The problems that you attribute to money are not problems with money they are problems with the values. These values that you consider to be problematic are not derived from money per se as they are from nature.
your problems is with peoples values not money.
Money is a means of encapsulating and storing energy. In the same way as an apple is an encapsulated store of energy. These forms of contained energy can be ex changed for other forms of energy. An apple can be eaten or planted and is transformed in to other forms of energy. Money can be saved for the winter and traded for other forms of energy.
Money is a commodity. The problem that you are discussing is not a problem with money it is a problem with values. These values exist in nature even were money does not exist.
Some people are natural givers, some people are natural takers.
It sort of works.
saying "it sort of works" is saying it sort of doesnt work too. there are couple of reasons why your idea sort of does and sort of doesn’t work. humans and animals operate in accordance with pain and pleasure principles. While at the same time we operate under the principle of conservation of energy. these prinicples mean that people (and animals) will avoid pain unless their is a benifit (pleasure) and they will seek out pleasure sometime at a cost (pain). conservation of energy principles mean that people (and animals) will use as little energy as possible to get what they need. so stealing, cheating and dishonesty are natural consequences of this principle. we see this in nature as well as in humans. it is not just humans that steal, cheat and decieve and it is not just humans that have an inclination towards laziness and selfishness.
you say that animals do not think this way. animals take what they need from each other in ways which are just as brutal and violent as humans. animals will fight and kill each other for food. as humans have done in the past. humans will even eat each other when they are functioning at this level. animals will fight and kill to proctect their territory from other animals. and they do all this without the money system.
You presume everything is at a price, I must give to recieve. Why? Animals don't think this way.. This is how we think, because we are conditioned to think everything is at a price. Food only takes a seed and labour. If we were taught to value people instead of money, we would grow that food for free to feed to people we value, because that would be our value system.
i dont think everything is at a price. we do give, we do share, and we do form communities that support each other.
And i want to make one thing clear here. I am not against the principles of sharing and cooperation. I support the notion of sustainable living including community farming, urban farming, permaculture, biodynamic gardening etc. And i also don’t buy the scarcity myth. I recognise the earth has everything we need to sustain all of us and more.
I am not a supporter of capitalism, communism or any other political ideology. as i have stated a number of times i believe we will see the collapse of capitalism giving rise to a more egalitarian society. you will see this happening in america. as capitalism destroys itself people will become more self sufficient and community focused. As people make a transition away from materialism, capitalism will consume itself and more and more people will fall out of the allure of consumer values. Our capitalist societies might even get rolled up into some form of communism before we are free from both of these ideolgies.
For example let's imagine slaves in egypt built the pyramids, if they were conditioned to believe building a pyramid would give them access to the afterlife they would not be slaves but only too happy to work, as it would be for their own benefit. If we were conditioned to value people instead of money the only price would be to take care of people, and as others would be conditioned the same, the care would be reciprocated. And extended beyond family & to neighbours and beyond. Because people (not money) would be the value system.
thats great and i would agree that if all people had values that supported an egalitarian society then life would be much simpler. this is not a problem with the money system this is a problem with social values. These values are not due to money they are due to natural tendencies.
Your argument is similar to saying people would not kill each other if they did not have guns. Tribalism and feudalism were around before money and guns. Tribes would war with other tribes for their land and resources.
If anything money helped to reduce tribal and feudal societies as it provided a more efficent means of trading. Thus providing greater security to trading people.
I think you are imagining a money free system working in the monetary system of today. Talking producers etc...
i am imagining a money free system in the world we live in today. This is the world we live in. If you take money out of this world we have the problem i described.
If you are saying that we take the money system out of some other world that we do not live in then. What is the point of your argument to us today, it is just a fantasy that has no relevance to anyone else. This is the world we live in, it operates in the way it does because of our social evolution. Any problems that we face and solutions that we look for have to fit into this world of today.
it wouldn't work in a monetary system that is what dictates the way we live,
it is not money that dictates the way we live, we were living and functioning in a similar way before we had money as a means of transaction. as animals function in a similar way. with out effective markets societies were more feudal. in a similar way that animals who have less food security are more preditory.
producers would be 'volunteers' or work on a rota, etc.. Imagine Hamish people for example. It would be a very different world, not a corporate one as is now. People would rather be 'social' and work for the greater good than be sat at home watching tv.. people aren't as 'lazy' as you think, it's very hard to sit and do nothing.
I don’t have any problem with this except you are confusing problems with peoples values with money.
People are selfish, but again I think the monetary system has created this selfish gene, they are selfish because they want more - more material goods, more status, all this comes at a price ££
i geuss this is the curx of our argument and the main point of difference between our opinions. You think people are selfish because of money. And that if you take money away from people they become more caring.
This could have come straight out of the Rothschild’s secret book of how to create a nation of slaves through misinformation. Tell people they do not need money because money is evil. Then people will work for nothing and all the produce will be owned by the state. Sounds a bit like the venus project really doesn’t it?
My opinion is that people have always had a tendency to acquire more than they need just in case. This is a form of security against bad times. When people have no food security (or other basic needs) they will go to extreme measures to meet those needs. Poeple and animals (and other organisms) have a tendency to get things done in the most energy efficient way and if necessary means taking from others by force or by guile.
anyway without money there would be no status, material goods would have no value, they would be meaningless because in an ideal non monetary system people would be value a grass bracelet carefully crafted by a friend, instead of a BLOOD diamond bracelet that makes holes in the earth and kills people. That's what we value now, diamonds that damage the earth and shed human blood, because this is what the monetary system does, it corrupts values..
some of this may be true but is of no relevance to this argument. It does no matter what material goods people value. Why is a diamond of greater value than a blade of grass. it is not. a diamond has no intrinsic value. it Is only through the values placed on the object through culture due to its usefulness and scarcity. As for your point about status, there have always been hierarchies in nature, with or without money. Do you think all wolves get an equal share of the kill? Or that all monkeys get to pick their lay from a harem of monkyettes. Money is a means of acquiring status but is not the cause of status.
Topic: HUMANISTIC CONCEPTION ESSAY (Read 3210 times)
August 01, 2008, 06:56:27 PM