There are many elements that lie beneath the surface, and those that can afford to manipulate the systems that attempt to make capitalism fair for all, offering a proper market of competition, instead of a system of biased steering of laws, in order to sustain a faulty or corrupt culture of business. In a nation that recognizes businesses as individuals, on the same level as individual persons, the economic imbalance is evidence that in a democracy that favors free markets and capitalist ideals, the dollar grants more advantage to big business, and places the true individual at a significant disadvantage. (Access To Justice In U.S. At Third-World Levels, Says Survey)
The credit system under the guise of free markets is also faulty, in failing to provide self-reliant financial gain for the individual. Based on my previous statement, legally empowered business grants credit, as well as maintains or enforces the credit values of individuals. The government has no role in this type of economy. There is no element of enforcement available to the consumer, that would provide a financial security if the consumer should be locked out of the current economic system, by not having a monetary provision. This, in essence, heavily enables private interests to selectively control and monitor who receives monetary resources, and how much of it they deserve. The Federal monetary system is practically becoming non-existent, and therefore corporations replace the Fed as a means to managing monetary aspects of the economy.
As manufacturing corporations, and corporations in general are granted more free will under limited regulation, they continue to impress upon the workforce a lower and lower wage, as financial corporations instill the use of credit, in order to keep the low wage earners psychologically at bay, from discovering that they cannot simply afford sustainability on a lower rate of income. In a capitalist democracy, as we have in the United States, money empowers any institution that has enough of it to supply, the corporation legally provided the rights of the individual inherits an unfair advantage over the literal individual. What the U.S. government has done is, instead of creating a separate set of laws to preserve the rights of corporations in a manner parallel to the rights of the individual, the government has purposefully created an artificial class of society that has tremendous amount of economic advantage over the individual, synonymous to the relationship between land owners of early America, and their imported slaves, who held absolutely no economic rights, whatsoever, and lacked the legal rights to sufficiently gain a secure and sustainable way of life.
Constitutional law since its establishment has emphasized an indifference to the financial freedoms of the individual. It is apparent in its wording of the 14th amendment, in that no state entity may "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This wording lends the federal government to too much passivity when it comes to regarding the freedoms of the individual. In a capitalist society, such as the one that exists in the United States, finances are the single most important aspect of gaining the essence of a stable and sustaining life; license to act within the law so as to maintain a sustainable life; and preserve one's own property. Granted the fundamental legislation laid forth in the founding documents and the following amendments were implemented to foster equality, but the reinterpretation of its meanings creates a paradox for the individual. If we are to uphold equality as some right granted to all individuals by supernal granting, then the people must ask themselves, how fortified is this equality when stood up against equality measured in monetary value. When you bring together the intrinsic strengths of individual freedom versus financial capability to purchase the essence of freedom, the two are not one in the same, Therefore, those elements of the governed that have the larger capacity to superficially obtain freedoms, should not obtain the same guarantees of freedom meant for the individual person.
There are more mechanisms in place that tend to disable consumers from participating in the economy, by utilizing their financial assets. Without any government involvement most private institutions share information about consumers, basically known as credit reporting. An individual's movement through an economy is monitored at all times by, not a governing element, but instead by private interests: corporations. Since these corporations are granted the same status of liberty as you and me as individuals, it is as if one person has the ability to oversee your financial habits, and on the same token, enable or disable your ability to effectively spend or acquire money. If capitalism is a sponsor of free market practices, how is it possible that one individual can judge the financial capabilities of another? How does one individual justify your economic status within a market? What is that concept called? Controlling, manipulating, and monitoring one's ability to participate in an economic environment can somewhat be defined as an aspect of slavery. If participants have a minimal amount of money to spend on sustaining their inalienable lives, then they must turn to some other form of financial capacity, which is defined in capitalist structures as credit. Either the government's economic mechanisms supply the means by which its society can maintain sustainable living, or the private elements will follow suit in providing loans or credit dispensation. If the individual who lends to the individual who lacks the assets to participate in the market, at what point does the borrower gain non-debt status, if the economy is not providing enough means to participate in the economy, then how would the borrower ever exit debt status? The individual who has loaned or granted credit to the other is aware of this situation, and will seek to extend the debt status utilizing the information provided via credit reports, in order to manipulate debt elimination steps, and indeterminately keep the borrowing individual economically disadvantaged. Therefore, the economically disadvantaged individual fails to ever enter a prosperous stage, and due to the constant lack of having on-hand financial resource, obtains the economic status of an indentured slave.
There are two types of people in economic culture: those that practice the art of deception as a means to producing more prosperity for themselves, without providing an ample product, and therefore lacking production; and there are those that produce as a means of provision to the rest of society. Those who facilitate provisions into a society, and are compensated for it, are those that improve, and enable better growth for the economy. In contrast to this, there are those who seek compensation from society, without offering a provision, and it is these participants of a society that impress disadvantage upon other members of society, and therefore are degrading the efficiency and growth of any economy.
As manufacturing corporations, and corporations in general are granted more free will under limited regulation, they continue to impress upon the workforce a lower and lower wage, as financial corporations instill the use of credit, in order to keep the low wage earners psychologically at bay, from discovering that they cannot simply afford sustainability on a lower rate of income. In a capitalist democracy, as we have in the United States, money empowers any institution that has enough of it to supply, the corporation legally provided the rights of the individual inherits an unfair advantage over the literal individual. What the U.S. government has done is, instead of creating a separate set of laws to preserve the rights of corporations in a manner parallel to the rights of the individual, the government has purposefully created an artificial class of society that has tremendous amount of economic advantage over the individual, synonymous to the relationship between land owners of early America, and their imported slaves, who held absolutely no economic rights, whatsoever, and lacked the legal rights to sufficiently gain a secure and sustainable way of life.
Constitutional law since its establishment has emphasized an indifference to the financial freedoms of the individual. It is apparent in its wording of the 14th amendment, in that no state entity may "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This wording lends the federal government to too much passivity when it comes to regarding the freedoms of the individual. In a capitalist society, such as the one that exists in the United States, finances are the single most important aspect of gaining the essence of a stable and sustaining life; license to act within the law so as to maintain a sustainable life; and preserve one's own property. Granted the fundamental legislation laid forth in the founding documents and the following amendments were implemented to foster equality, but the reinterpretation of its meanings creates a paradox for the individual. If we are to uphold equality as some right granted to all individuals by supernal granting, then the people must ask themselves, how fortified is this equality when stood up against equality measured in monetary value. When you bring together the intrinsic strengths of individual freedom versus financial capability to purchase the essence of freedom, the two are not one in the same, Therefore, those elements of the governed that have the larger capacity to superficially obtain freedoms, should not obtain the same guarantees of freedom meant for the individual person.
A person is defined as "a human being regarded as an individual." In no way can this be misinterpreted or misconstrued as some other form or being, yet the law interprets it as including a network of individuals, even corporations. As Noam Chomsky has noted, the "powerful and privileged" felt that "any person" was too acute and obtuse under the same definition. "The Courts decided long ago to extend the concept "person" to include collective legal fictions created and supported by state power: corporations, which now dominate the economy and the society, and increasingly the political system." If the political system is dominated financially by corporations, then it is correct to conclude that the individual under these legal bounds has involuntarily relinquished crucial aspects of the freedoms granted by the 14th amendment. "Last January the Bush Supreme Court appointees overturned a century of precedents and sharply extended the right of corporations to buy elections." If those with the financial capacity to purchase votes have the driving force to guide the results of election in their favor, then it is true that the individual has lost their ability to effectively participate in a free democracy as a free person. The means by which laws are created to preserve individual freedoms are now steered by those who gain freedom through financial mechanisms, and not by right alone. "The grounds for the verdict are that money is speech, and corporations are persons, so to deprive them of the right to buy elections would deprive these fictional persons of their constitutional rights of freedom of speech. These expanded rights of unaccountable state-backed private tyrannies are being quite effectively exercised in the congressional campaigns that are underway right now, in a concerted effort to ensure that Congress is taken over by an extreme wing of business representatives." It is wrong to consider that men of business maintain a firmer right to freedom by way of state laws, than what is intrinsic in the right of free men. Whether we are associated with business or not, our freedoms are single in the perception of justice. (Final Remarks, Istanbul Conference on Freedom of Speech)
There are more mechanisms in place that tend to disable consumers from participating in the economy, by utilizing their financial assets. Without any government involvement most private institutions share information about consumers, basically known as credit reporting. An individual's movement through an economy is monitored at all times by, not a governing element, but instead by private interests: corporations. Since these corporations are granted the same status of liberty as you and me as individuals, it is as if one person has the ability to oversee your financial habits, and on the same token, enable or disable your ability to effectively spend or acquire money. If capitalism is a sponsor of free market practices, how is it possible that one individual can judge the financial capabilities of another? How does one individual justify your economic status within a market? What is that concept called? Controlling, manipulating, and monitoring one's ability to participate in an economic environment can somewhat be defined as an aspect of slavery. If participants have a minimal amount of money to spend on sustaining their inalienable lives, then they must turn to some other form of financial capacity, which is defined in capitalist structures as credit. Either the government's economic mechanisms supply the means by which its society can maintain sustainable living, or the private elements will follow suit in providing loans or credit dispensation. If the individual who lends to the individual who lacks the assets to participate in the market, at what point does the borrower gain non-debt status, if the economy is not providing enough means to participate in the economy, then how would the borrower ever exit debt status? The individual who has loaned or granted credit to the other is aware of this situation, and will seek to extend the debt status utilizing the information provided via credit reports, in order to manipulate debt elimination steps, and indeterminately keep the borrowing individual economically disadvantaged. Therefore, the economically disadvantaged individual fails to ever enter a prosperous stage, and due to the constant lack of having on-hand financial resource, obtains the economic status of an indentured slave.
There are two types of people in economic culture: those that practice the art of deception as a means to producing more prosperity for themselves, without providing an ample product, and therefore lacking production; and there are those that produce as a means of provision to the rest of society. Those who facilitate provisions into a society, and are compensated for it, are those that improve, and enable better growth for the economy. In contrast to this, there are those who seek compensation from society, without offering a provision, and it is these participants of a society that impress disadvantage upon other members of society, and therefore are degrading the efficiency and growth of any economy.
The process of creating an alternative international military force, "is nothing short of a subversion of the very existence of the nation-state and of principles of sovereignty and self-determination. 'The increasing use of contractors, private forces or as some would say "mercenaries" makes wars easier to begin and fight -- it just takes money and not the citizenry.'" This is the crux of this argument, in that there is no containment or element of private industry regulation to ensure the citizens that a paid force would not maneuver against the rights of a state and it's people. Only does money create mechanisms by which a force can generate a system which the intrinsic rights of the individual come with a price in monetary terms, and not on terms of liberty. (Scahill, Jeremy. Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. 2007. Nation Books. New York.)
Let's think about IBM's move to relocate, or expatriate its domestic workforce in the United States (Project Match). IBM simply wants its workers in the U.S. to leave the U.S, and move to India, because the cost of living is cheaper there, and the workforce demands a significant less amount for wages (The Business Elites ... Are Instinctive Marxists). Basically, outsourcing jobs to foreign workers for its company is not enough, and now that that workforce is saturated, and the U.S. workforce is desperate for jobs, due to economic hardships, IBM gains from removing a trained workforce from one nation to another, in order to decrease pay, without regard for international laws, or the domestic rights of the individual who chooses to relocate for work. The worker has two choices: relocate outside of the country that guarantees your freedoms and quality of life, to preserve your job, and work for less money, or resign, and seek work elsewhere at a time when the availability of jobs is scarce. Either way the individual is forced to sacrifice their livelihood and the stability of domestic laws that preserve individual rights over state or plutocratic authority. This is a basic manifestation of involuntary labor enslavement. The lack of international laws protecting foreign workers who have relocated, plays into the hands of corporations who take advantage of global free trade, in order to manipulate labor in a way that would place global workers within an insecure, and lacking global arena of nonspecific human rights laws, which provide these corporations with the ability to have complete dominance over a workforce's ability to sustain a free and stable life based on its provided labor. Is it not in the practice of financially advantaged corrupt third world entities, to gather up the strong, and those fully capable of providing intense labor for minimal compensation, in order to gain full profits? There is an unspoken advantage supplied to the corporate elites, that consumes the liberties of the common man, and that disguised upper-hand that the elites have gained, fails to address the laws that guarantee a dislocated workforce's economic freedom, and prevent capitalist-driven indentured servitude.If we are to continue to convince ourselves as a society, that the current form of free-market capitalism is the only means of providing the individuals of society with freedom, then we are leading ourselves down a path of foolishness, ignorance of the law and misguided philosophy. Those of us, that are not financially capable of purchasing the attention of representatives at the state and national levels, are the individuals that are blindly led to have faith in our freedoms, but that faith is weakened by the mere fact that freedom within a capitalist society is so closely tied to monetary value and status. This is especially true, when the availability of money is decreased, and replaced by a system of credit, that has the intent of deteriorating our value as free members of society, and therefore debt becomes the chains by which we are prevented from gaining individual prosperity. If the individual cannot prosper, then the individual cannot be free.
No comments:
Post a Comment