Awakened Life

There has been a lot of talk lately about President “O” and the US becoming more and more Socialistic. First of All lets define what Socialism is

[Socialism is defined as the] theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

This Scares most Americans because they see this as Un-American and goes against the whole concept of what America is about, to be Democratic a Society means to be a Capitalist believing in the myth of Free Markets means Free People.  I’m not an Socialist nor am I afraid of the word, however I think we need to get away from the fear that this word portrays and begin to talk openly about what we need to do to get out of these “Boon/Bust” Business Cycles. This type of discussion will require us to wake up from our dream and myth how our current economic system works.

Here is an Article that was Posted on the Nation’s Web Site written by Robert Pollin, entitled “Be Utopian: Demand the Realistic“

Neoliberal capitalism–whose defining features were Wall Street greed and big business domination of government policy-making–is dead. But what comes next?

Solidarity, equality and freedom have always been the fundamental principles animating the left. It is from these principles that the left has constructed its various visions of a truly democratic, egalitarian social order–i.e., the only type of society that deserves to be called “socialist.” Given the collapse of neoliberalism, shouldn’t the left now advance a case for full-throttle socialism?

While socialism is desirable as a longer-term vision of a just society, it is unrealistic in my view to expect it to take shape today. The problem is that, at this stage in history, we do not know what a socialist economy would look like, nor do we know how to move from our current disintegrating neoliberalism to something approximating socialism. Socialism should be seen as a series of challenges and questions as we push a social justice agenda forward amid the ongoing crisis. It should not be seen as a package of obvious and ready-made answers.

This becomes clear in considering the collapsed financial system. In the short term, there are no longer any viable alternatives to government takeovers of failing banks. But nationalizing the banks, by itself, is neither a panacea nor an advance toward socialism. The fact that former Federal Reserve chair Alan Greenspan now supports nationalization should at least give pause to its enthusiasts on the left. Over the longer term, a nationalized financial system presents daunting problems.

Realistically, such a system will inevitably produce failures and scandals tied to “crony capitalism”–privileged back-dealings with well-connected non financial businesses. In addition, individual financial enterprises, as with all business entities, require micro-management. The government would have to create an incentive system for the managers of the publicly owned banks that would substitute for the very straightforward profit motive that guides managers of private banks. If the nationalized bank managers are not committed to maximizing profits, how should their performance be evaluated?

Resolving such questions would require years of experimentation and fine tuning. In the meantime, taxpayers would pay for the inevitable breakdowns. This, in turn, could be the very thing–perhaps the only thing–that could shift the target of public outrage over the collapse of the financial system off Wall Street and onto the government. At this historical juncture, it is therefore preferable to fight for a new financial regulatory regime with primarily private bank ownership as the means of promoting financial stability and channeling credit to priority areas such as affordable housing and the green economy.

Building the green economy raises similar concerns. We need to stop consuming fossil fuels and defeat global warming over the next twenty to thirty years. This is a massive project, and it will not succeed by relying entirely on the public sector or community-based nonprofit organizations, however worthy. Rather, its primary propulsive forces will be large government incentives for private businesses to profit from clean energy investments, and for these same business interests to face significant costs through producing and selling fossil fuels. The Obama stimulus program is a first major step in the right direction, by mixing large-scale public investments–in the range of $80 billion over two years–with even larger incentives for private firms.

One of the most bracing slogans to emerge from the 1968 uprising in France was “Be Realistic, Demand the Impossible.” I am more inclined to embrace its mirror image as a guide for moving forward today. That is, “Be Utopian, Demand the Realistic.

Even if President Obama, whom I love very much, but even if his Stimulus Plan works, it will be temporary. This is because the Monetary system is inherently flawed, whether you subscribe to the Keynesian, Socialism or Austrian Model of economics, any Economy that is based on a Monetary system will be inherently flawed  and will leave a segment of humanity out in the cold.

I believe that we need to start a debate and talk about a Resource Based Economy that leaves no one out in the cold

A Resource-Based Economy is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

…Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.

Jacque Fresco

Peace and Love