Perhaps one day in the distant future, when the human mind is successfully emulated on a computer, we will find a way to extend the desirable and virtuous aspects of the human mind in such a way that it becomes a super intelligent, superior, benevolent being who is put in charge of what would normally be the affairs of the state. This totalitarian benevolent all knowing dictator could rule either a horrifying, real time surveillance monitored 24/7 by the AI dictator, or perhaps act merely as an advisor of human affairs, even guiding humanity into a new age of reason and justice. It’s a scary thought with frightening implications. The thought came about while reading Republic by Plato. His idea of a ‘Philosopher king’ made me wonder about the possibility of combining his ideas with AI technology. Then again if we ever do really create AI’s we’ll have a different problem entirely.
Waves roll back and fourth
Salty wind whirls with the waves
Sun shines through streaks of cloud
The basic philosophy behind currency is that labor = capital received. The current socioeconomic system twists, bends and distorts this philosophy so that those with the most capital are not the hardest workers, but instead make fortunes off the exploitation of those who do work the hardest in return for a meager wage in order to maintain a wretched existence. Thus crime, exploitation, greed, immorality and corruption are seen as better procurers of capital than hard work. The hardest workers are the poorest people and those who do nothing of any particular importance amass excessive wealth. Thus, in the move towards a society without money, capital must be directly tied to labor. Even if this means doing away with paper money in exchange for digital currency.
Democracy, by definition is the dictatorship of the majority. However a major Scientific Study shows that the United States is actually an oligarchy, not a democracy. Thanks largely to the financial power of the ruling class, our government has decided to put their interests above ours. Highly organized special interest groups and Economic Elites are the ones whom our government represents. The individual, along with the interests of the common people are swept aside to serve this small ruling class. Thus, our democracy, while a dictatorship of the majority in theory, is a dictatorship of the minority.
This actually plays into Marxist theory which I am reading heavily and will discuss in later posts. Marxists often speak of a ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’. Naturally, those unfamiliar with Marxism cringe at the word dictatorship. They do not realize that the goal of the class-conscious proletariat (Working class which becomes aware of their oppression) is to overthrow the already existing ‘dictatorship of the bourgeoisie’ (Capitalist ruling class minority). So naturally one looks at his present condition and realizes that the word dictatorship is not dictatorship at all. In fact, a dictatorship of the majority, as stated above is best done through democracy. So when reading through Marxist thought, one eventually finds that this ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ is actually a call for immediate representative democracy which serves only the working class, under which it is illegal to serve the interests of the minority bourgeoisie. This is the fullest democracy achievable at our current stage of social development, such a system is the mortal opposite of a tyrannical dictatorship. Our current system is a ‘dictatorship of the bourgeoisie’ i.e. oligarchy, masquerading itself as a democracy which serves the bourgeoisie. Realizing this, anyone can see the need to change to a better system, which fully represents the interests of the people. Not to mention it seeks to get rid of the fundamental causes of poverty and hunger, to mirror the sacred doctrine that ‘all men are created equal’ by giving all men the same chance to succeed in life, regardless of whatever family they were born into.
Another misconception I’ve found is that communism is when ‘the state controls everything’ or the state has ‘absolute power’. The fact is, in the process of moving to achieve communism the goal is to make the state ‘wither away’ and collapse, dissolving it’s power and giving that power to the people. Such a misconception about such a fundamentally basic part of an ideology has awakened me to the fact that anytime someone says ‘communism’ they have no idea what the hell they’re talking about. So thus, I have to look even further into this ideology to find out how it actually works, to sift through the lies and find the truth. There is an alarming amount of misinformation out there, not only about countries which have tried to achieve communism, but about what it actually IS.
That being said, one cannot look away at the totalitarian regimes of the past. We see that full authoritarianism actually strips away the rights of the very people it seeks to emancipate from the oppressive social conditions brought about by capitalism. (Although there is expected to be some element of this in the Marxist-Leninist road to socialism, Stalin blew the whole thing out of proportion. In the early USSR, the mastermind of Leninism, Lenin, tried to warn the party of Stalin. He foresaw that his brutality and cruelty would only spell disaster for the country. Thus Stalin’s brutality was legendary, he wished to achieve communism at any cost, the next leader of the USSR heavily condemned his actions. Thus many countries after the fact wishing to begin the road to communism based their government on Stalinist Russia, and not the original tenets of the October revolution.) On the opposite side of the spectrum, anarchists often see the emancipation of the individual as something to come first before the emancipation of the masses. But why hasn’t any system so far combined the two to create the best of both worlds? A system which does not restrict the freedoms and pursuits of the individual in any way (I am VERY critical of many Marx’s and many Marxist’s attitude toward religion) while simultaneously guides the ever changing social conditions of the masses, moving them ever closer towards communism. Anyone who looks at the theory behind communist society can see that it a fundamentally good thing, the problems and conflicts occur when actually struggling the achieve communism, like the struggles to achieve feudalism and capitalism which were equally bloody. So far no country has ever achieved communism, and it is widely to believed to only happen on a global scale. Anarchists and Communists both have the same ends in mind: the disappearance of the state apparatus. If true communism had ever been achieved, there would be NO state to oppress anyone. Communism is not ‘total control of the state’, it is actually the exact opposite.
For the record, I know this is very controversial and I do not see myself as neither a communist or a capitalist. I like to hear both sides of the story before I take sides. Communist ideals certainly have a lot to offer the world and can really make it a much much better place- if done right. I certainly agree with most of it, but to say I’m a communist is quite the stretch. I need to delve further into neoclassical economic theory before I even begin to consider making such a claim. I have a habit of reading books I’m not supposed to read, of seeking out the truth even when it is not popular or socially accepted, this is exactly what I am doing. Sifting through the lies to find the truth.
All of natural evolution is nature trying to find a dominant intelligent species smart enough to prevent it’s own mass extinction event, and to take evolution into it’s own hands. Over billions of years of evolution, after countless mass extinction events, this is the inevitable type of organism to survive past it’s own would be extinction event. Intelligent life is rare, sometimes it takes billions of years to evolve. But the true test of it’s ability to survive comes with it’s mass extinction event, if it can persevere and continue to evolve and leave the planet from whence it came. Thus for mankind to survive, it must remain vigilant. It must watch out for dangers, including a run away greenhouse effect. Perhaps one day our distant descendants will thank us for our vigilance. (For the record I am a devout Christian who believes in evolution and that the universe is 13 billion years old)