Conservatism and Liberalism in Democracy
Can large economies work themselves in such a way that benefits from the work all participants put into economies is fairly and equitably distributed? Maybe, if you overlook the extremes in the sine wave as they go through these booms and busts, and just measure the median line running through. Lemming in the Arctic tundra over time have pretty much the same mean population. Power and positioning of the capital in economies based on such measures of wealth will always result in a competition for accumulation, and we will have humans who want and want and want, and they will accumulate to satisfy those wants until they can’t.
What that which we label as governing functions can be made to do is take some of the wealth that accumulates at the top of these little — and big — inverted funnels, and move a little of it back down to those who struggle to move it up for those with the unique structural positioning to collect it.
Now you can say that those at the top work too, that’s fine. But I know what work is, all different kinds. I know what property is, both conceptually and to actually own it and do something with it. And I don’t see the "having fun" winning at monopoly quite the same as losing. At least not in real life, with the same few land "lords," their grubby fists wrapped around their land titles, their piles of wealth measurement stacked in front of a them, and with all the rolls of the dice rolling for them, no matter who rolls it, as quite the same as the "work" of the losers in that game. And so I can’t find it in my heart to see that the "not having quite so much fun" losing is the same work as the having fun winning is. That’s what I see when the winners try to tell me that. Because I’ve been both.
You can play with words and make what’s happening out to be all sorts of different things. People will be swayed by this feature of human cognition. But the way I see it, stripped of the illusions created by the words about the old Puritanical work ethic, governments are misconceived as entities that take and give from those who work to those who don’t. That’s a trick. We trick ourselves that way. Governments are not entities, they are a rule bound process — an ongoing collection of various functions that are just a part of a society of people with common social connections. Giving such things entity status is a conceptual error that leads to mistakes in other conceptual errors.
Capital accumulation processes have their structural roots in a social meme that has created some of the worst of human social equality arrangements in the last ten thousand years. We keep getting the same form with different names. We keep getting these inverted funnels that look just like ancient Egyptian pyramids because that’s just about as advanced in their human evolution as they’ve ever gotten.
Modern day socialist thinking did not begin with Marx, and it was not accurately formulated by Ayn Rand who misconstrued and miscategorized the term "collective," thereby sending who knows how many off down the wrong cognitive road with a misconceived image of the world and the word socialism. It began with such thinkers as Rousseau and his Discourse on the Origins of Inequality Among Men, and other forms of anarchist thinking by people who really did care to whom and how many the term "freedom" could be applied.