-=> Kaelon wrote to Boraxman <=-

Ka> I think true Capitalism, including the "free hand" of the market, needs
Ka> freedom in order to function properly.

Which is at odds with the Elitists who have been around since the beginning.
The Elitists have an idea that the world would work so much better if there was
a small group of smart people directing everything and that the great unwashed
masses didn't have to think anymore.

Of course, these Elitists think that they are the smart ones and that they
should control everything. Never mind that every time that they've tried, they
have utterly failed - usually with catastrophic results.

Ka> Cryptocurrency Bubble we have now), the wealthiest investors started to
Ka> leverage their tremendous assets to co-opt banking institutions to
Ka> create insurance models that would, in essence, create soft-floors for
Ka> failure.

I can't blame them for wanting that.

Ka> This should have been thwarted then and there.

Correct. But that was only allowed because of the Elitists in the society who
saw doing so as a way to gain more power - and move toward their goal of
complete control.

Ka> Corporations today are not engines of capitalism or innovation.

One thing that we need to remember, though, is that corporations are not the
majority of the employers nor are they the driving force of our economy. It's
easy to think of them as such because they are so large and visible.

The major drivers of the economy are the small businesses.

Look back just a year or so with the scamdemic. Who won? The large
businesses. Who lost? The small businesses.

Why? Because the Elitists pulling the strings knew it was easy to control a
few large businesses (which they already have good control of) than to try to
control many, many small businesses.

Ka> They
Ka> are syndicates of vast capital control, and resemble nothing like the
Ka> intentions of true capitalism -- which were not single-man corporations
Ka> or self-employed persons.

But those large corporations all started out as single-man operations. So in
that respect, they exist because of "true" (whatever that means) capitalism.

The problem is that those large corporations have been corrupted by the
Elitists - many of whom are in the gov't. Laws, regulations, etc. are put into
place to prevent a small business from disrupting big business's business
model.

Ka> What we have today is nothing
Ka> like the original corporations, because they have become so deeply
Ka> interconnected with our institutions - especially our fiduriary
Ka> controls and our political organs.

I would argue that that interconnectedness is due to the piles and piles of
gov't regulations placed on these corporations. They do it simply to survive.
Or, maybe, the correct way to say it is "they used to do it to survive" and
they do it today because that's the only way you can do it.

Ka> One might argue that following the Great Depression, the only way to
Ka> mobilize all of society to combat both imminent economic institutional
Ka> collapse and to defeat geopolitical threats, was to unite the pillars
Ka> of commerce and government into a single corporatist continuum. This
Ka> was certainly the approach of the Fascists and Communists. I would
Ka> argue it's ultimately what happened in the Western - now Global -
Ka> Order, in that Democracies learned how to harness and unify the
Ka> economic structures to unite military and industrial components to
Ka> thereby coopt commerce for political aims.

Oh! Now that is something that I didn't connect yet. Thank you.

I already saw the "create a crisis" play that they often use. (Create a
crisis, then use that as an excuse to grab more power to "help avert a
diaster", which then causes another crisis, and so on.) But I didn't see the
connection to things like WWI and WWII where we "pulled together" and basically
became a sociaist country "for a time" in order to fight off the threat.

Side note: I have an interest in railroads, so I've studied much history about
them - and not just the Transcontinental Railroad. During WWII the gov't
seized control of the railroads because they needed them to move resources
around "efficiently". The end result was that after years of gov't control,
the railroads were wrecked (too much deferred maintenance, old equipment,
etc.). That was one of the reasons road travel became so popular after WWII -
the railroads needed time and money to get their system back in order and they
were deep in a hole that they needed to get out of.

One of the problems a gov't has is that once it has power, they will never let
it go completely. And while I haven't researched it, I have heard people
assert too much that many of the controls put in place during WWII are still
there.

.... I thought I was a wit, and I was half right.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi

Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: Moondog to Kaelon on Wed Jul 20 2022 01:43 am

> I fear a meritocracy can be gamed and infiltrated by the people they wish to
> keep out of power. If service guaratees citizenship and the rights to vote
> and hold office, you'll see folks who abhor the concepts of a meritocracy
> follow the rules into order to inside.

I guess one of the things we would need to make sure in this Heinlein-esque future where veterans seize control, is that civic education / indoctrination and a sufficient tour of duty for service to guarantee meritocratic outcomes, rather than just checking off of boxes, would need to be guaranteed. How, though, would be anyone's guess.

Did Heinlein ever go into greater depth on his vision beyond just Starship Troopers?
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: Moondog to Kaelon on Wed Jul 20 2022 01:43 am

> I fear a meritocracy can be gamed and infiltrated by the people they wish to
> keep out of power. If service guaratees citizenship and the rights to vote
> and hold office, you'll see folks who abhor the concepts of a meritocracy
> follow the rules into order to inside.
>

A meritocracy will always, always be gamed. If you have a system where taking risky loans to hoard resources and extract rent pays off, then people will game the system that way. People who flip property, take advantage of low interest to leverage and hoard, game the system.

And you have to define 'merit', which is very culturally biased. EVERY system is a 'meritocracy'. Even Communism is. You need skills to be top dog. Theocracies reward on merit. Fascists reward on merit.

Playing 'the game' is a skill, and the best win/

You need to define what behaviour you want to encourage first.

---
■ Synchronet ■ MiND'S EYE BBS - Melb, Australia - mindseye.synchronetbbs.org

-=> Kaelon wrote to Moondog <=-

Ka> Did Heinlein ever go into greater depth on his vision beyond just
Ka> Starship Troopers? _____

Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough for Love, and The Moon is a Harsh
Mistress lay out a pretty strange universe that RAH envisioned.

.... Only a part, not the whole
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
� Synchronet � .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: Kaelon to Moondog on Wed Jul 20 2022 01:21 pm

> Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
> By: Moondog to Kaelon on Wed Jul 20 2022 01:43 am
>
> > I fear a meritocracy can be gamed and infiltrated by the people they wish
> > keep out of power. If service guaratees citizenship and the rights to vo
> > and hold office, you'll see folks who abhor the concepts of a meritocracy
> > follow the rules into order to inside.
>
> I guess one of the things we would need to make sure in this Heinlein-esque
> ing off of boxes, would need to be guaranteed. How, though, would be anyone
>
> Did Heinlein ever go into greater depth on his vision beyond just Starship T
> _____
> -=: Kaelon :=-
>

I never heard any more about the idea. I chalk it up to writers writing
their characters as absolutes, and couldn't fathom someone that doesn't
believe in an idea would go through all the steps.

Back in the 1990's this discussion came up when someone brought up that Bill
Clinton wrote a letter to colonel in order to excuse himself from slective serv
ice. Another person claimed this would've been a great opportunity for Clinto
n to be weeded out of any future political aspirations. I played devil's
advocate, and provided example of a teacher that avoided getting conscripted
and thrown into a front line infantry unit by intentionally joining, testing
high on the ASVAB test, and going the special forces route. By the time he
finished his training, his required time in the service had been met. No
combat, or at least activity somewhere else he could confirm or deny.

Clinton may not have been a hard charger type, but with
his academic background I could see him do well in language schools and
intelligence or counterintelligence. Instead of a battlefield, he would've se
en a tour of duty in an air conditioned office.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: Moondog to Kaelon on Thu Jul 21 2022 03:03 pm

> devil's advocate, and provided example of a teacher that avoided getting
> conscripted and thrown into a front line infantry unit by intentionally
> joining, testing high on the ASVAB test, and going the special forces route.
> By the time he finished his training, his required time in the service had
> been met. No combat, or at least activity somewhere else he could confirm
> or deny.

Great story, and absolutely see this playing out had Bill Clinton applied himself to this scenario. To further the Devil's Advocacy, though, anyone who lived through the nightmare of the Korean War will attest to the brutality of ever being drafted and sent to the front lines. With Vietnam being far bloodier and more endless, I can see people not wanting to tempt fate with conscription-and-testing games.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Kaelon on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:33 am

> Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough for Love, and The Moon is a Harsh
> Mistress lay out a pretty strange universe that RAH envisioned.

I guess I need to read these! If they extend this strange Fascist/Anti-Fascist universe portrayed in the Federated Territories depicted within Starship Troopers, I am definitely keen to see how this existence plays itself out. Thanks :).
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
By: Kaelon to Moondog on Thu Jul 21 2022 07:56 pm

> Re: Capitalism & Corporatism
> By: Moondog to Kaelon on Thu Jul 21 2022 03:03 pm
>
> > devil's advocate, and provided example of a teacher that avoided getting
> > conscripted and thrown into a front line infantry unit by intentionally
> > joining, testing high on the ASVAB test, and going the special forces rou
> > By the time he finished his training, his required time in the service ha
> > been met. No combat, or at least activity somewhere else he could confir
> > or deny.
>
> Great story, and absolutely see this playing out had Bill Clinton applied hi
> sent to the front lines. With Vietnam being far bloodier and more endless,
> _____
> -=: Kaelon :=-
>
That is the merit of volunteering. If you ou can pick your path, you
increase your chances of staying away from the front lines. I worked with a
guy that joined the Navy and never set foot on a boat, let alone spend months
on a cruise. he intentionally chose fuel transport, which alowed him to be
sent to a joint Navy/ Marine base in Yuma, Arizona. The closest thing to a
sea out there was the dune sea where the sarlacc pit is in Return of the
Jedi was filmed.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net