not as physical locations of heaven and hell are conditions to pass through and be imposed on people to people seen to react in ways that bear comparison with Responses to pleasant and painful stimuli. But all this sits rather uncomfortably with expressed the Puritan rejection by most religions - especially in the tradition Abrahamaic - Each displaying a life-affirming sex outside strict social boundaries. We find certain Muslim fundamentalists calling for the self-righteous whip, or the Ball, women's transgression of the rigid mores of their societies. In the same breath they will wax at the prospect of eternal orgiastic mating rhapsodic in paradise in the company seventy-two virgins, they should lose their lives while trying to butcher innocent people in some Middle Eastern market or dirty in the streets of some anonymous western city. (Recently, there have been unconfirmed reports from Iraq - the bastion of Western-sponsored freedom that adhering to religious militias of the anus of lesbian, taken are gay, bisexual and transgender people, and then gives them a drink causes diarrhea, which leads to a horrible death). While these barbaric acts not consistent with the Quoran be - a little hypocritical religious-minded people tend to be tied not to their holy books - and owe more to the backward facing societies in which they occur it is, the view informs them still a religious and mainstream Muslims would consider what assistance it to this disturbed fanatics (not so long ago, we provide experienced, for example, the Karzai regime in Afghanistan introduce legislation to effectively legitimize rape in marriage; to calm the conservatives in this godforsaken country). Christianity is no less hypocritical. Witness the spectacle of millionaire preachers in the U.S. by Biblebelt its executives and power-dressing surrounded spouse, only sporadically over hell and damnation only be found with her pants down to meaningless pleasured by some young Congregationalist. Or have a look at all these sad Catholic priest with a furtive lust for altar boys, their ominous intoned sermons on the evils of masturbation. The vehement religion forbids, the more dirty-looking are the penalties that follow inevitably. However, it is not only in matters of religion is a fear that sexual laden casts pall over everything. In all possible ways, religion, I would argue, is a kind of neurosis, the hard on the human soul. Truly, it is the "sigh of the oppressed creature," as Marx put it so eloquently. It creates a sense of fear, a hesitation, about life in full and without Reservation. You could even construct the story of the Garden of Eden, where God created Adam and Eve from eating the fruit of the apple tree as a parable warning against people banned Pleasure and praising restraint instead. No wonder that the increase in consumption in Western societies since the war closely followed the case, the practice of religion.

I have argued that in claiming we somehow survive death and determines how we live our lives, what this "beyond" is to be the religion society a service if it provides ready answers to questions concerning the meaning of life and reinforces socially acceptable behavior. However, this contribution is not a necessary Condition that people are not intrinsically different or anti-social behavior. For, in truth, many people reject idea of life after death is still To create stay on the right side of the law. Many people are atheists, and although the two concepts are not conceptually, not survivalism and atheism would seem Hand in hand (Interestingly, both are in contrast to positions that are deeply informed by analogical thinking also the respective performances against which they opposed are;. that is, belief in life after death and in God, are also connected: What's the point in believing in a God if there is no afterlife? I should add, incidentally, that although each state religion and atheism, in contrast, there is one thing that they agree that man is a slightest speck against an incredibly powerful force set is. For atheists, this power of the cosmos, and most atheists have a capacity for deep reverence for the consideration of the fact that humanity in a moment disappear some cosmic catastrophe befall us, such as those hypothetically occurred billions of years ago when the earth and the planet Theia collided - reducing the Moon and thus the conditions conducive to gracious living. Co-religionists not face the nihilistic import of such a possibility, the better their hopes a good God and a blissful life after death instead of configuring an anthropomorphic fantasy - "God created everything in seven days" - to the great Canvas matter of the universe). Something has to recognize that this significant constituency of survival, and not by atheists and large margin ordinary lives quietly in the framework of the law. The inconspicuous truth of course is that like all those who hold these positions through a socialization process, as they grow up, what they internalize the norms and values of the society in which they live. Any religious justification for these values and standards is either never "to Board made ", or is discarded later in life - although it must be said that some alleged non-survivors and atheists may hold some unconscious Notion of a beyond, as is so ingrained in popular culture and can be found through a process of cultural osmosis a niche within the most reasonable of the spirits can. Some, of course, can keep religious baggage from childhood. Despite the fact we are still trying to argue that - because their compliance social norms and values is not supported by a powerful irrationality - those who avoid the major religious term an afterlife have a slightly different relationship to society. For example, consider the probability that, as the company has no sacred character, for they are atheists and their ilk unlikely to consider themselves a chosen people, and may be more inclined to humanistic and inclusive attitude vis-à-vis other social groups. It can also be no coincidence be that many of the more radical figures have been atheists or agnostics, since the dawn of capitalism. Certainly surprised me, by Richard Dawkins excellent book "The God Delusion" to learn that many if not most of the founding fathers of the American republic and atheists or secularists. Secularism, or the belief that religion and religious institutions should play no role in the governance of society, has often dragged behind thoroughbred atheism. It owes much to the supercession of feudalism - in which religion played an important role and open - by capitalism. This development was accompanied by an increasing partitioning of the society and Secularists simply insisted that religion are limited to the subject as a 'religion'. Secularism does not necessarily mean a rejection of religion.

This, of course, begs a question: Since the company developed and therefore its complex relationship with religion also has developed, it is not possible a society that does not depend on religion to support their ideological architecture, which could sit easily with both atheistic and non-survivor views simply because it does not rely on the wrath of God or the prospect of eternal damnation, where the conflicts and tensions inherent in today's society no longer exists. I believe that it is, and this brings me to the third found the ingredients in my spiritual stew.

The idea, often jokingly dismissed as utopian, a company founded on the principle of common ownership has an ancient pedigree: Sir Thomas More is the word, Utopia, was published in his book in 1516, represent biased influenced (as he meant to draw attention to some of the evils of their society) to live on the mythical island south of the equator, where private Property did not exist. But elements of utopian thought can be traced back much earlier to Plato and others, and the idea of an ideal community has fictional expression found in the work of many authors, of Bacon, Campanella and Harrington, Morris, Hertzka and Wells. The idea and the ideal witness to the Diggers in England 17c, or the various experiments in the construction of communist communities as - especially of common property, the actual events in the history informs Robert Owen. Moreover - and this is often overlooked - for most people, the existence of the company has managed to get by without private property, bar the odd loin cloth, piece of jewelry or flint Ax for personal use only. Marx argued that people in a state of primitive communism for eons before the advent of the classical ancient societies lived, where production came to be carried out largely by chattel slavery to me.

My concern is with advanced communism. If ever an idea had "arrived" and deserves serious attention, it is this, especially now that humanity on the brink of an ecological abyss of unfathomable Deep is the global capitalism, by acts or omissions of the Commission, made justly be responsible. So, how to start laying out the term? Maybe one must first of what is proposed look: In a nutshell, would be advanced communist society on a worldwide basis into operation after this old Marxist dictum "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." As such, it would have no similarity to existing and "capitalist state" extinct states, ridiculous and cynical claim to "communist" or "socialist." It would be a democracy in the truest sense of the word, and would be based on a majority decided they have found to be - and certainly not imposed by the revolutionary vanguard. States and the geographic limits of its administration - national borders - would no longer exist. The freedom of expression would be completely free and the only socially sanctioned limits on behavior than those who put off action demonstrated that the injury of others. Not more by the need to to make a profit straitjacket that production would be made on the basis of need and in a very rational: the manufacturing, the possible adverse Impact on the environment or unacceptable risks, for example, would not be considered and every effort would be made to ensure that safe alternatives were used instead. The people would help the production of goods and services and how they wanted. That is, work would be both voluntary and cooperative - It would no longer exist competition between workers, businesses and countries. And people would have free access to the fruits of human labor. In other Words, no money or bartering would play a role: When people need something, they would simply go along to the local distribution and take it without something in return over the hand. Sophisticated inventory management measures would ensure that needs were anticipated as far as possible by flagging up potential shortfalls. The production of these goods would then be carried out in a very rational and planned. Where there is no actual loss was then rational strategies such as considering alternatives, rationing, reservation, make use different manufacturing processes, importing from further afield, or simply do without would be used. There is no need to acceptance by the people in any way abusing the system, why they were where goods and services, should be available for free? In any case, it is reasonable to assert that a completely different mentality would be in this new society, one that more total would react to a social, humane, tolerant and far less tainted by selfishness and greed. Property held in common, there would no longer exist, the vast armies the staff and the bloated resource dedicated to maintaining ownership structures or access to resources within and outside of any State currently receives: I speak here of the police and the military, the entire judiciary, the prisons, the defense industry, the countless posts in the administration rights and claims, etc. are involved. Would accordingly drawn uncounted millions around the world not to a life of crime or end up incarcerated because of this career move be. The raison d'être for crime, war, terrorism, industrial disputes and bloody conflict, among other stressors horrible feature of the modern World would simply not exist. People would be able to travel and settle where they wished, but, as the current economic and political conditions driving people to uproot and seek refuge in other parts of the world will no longer mass migration (not to mention the attendant fear and resentment in the population Host) is unlikely - except in the case of some catastrophic natural disaster. Formation would be completely different from what it is today: As expected free and non-compulsory, that this was their training to do so joyfully looking. The grim discipline-oriented schools of today, aiming to mold children in food industry and economy, members would be a thing of the past. For once, art for art's sake would be really, not cynically foisted on a passive population as a means of turning the quick money. Quality, in other words, the solution in all creative activity is, of architecture and garden design, music, theater, film and writing. Technological Innovation, speed would no longer bound by patents or invested interests, albeit in a controlled, socially responsible way, and many of the more onerous Tasks, the company could have automated systematic. Medical research in particular (especially in areas currently under-researched - for example, Tropical medicine - because there is less of a financial incentive to do so) would be prioritized to humanity from the misery of illness and disease as much as possible to get rid of. In , it would be in an open, be carried out in a coordinated way, not in a fragmented fashion, it is today, jealous of their many research groups Discoveries for "commercial reasons". In this regard, and so many others, the establishment of world communism - or socialism - would be completely transformed, how we live. Life would simply incomparable relaxed, pleasant, fulfilling and happy. Virtually all of today's so-called "evils" - if you could to pulpit language for an instance back - would simply disappear: war, ethnic cleansing, vandalism, robbery, prostitution, pornography, drug-pushing, Extortion, nepotism, corruption, repression, the cynical manipulation of the minds for financial gain, trafficking, slavery, mass hunger, poverty, Unemployment, environmental destruction, the waste of resources, the deliberate creation of soulless and ugly human environments, to name but a few. And the reason is simply that each and every one of these phenomena has its origin in or by the current social liberation sustainably organized by the manner in which society today is. Money, in other words, is what are these evil all over. When mankind finally chooses to embrace communism, then have really crossed a threshold between barbarism and civilization.

I do not pretend that all will be perfect under communism: It is reasonable to assume that after to embrace the solution to communism, mankind will live with an assortment of "transition issues" for several decades before the start things running smoothly. And of course the controversial question of the relationship between the individual and society will continue to demand attention. When discussing this relationship, political scientists sometimes refer to the notion of a "social contract". To literal minded about it, which of course is a fiction, another instance wrong analogical thinking, in which individuals and society as a quasi-legal relationship with any party, the obligations to the other, or have created in the society give to people in contracts with each other about the nature of society. Strictly room as an analogy suggests that this view: There is no analog court or presiding Judge (unless God in heaven fits this description - but then he would exist sanction some of the most heinous companies today, one must ask - rhetorically) on Alleged violations of this Agreement generally, and it is absurd to such a contract than to a specific time has been negotiated, after which the individual had to behave construct defined within the limits. Of course, what the notion of a social contract is actually trying to convey that people give all sorts of benefits from the membership of a society, but to do so they are forced to operate within certain limits, and help society as well. However, what society offers the individual and the extent to which they can comply with social norms are variable. In other words, we have the nature of the society in question to examine if this relationship. The tensions at the interface between individual and society are perhaps inevitable: one or the other can in all kinds of social Bodies are impaired. In one extreme case, we can put our lives in a laissez-faire jungle, where little or no social restraint is in people in their pursuit of wealth or hedonistic lifestyles, where is the justice in applied minimal or corrupt, where a "dog-eat-dog ethos presides, and where little heed is paid to the social consequences - be it the ruthless sequestration of what is commonly held resources, the oppression of the poor, the weak and the vulnerable, environmental pollution and devastation was the creation of unpleasant, violent, and often politically illiterate subcultures, or bright and architecturally discordant urban environments. Such a society devoid of any sense of togetherness. But much the same can be said for the dystopian extreme, where society is on the individual men, crushing each flower of individualism, demanding total loyalty and conformity. This nightmarish fascist model of society based on a powerful state. Interestingly, and somewhat ironically, seem disparate elements of the two models co-exist in many contemporary societies; China is the most notable example. Communism on the other side, while probably not entirely eliminate the tension between individual and society, is certainly the only form of society will be able to drastically reduce such tension, as would be the greatest individual freedom to facilitate a socially harmonious framework.

People who have never entertained the idea of communism often misunderstood, if you know him to respond. Perhaps this is understandable: it is a profoundly revolutionary idea that calls into question many deeply embedded assumptions about man and society. However, the reader is able to, the following list of Points, which is by no means exhaustive, is intended to demonstrate that Communism, in fact, consider a feasible proposal and that the actual arguments in their favor very complex. It should be borne in mind that what I mean is that the current universal capitalism economic system in which goods and services produced in the first place, to be sold for a profit (which is known as commodity production), whether related to the State or by private companies and the money wage and property, among other functions, are. Capitalism can take either the form of state capitalism or private / laissez faire capitalism - or even everything in between. There is no such thing as State Socialism or communism.

• One of the most convincing points in favor of real communism, which, significantly, called "Human Resources". The Arrival of communism, literally billions of people around the world would be relieved of jobs - though essential for the implementation of today's Society - no longer required to be under communism: I already have on the millions in protecting property rights or access to resources. But there are also large numbers of other similarly non-production concerns, such as banks, insurance, advertising, social security departments, charities, customized services, Exchanges involving payroll departments, agencies, bankruptcy, pension providers, tax departments, mortgage provider, just to name a few. These occupations would not be necessary in a society, free from the cash nexus. Also, people would commit forced to be paid humble, unrequited work behind cash registers, Check meters, issuing parking tickets, guarding premises which sell for gambling or lottery company their bodies for sex, as a drug Mules, issuing tickets, indulge in dubious main business fraud, sorting out paying other people, running market stalls barter, finished Bailiffs tasks and so on and so forth. And the enforced idleness of unemployment, probably a further important feature of capitalism, would be a thing of the past be. In short, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of people around the world - particularly in the so-called developed countries, where workers are predominantly employed in the tertiary sector - would find their jobs obsolete. This does not count, even with the countless millions - especially in developing countries - in difficult Engagement, "low tech ', labor-intensive work such as working, dismantling ships, construction of dams -. A bucket with soil at a time, most of these works could also be overtaken by mechanization and automation. Thus, what would work was needed to ensure all needs were met, under be a significantly larger number of people divided.
• Speaking of work, it is sometimes protested that people are not motivated in the production of to provide goods and services in the communist society. However, a little thought to put an end to this particular objection: First and foremost it is not considered the dramatic "sea change" in the social ethos within the prevailing norms and values that would accompany the establishment of communism, a development inevitably done through the democratic character of the revolution of the opening of the new company. Divisiveness, cynicism, greed and cruelty inevitably the way for the cohesion, social concern and altruism, because each set of settings in the modus operandi of capitalism and communism and is rooted. It is inconceivable that a large majority people voted en masse for a new way of life and all that could decide the result, you sit back and take an attitude of 'Stuff you, Jack - will contribute to not me, I am will take only. "Second, much of the negativity informing workers' representatives attitude to employment in today's society often arises not so much from the work itself, but from the conditions under which it deals, the hierarchical structure of organizations working for them, and crucial, is forced to work in the first place. Karl Marx's theories on the alienation of the workers are extremely illuminating in this regard. Thirdly, as I said that, since billions of people around the world currently in jobs that would not exist in communist society, there would be far more people in work to do what was necessary to be hired. would Accordingly, one could argue that its only one or two days a week and work on average, people needed be - taking into account the considerations such as the fact that many currently produced goods and services - for example, advertising material, cash registers, Weapons, or ticket barriers - would not be required, and the fact that a communist society would try to systematically eliminate all forms of automation work as too burdensome or risky. This being the case, it is reasonable to assume that people would be less inclined to save society some of their free time. It is even conceivable that there might be some socially useful work is available. Fourth, one could argue that people are motivated far away, to avoid in fact, have to hire a natural aptitude for work, and a drive at work, both of which are hostile to capitalism employment suffocated. Fifth, It can be observed that even in these cynical times, engage millions of people around in voluntary work, in spite of capitalism, and that this is a slap in the face the assumption that ceteris paribus, people lazy by nature and would jump at the opportunity to spend their entire existence on a deck chair with a glass of tequila on the Hand. I could go on, but I am sure that the point was made.
• Many paragraphs back, I argued that materialism has a sort of Quasi-religion promoted relentlessly by almost omnipresent advertising. The constant backdrop of the visual, auditory, olfactory and even encouraged - a visit to your local Supermarket of the latter will testify - whether subliminally or "in your face", is required to affect us all. Why else should the companies literally billions of dollars all around the world of advertising? It is so that we buy, buy, buy, regardless of whether we actually need the goods on offer. It is said that that which knows not the head, the heart does not yearn for. Under capitalism is a need that often artificially created or promoted both wasteful in terms the use of resources and potentially stress-inducing extent people may not have the wherewithal to meet these needs. Nothing exemplifies this better than the fashion industry, which dictate, one could say that is last year's hipster simply must go. This is a serious problem: in the UK tons discarded clothing into landfill sites are plowed every year, the impact on global warming among others. Then there is advertising targeted at children and encourages them to their parents for the latest "Scream" harass product. No wonder they grow up to be acquired. Speaking of greed, something else that may be about capitalism Please note that - especially among the wealthy - status is often acquired through the purchase of luxury products. But there is a huge amount of waste inherent in this farce of "Keep up with the Plunkett-Pemberton: So we have the obscene spectacle of the archetypal tycoon with a fleet of luxury sports cars have several villas - each of which contains enough rooms to house local homeless people, and a trophy wife with a shoe obsession, comparable to that of Imelda Marcos, Not only are these concepts necessarily insufficiently used;. but time and resources on its production, which would more usefully to meet urgent needs can be spent spent been. I have to dare to suggest that in a communist society, status, provided that as it had some kind of psycho-social purpose in promoting emulation, would be completely different in nature: I would imagine that would stay in state to the extent that they actually contributed to society, with most of those most stressful and dangerous tasks of the highest status awarded. Such attitudes would be of course the interests of the society very well, and make the social cohesion.
• Not only that capitalism manipulate people to buy what they otherwise could not buy as it sometimes forces them to continue buying Raw materials to ensure again and again by the simple expedient that these things do not really take as long as they could. This is what is known as a "built-in obsolescence" and it is a characteristic of all types of products, from simple car on the light bulb. And the general shabbiness of many industrial goods, such as houses (especially in the cynically called "social housing" market), based out of the desire, the costs to the bone, also leads to a shortened duration of use cut. The result in both cases, more waste and customer dissatisfaction. Waste has to make in this connection with a product unusable and thus must much earlier than it otherwise might want to be disposed of.
• There are many other ways in which capitalism is a waste: Take for example the tendency to 'modulis " Parts. What I mean is that instead of selling a replacement on its own, sometimes manufacturers will only sell the item as part of a larger unit or a batch. Although this is sometimes easier to place the article, it is also likely motivated by the manufacturer's desire to fleece the customer more money. As far as the part is specifically to a particular brand of product, to indulge the manufacturer almost a free rein in this practice.
• But this is practically insignificant compared to the waste Part of a system where everyone competes to the millions of businesses and companies around the world with numerous others in the production of certain goods and services for a given market. Why is this waste? Well, only for a moment the sheer amount of the overlap into account from this institution: You could receive dozens of companies producing a particular product or service in a particular place, each with its own space, staff, management structure, and so on. Each has a range of administrative and financial operations of the production operation, simply do not occur in a socialist / communist society would like to hold general meetings to carry out the conduct of audits, running pay departments, operational security measures and implementation of marketing strategies. The latter is particularly remarkable: Large companies like Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola are trying to spend literally billions of dollars each other to excel in the marketplace, and have extensive marketing departments dedicated to this goal. On the issue of duplication, it can also be instructive to examine Result of a previous conservative government is trying crazy, the National Health Service in Great Britain more "efficient" to do a few years ago by they are familiar to hundreds of self-government. The result was a large increase in administrative staff by comparison with clinical staff, as each trust had its own finance department have their own "goods" department, in his own pay department, and so on - indeed, the economics of the madhouse! In capitalism, it is often the case, want to sell with many companies competing for certain services is often far more than the market can bear. It may be that a significant number of these companies will capacity under the operating system some of the time. In fact, a few are going to the wall by the big players squeezed. The under-utilization or non-use to lose the resources in this regard amounts. This means the fact many of the smaller companies, usually with corresponding higher costs on such things as heating and could be current as well as in services received for the other "in-house" sales charge lack economies of scale ".
• The fact also, that competing products are sometimes transported from great distances yet another instance of waste, as well as environmentally damaging. Is it really necessary New Zealand butter to butter, stacking alongside English in British supermarkets, given that the European Community had to shrink it once notorious "Butter mountain".
• This "butter mountain" actually found a frightening example of a different kind of waste in capitalism: the waste generated by over-production. Just as the market may be determined that the very factories, offices, mines and farms are not economically and have the Commission to be made, it may also determine that the products and services that are from these institutions "are no longer required" and must be discarded. We see this in the periodic cycles to fight the trade capitalism, which occur mainly because capitalism has outsmarted itself.
• There are other ways in which waste can be generated. For example, companies often do what they can to improve the cosmetic appearance and thus the "saleability" of their products, without necessarily improving the quality of the latter, and this may result in wasteful quantities of waste. Tristram Stuart, in his recent book, "Waste, detection of the Global Food Waste Scandal 'claims, for example, that 25% of fruit and vegetables produced in the UK is wasted in the process of production, just because they do not see the right shape, color or size. The taste and nutrition are secondary. On the subject of food waste in general - both by consumers and the food industry - it was estimated that what the United States alone wastes a year twice as much as necessary, sufficient to feed the 923 million undernourished people in the world today (The Independent, 9 July 2009, P9)

• The raft of international laws and trade agreements for all types of economic activity around the world creates a huge amount of waste by any number of scales. These laws and trade agreements exist only a semblance of order and restraint of wild greed impose different nation states compete for scarce natural resources, trade routes, access to markets, and so on. As such, it would serve no purpose in a world communist society. But in today's world require, these laws and trade agreements vast armies of bureaucrats and other officials for the administration and police call them, these functions themselves costly control measures that also require much in the way of resources and personnel. These measures were missing, of course, it is quite conceivable that disputes around the world could degenerate into any number of wars. However, these laws and trade agreements lead to bizarre consequences, as tempting as they ignore a few. I mention a few examples: It is estimated that due to the common fisheries policy of the European Union, something in the region of 40 to 50 percent of the fish from EU trawlers caught is thrown back dead into the sea (The Independent, ibid.) Touching on my previous point, the European Union has quite strict rules the cosmetic appearance of 10 varieties of fruits and vegetables, which account between them for about three quarters of all fresh produce sold in the EU. As I explained earlier, the effect such laws to generate waste, because there would be a certain quantity of the goods as unfit for his past - only for cosmetic reasons. Incidentally, it is no coincidence that such arrangements large Western-owned agribusiness concerns at the expense of the Third World to promote small farmers.
• The tendency to reduce costs in the capitalist Production is something else that occasion refer to all kinds of other problems, perhaps the most famous one on health and safety issues. Thus we find plane crash due to lack of adequate maintenance or the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (sic) decided in Great Britain, that certain forms of treatment does not "value for money "And can therefore not required, despite their effectiveness in many cases docufilm. Michael Moore's" Sicko, "only underscores how purposefully capitalism is when it comes to money. In this insightful study of the American health care system, it shows how brutal the richest country in the world can be when it comes to treating their Sick and injured is. Those who are without Health Insurance are often in desperate situations. Like the man who loses two fingers in an accident and comes with a bill of $ 60,000 to one of them back Sew facing and $ 12,000 for the others. Well, it's child's play - the more expensive finger ends up in a landfill. But even those who do not pay insurance and find themselves in need of medical treatment, often with a medical examination by HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) personnel whose single objective, I repeat, is solely intended to try to deny treatment which. (in the case of staff with a medical qualification, seems in flagrant violation of the Hippocratic oath to be). This is supported by the fact that their compensation is taken depending on the percentage of rejections they manage to issue. The film, described the heart-wrenching case of a man with kidney cancer whose doctor had urged a particular course of treatment. His wife met with representatives of his health insurance company and asked them to provide the means for treatment. But they regarded the treatment as "experimental" and refused. Within three weeks the man was dead. Apart from the fact that there have been a racist element in their thinking, - the man his wife was black and white - the sheer psychopathic disregard for anything bar the company's profit margins leaving speechless. Such blinkered thinking would be anathema to a socialist society, out real need rather than financial criteria would be to determine whether something is produced or made available. Reduction in costs can affect the quality of life in many other ways. Take, for example, the Poor provision of services granted to rural communities in post offices to the buses. What is this, of course, both the larger transport costs inherent maintenance rural communities and the fact that the urban population would be to present a lucrative market companies. Who can cherry-picking Practices of the bus companies in the deregulation of the Thatcher years forget (which exist in many large urban centers such as Manchester) when buses came in two or three of the popular (and shorter) city bus lines were cut off while rural services again. Needless to say, would be the financial Settlement behind such developments never occur in a society dedicated to fulfill, instead of profit maximization.
• A year or so ago, there was much interest the media on the issue counterfeit or pirated products;. alarming Channel Four series called "The Fake Trade ', a typical case, it is not so much the fake Prada handbags and Rolex watches that worries me: Counterfeit luxury items such obviously meets the "legitimate" producers and supposedly promotes Gun crime and terrorism, consumer surveys have shown, in fact, that many, and in some countries - the U.S., of all places, for example - most people are not averse to buying some types of counterfeit products, an activity which has also acquired a fashion frisson. However, what really scared the most of us is the falsification of certain types of products, medicines, a prime example. The statistics beggar belief: it is estimated that something like a million Africans die each year through the purchase of counterfeit drugs. Let us be clear what is happening here: tablets, capsules, ampoules, etc., packaged convincing, but deliberately with little or no knowledge of therapeutic value, are sold by dealers, or sometimes unknowingly by "respectable" outlets which people - most of they are devastating poor - who away in the hope that the diseases they may concern them or their families will finally be addressed. But, of course, nothing like that happens, and worse these poor souls. In the case of antibiotics, with only some, but not enough can be dangerous because they can cause resistance (and lead the way to a stronger strains of bacteria). With a disease like malaria, the resulting delays can be critical at the entrance to effective drugs. No wonder that one fifth of the annual one million malaria deaths around the world that can be directly attributed to the consumption of counterfeit anti-malarial drugs. In the Developing countries varies, the incidence of fake drugs from 10% to 50% and in some countries. But this is not just a problem in the developing world: Russia is thought that 10% of medicines are fake, and here in the UK, anti-counterfeit statins, for example, have recently infiltrated the supply chain. Here truly, we catch a glimpse into the dark heart of capitalism, his unbridled greed and disregard for all others. One of the participants of the above Channel Four Program said that capitalism is really needed to be restrained or managed, and anarchy and chaos would follow. But that is in the matter by: Capitalism, like a rabid dog with an insatiable desire to sink his teeth into someone, can be safely said leash (or, otherwise, we can certainly try to capitalism save them from themselves to be). But even with the most severe restrictions, it would still try to minimize costs and maximize profits. The other shortcomings mentioned above - Shoddy production, obsolescence, and constructed so on - are really of a piece of counterfeit production: It could be would rather think in terms of a "continuum the dysfunctionality 'here. In addition, these companies or countries that try to act quite responsibly and with due consideration of the Environment and their workers find themselves disadvantaged, the barbaric world of commerce, something like the British slave owner in the lobby 19c argued that freeing slaves would sneaky French give an economic advantage. What is particularly ironic about the situation in counterfeit production, that is to finger the main culprit no other than the workers' paradise, is the "People's" (sic) of the People's Republic of China. Here we see capitalism in a truly fascist form, it can no disguising the point. The fact that China is presenting itself as a "communist country", a fiction that ignores the Orwellian or made only half-heartedly into question Capitalism hacks in the "free world" tends (sic again) for cynical reasons, no doubt, is the basic battles. It is estimated that something like 15-20% the products are manufactured in China faked, and China is a major supplier of counterfeit drugs - despite attempts to stem the production lackadaisical official this. Chinese workers are victims of this unjust industry, both as an underpaid wage slaves and thousands die each year from mistakenly taking this medication. The Chinese government allows its bourgeois masters much leeway to grind their workers, regardless of the vicious circle has to call for dealing with villains, or those who go a little too far in their pursuit of profit.

Now go to 'A Point of View 2'

About the Author

Nurses and the Affordable Care Act