28 July 2016

Slavery or equality, there's no middle ground

If one truly believes in the free market system then so should they support unpaid labour (slavery). If both parties consent to the exchange of labour for food and lodging then under a truly free market, that should be allowed. By interfering with that trade through government regulations (socialism) or the like, one is stifling the natural balancing effect of the theoretical "invisible hand". To put it bluntly, you either support slavery in a market system or you support the abolition of slavery through socialist means.

The truth of the matter is that in a free market system there is an ever dwindling group of active participants due to the fact that wealth and power attracts wealth and power (compound interest). We need to accept that wage slavery is genuinely a form of slavery. We as wage slaves are given the illusion of financial wealth via a vast array of subtly differing products with perpetually receding quality and ever increasing toxicity.

Our buying power is dwindling to a point where we will be worse off than slaves who trade labour for food and lodgings. We are already at a point where most of the Earth's population cannot afford to own land and a substantial portion cannot afford to feed themselves and their families. It's important to note that a very small minority are able to afford food and healthcare that is of a humanely acceptable standard.

The market system is at work, allowing people to make decisions for themselves that are effectively killing them off. You're naive if you believe that this "thinning of the herd" effect is a favourable accident of the market system. The influencer class is intentionally weeding us out because of the belief that the Earth cannot sustain this exponential population growth. That is obviously true to a degree.

The Earth cannot sustain such a large population but if we designed our systems more effectively, it could sustain at least double the Earth's current population. But there are two points that are being ignored by right wingers. Firstly if the general level of education was dramatically increased, as it would be in a more equal society, there'd be a higher probability of us being able to expand to other planets and moons, and therefore reduce the strain on Earth's resources.

Secondly, the poor aren't being removed from the gene pool as the right wingers are hoping. They're doing one of the few enjoyable things they can do for free, they're breeding. They then raise malnourished, uneducated children who repeat the cycle. If we don't kill ourselves through ecosystem degradation first, we will eventually be split into two separate species; the aristocratic humans and the slaves.

Another important point is that the aristocracy is not protected from this poisonous existence they've created for us. Sure they have access to better healthcare, they can buy expensive organic foods and send their children to exclusive schools. But ultimately no matter how rich and secluded you are, pesticides, hormones and carcinogens eventually finds it's way into your bodies, the pollution caused by mass production spreads into your neighbourhoods, the destructive consumption culture propagates into your children's subcultures, and you end up being the most fortunate slaves but slaves none the less of a self consuming system.

Equality is an absolute necessity if we want to firstly wrest control of our spiralling self destruction, and secondly if we want to expand into the cosmos. Splitting human society into ruling and slave classes has no positive outcome, not even for the wealthy. A class based system such as the capitalist/market system will inevitably result in self annihilation or, if we're lucky, another "French revolution" and that doesn't bode well for the aristocrats.