Egocentrism, Tariffs, and the Single Tax, Part II

Last week we looked at how a distorted idea of one’s own importance can lead to treating anyone who opposes you as an enemy to be eliminated, and supporters as tools to be discarded once their utility is over.  This week we look at the implications of the Ricardian (as opposed to the Smithian) Labor Theory of Value.

Scrooge and the Virtue of Being Rich, Part IV

In the previous posting on this subject, we closed by noting that some new ideas had entered the general culture.  As a rule, prior to the middle of the nineteenth century people got rich to be able to live “the good life” (which didn’t mean quite what it meant to Aristotle, who referred to the “good life of virtue”), which required wealth and power to be able to obtain the goods and services that went along with a materially good life.  This meant as soon as they had “enough,” they could stop accumulating wealth, and then sit back and enjoy it.

Scrooge and the Virtue of Being Rich, Part II

In the previous, Christmas Day posting on this subject, we noted there was a significant difference between Ebenezer Scrooge and the rich of today.  Scrooge, for all his faults — and his unsuspected, if very real virtues! — did not seek wealth as an end in itself.  True, as Dickens portrayed him, Scrooge was —

Scrooge and the Virtue of Being Rich, Part I

In A Christmas Carol — as if you couldn’t tell from the title of this posting — the Ghost of Christmas Past forces Ebenezer Scrooge to watch as his younger self accepts Belle’s (his fiancée) release from their engagement.  As she gives him her decision (and, presumably, returns the ring, although Dickens didn’t mention that particular bit of jewelry — pronounced “jewel-ry,” not “jew-lery,” by the way), we gain important clues as to Scrooge’s motive for pursuing wealth . . . which is, of course, why Dickens included the scene:

The Age of Revolution

Today’s blog posting is adapted from the book, Economic Personalism, which you can get free from the CESJ website, or from Amazon or Barnes and Noble.

To oversimplify somewhat, three revolutions have led to the alienation of most people from the institutions of the common good by stripping them of power. The first two did this almost inadvertently by limiting access to social and technological tools, while the third did it by the nature of the change itself. These were,

The Road to Limited Liability

In the previous posting on this subject, we saw that even if ordinary people had sufficient savings during the Industrial Revolution, or even if they had gained access to the commercial and central banking system in England, broad-based ownership of the new industries would have been much too risky under the law of the time to allow it.

More Than an Individual Problem

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, life in the early nineteenth century had thrown a lot of curves at most people in the form of massive social, economic and political change, and the institutions of the social order were not keeping up.  Instead, radicals were calling for the abolition of all old institutions, such as private property, organized religion, and marriage and family, and their replacement with what was called by many names, but with one substance: socialism.

Making the Best of a Bad Situation

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, Charles Dickens’s character Ebenezer Scrooge turns out not to have been so much a bad man, but an incomplete person.  Once he accepted grace and “converted” to personalism, as Dickens put it, “He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world.”

A Slight Problem with Moral Relativism

Okay, a really big problem with moral relativism, which is the philosophical aspect of both capitalism and socialism.  Moral relativism and socialist-capitalism (or capitalist-socialism, not really too much difference atwixt the two) both shift the understanding of the world from what can be proved by logical argument or observed by empirical evidence and go with a “faith”-based personal opinion that ends up being whatever those in power want it to be.

And the Money?

      Yesterday we looked at the recent spate of strikes and strike-threats that have gotten this month renamed “Striketober.”  Of course, we are grateful that no one has yet started calling for a “Strike-a-thon,” but no doubt somebody soon will.

The Three Types of Liberal Democracy

       In the previous posting on this subject, we promised (or threatened, depending on your point of view) on the meaning of “liberal democracy.”  It turns out that there are three (at least) different meanings of the term, depending on whether you’re a collectivist, an individualist, or a personalist.

Investment v. Speculation

In the previous posting on this subject, we pointed out a few foibles of socialism, noting especially the idea that the only legitimate way to have an income is a wage system job, which over the past century or so has been gradually displaced by the idea that people should just get an income whether or not they have jobs.

Redefining Humanity

As we saw in the previous posting on this subject, redefining a natural right means that you are, in effect, redefining what it means to be human.  That’s because natural law is based on human nature, so redefining its principles effectively redefines what it means to be human.

The Magic of Future Savings

If you want to baffle and outrage both socialists and capitalists — kin under the skin more than either group realizes — tell them that it is possible to have expanded capital ownership without either redefining ownership or redistributing what belongs to others.  Socialists will bellow that you cannot have widespread ownership without changing the meaning of ownership, while capitalists will shriek that the only way others can own anything is to take it from them.

The Demands of Human Dignity

All things, as Aristotle said in the beginning of the Nichomachean Ethics, seek the good.  If someone seeks evil, it is because he either has the wrong idea of what is good, or is trying to avoid a greater evil.  The former is called a badly formed conscience and must be corrected through education and example.

4. Five Roadblocks to Social Justice: Technology

We now come to the fourth of the roadblocks to social justice: the effect of advancing technology.

Not to belabor the point, but as we stated in the previous posting on this subject, there are five situations that need to be addressed if we are to carry out a restructuring the social order.  Again, there may be more, but these are the ones we think are key to carry out a just, effective, and sustainable restructuring of the social order:

Interpreting the Goals of the Great Reset

Whether or not anyone realizes it, everyone has a philosophy of some sort.  To understand the Great Reset, it is essential to know the philosophy behind it.

Appearances Can Deceive

At first it was touted as David versus Goliath — the “GameStop Mania,” which bore a striking resemblance to a number of other events in history chronicled by Charles MacKay in his 1841 classic, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.  The price of the shares of a company pretty much off the map was bid up and down in a speculative frenzy ostensibly intended to teach the Big Money Wall Street Élite (BMWSE) a lesson in humility.

Capitalism Versus Socialism?

Many people automatically assume that socialism/communism and capitalism have been the bitterest of enemies from Day One of recorded time.  Shocking as it may seem, this is not the case.  Capitalism and socialism are much closer than many people imagine, or that some of the can imagine.

Left or Right, What’s the Difference?

Frequently in our research we’ve come across claims such as Marxist communism and Fabian socialism are two different things, that Nazism isn’t/wasn’t real socialism, that fascism and Nazism were/are right wing, and so on, so forth, etc., etc.  Of course, it might be helpful to define what we mean by “left,” “right,” and “center.”