Money is not a necessity for life and it is not the natural order of things (at least here on Earth): The proof of these claims is the fact that no other species, other than Humans use money to survive. As for Humanity's use of money, those things that money has allowed have not been very beneficial. For one, a monetary system has allowed for and perpetuated the formation of unnatural hierarchies that increasingly prove its inability to serve the needs of the majority. In this post, I hope to provide an argument against the use of money as the means by which resources are divided among the World's population and offer up one or more alternatives to a system that deprives so many of so much.
First, I would like to present the ways in which a monetary system only truly benefits those who control and can therefore manipulate it to meet their needs. In this regard, I intend to not only expose how, on a macro-economic scale, a majority of the world's population is manipulated, controlled and held hostage by an ever-decreasing number of elites, but to also explain on a micro-economic scale how small business owners and entrepreneurs manipulate, control and hold sway over the lives of those they employ because of the monetary system to which we currently follow with a religious zeal. And no, I am not being hyperbolic when I a say "religious zeal", because most people take it on faith that a monetary-based economy is the only type of economic system under which Humanity can live. As I eluded to in the title however, mankind's faith in money is akin to believing in a false God that only grants wishes to those who control him. To strengthen my argument while shedding light on the unnatural narrative of money as a necessary evil, I offer a simple analogy:
Say the animals adopt a monetary system of trading goods and service for grains, oats, seaweed or whatever food is available and abundant. Now, this system may have initially been created by a group of benevolent dolphins, sheep, kittens (or whatever animal(s) you deem benevolent and kind). In its early stage, the system starts out fair and just for the majority of creatures, so most if not all live happy living lives free of scarcity. And, because the system at this point is fair an equitable, the majority of animals live the lives they choose, not the lives they are forced in to. Crimes like theft are minimal, because most have everything with which they need to survive and life in general is good. After some time has passed however, one group or specie's beliefs evolve to incorporate the idea that they require more to satiate their desires.
One day this group (let's say the group is a pride of lions) seizes control of the system and begins to demand a greater share the food (grains, oats or seaweed). In return for this greater share, they swear an oath to serve and protect all of the other animals from Al Qaeda, ISIS and all enemies, both foreign and domestic. While most of the other animals have never heard of or come face to face with Al Qaeda or ISIS, the lion's argument sounds reasonable. Besides, the lions have the most weapons and could be really brutal if they wanted to be, so what's the harm in giving them a greater share. After all, every sheep, goat, gazelle could become a lion someday, at which point they too would be the beneficiary of the lion's share in this slightly imbalanced system.
As time passes and the other animals have settled into the hierarchy that develops, the lions slowly increase the amount they demand. Though the increase creates greater hardship for the other animals, the lions point out that, under their protective claws, no one has heard nor seen an Al Qaeda or ISIS since the lions claimed victory over these adversaries. As the shares of food that the lesser animals must divide among themselves dwindles, none voice any complaints, as long as they get enough to sustain themselves. As for the lesser of the lesser animals (like the sheep) who barely receive scraps, they're on their own. Most of the other lesser animals have determined that it is the sheep's own fault for not getting what they need to survive. Though not said aloud, rumors circulate that label the sheep as lazy and shiftless, while here say explains how it's a good thing that the sheep's numbers have thin to zero.
The next group to disappear from this community of animals are the goats, who like the sheep were also considered lazy, as well as "different" and therefore, the sole cause for their plight. For their part the lions reinforce the innuendo, agreeing with the other animal's assessment of the sheep and goats, as they remind those same animals that they need to work harder to elevate themselves to the status of lion. As a display of what's possible, the lions gorge themselves on the extra rations of food they have acquired, as a Robin leeches leftovers and tweets out reports called Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.
As time passes and more species of lesser animals die off, the lions get strong and thrive from the efforts of their subjects. They dine on the freshest grains. They expend far less energy hunting their weakened prey, and bask in the admiration that continues to grow. At the height of their popularity, all of the other animals praise the lions for their ability to get what they want, when they want it, all while keeping Al Qaeda and ISIS at bay. The other animals gleefully hand over larger portions of their share of the food with the hope that the lions will give a portion of said portion back, at least after they’ve cleaned ticks from the lion's mane or removed the sheep bones that foul the air in the den.
Shortly after the pinnacle of lion pride has been reached however, the only remaining lesser species approach the lions as the bravest of these lesser creatures approaches and asks the following:
"Since there are no other animals left, can we assume that we too are now lions?"
To which the leader of the lions replies.
"No."
Timidly, the spokes-animal of the lesser animals asks.
"Well. Since there are no other animals left to help forage for food, will you, the lions, help us in gathering food for sustenance?"
Again, the answer is . . .
"No."
The lone spokes-animal then looks back at his fellow mutineers and finds them all cowering in the shadows. Exposed and figuratively alone, the spokes-animal gulps deeply then asks the following.
"Well, you have all of the food now. Can we partake in your bounty?
The lion does not even answer, but simply shakes his head this time.
"Well, you promised to take care of us. What happened to. . ."
Interrupting, the heavily maned leader of the lions speaks.
"Our promise was not as broad and encompassing as you are implying. We promised to defend all creatures great like ourselves and small like you against Al Qaeda and ISIS."
The lion tilts his head back and fills his lungs with air. His chest expands in the effort, making hims look that much more impressive.
The spokes-animal fades in the face of such a display.
The lion's gaze narrows as a smile exposes the longest of his teeth. He relishes the fear that he can see as well as that fear that he can smell in the den.
"Do you see any members of Al Qaeda or ISIS?
The lesser animal looks around, uncertain as to whether the question was rhetorical.
"No, I don't, but that brings me to my next question."
Frustrated, the lion huffs.
"Okay. What is it?
"Well, well, well. You have always informed us of the threat that Al Qaeda and ISIS pose, but we have never seen this threat, nor have we even heard stories of this threat from the animals who roam freely beyond our borders. You know, the ones beyond the wall?"
"And, your question is . . .?"
"Well. My question is this. Since it was meeting the demands of your tribute that caused the extinction of the other animals and no one has ever seen nor heard of ISIS or Al Qaeda, what can you say for yourself?"
To the lesser spokes-animal's surprise, the leader of the lions considers his question and not simply in a cursory manner. The lion actually sits on his haunches and bows his head, deep in thought , purring loudly, as he thinks.
After several minutes of contemplation, the king of the lions looks back at the lesser animal spokes-animal and responds.
"First off, I would like to commend you on your eloquence. Your question was quite succinct and to the point. If I weren't a fellow animal, I would question the idea that you are indeed an animal, but I digress. As for explaining the actions of my pride, I cannot speak for them all, but as it relates to my actions I can only offer the following as a means of explanation. My name is Leo and like my namesake in the Zodiac, I am always a lyin'."
As this unsatisfactory answer sinks into the lesser animal's thoughts, Leo's teeth sink into the lesser animal's spoke-animals' jugular. In a seemingly coordinated attack, Leo's friends chase the remaining animals out of the den, claws slashing, fangs piercing. While most are slaughtered mere yards from the den, others make it all the way to the wall, while one antelope even makes it halfway up the wall before sliding down into awaiting jaws.
Now. while this tale may sound like a win win for the lions, it wasn't long after this last meal that Leo and his pride realized that the wall they demanded be built was too high for any of them to traverse. And, if you think Leo was the last to cannibalize the rest of his pride, think again, for it was Leo's leadership that led all of the animals to this fate and to the other lions, it only seemed fitting that Leo share the fate of the leeser animals.
If I were to pinpoint the moral of this story it would be this, at least in America: We should change the title of our commander and chief to "Leo", because no matter who sits in the Oval office, they're always a lyin'. As for the broader point of the story it is that a monetary system, no matter what the currency, will always be susceptible to malevolent forces. And control of any monetary system becomes that much more susceptible when control over the system is as centralized as the Federal Reserve system of privates banks.
A step towards a fairer system is something like the Blockchain and currencies like bitcoin, where the value of currency is democratized by all. The ultimate system however, in my humble estimation, would be a system in which all resources are made available to all people and the use of said resources is determined solely on need, not desire. Though there are a multitude, I present just one example of the effects of money in part one, as well as evidence of its influence on our lives:
War
Whether intended or not, the primary reason(s) for war (at least in recent memory) all center on money. In America, we choose to liberate those suffering under tyrannical rule by bombing them with single-use, expensive bombs. While there may be something very liberating about death, I do not think this is the form of liberation American leaders sell to the American Public as justification for their actions and I am even more certain that those subjugated masses in the countries we bomb sought freedom in the form of death from above. America's tendency to liberate people under the brutal authoritarian, dictators from their homes, culture and lives is becoming less of a conspiracy theory and more a conspiracy of which everyone, including Americans are growing weary. Forced Democracy is being exposed as the oxymoron that it is as a worldwide enlightenment takes hold over mankind.
As for sources for arguments against perpetual war, there are plenty and I offer one in the form of Smedley Butler, the most decorated marine of his time who wrote a book called "War is a Racket.". In "War is Racket" Smedley points out the primary motivation for those who start war as money.
As for real world examples of how money impacts our collective decision to support war I present the false intelligence that has led us into wars like Vietnam, and Iraq (after 9/11). Why would those intelligence agencies sworn to protect America, its culture and its citizens present false narratives that have led to war in the past and present and will potentially lead to more wars in the future? Below are a few examples of wars that should have never happened as well as wars that should not, but could happen..
George W. Bush's war in Iraq was based on a confirmed known lie yet Bush and his administration have avoided prosecution for starting this illegal, immoral and unjust war. There wasn't even an inquiry as to whether that Administration had committed war crimes like torture, as hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's (men, women and children) were sent to heaven with what Jimmy Dore calls Christian bombs.
In Syria, Obama dropped so many cluster bombs (banned by most countries) that America ran out of cluster bombs in 2016. Talk about the invisible hand of the market; America created the supply and demand for death as a means to spare a people of their miserable existence. Like the phrase goes. "Ask and ye shall receive". Good thing our leaders put an American spin on that old saying. "Ask. Don't ask. We're still gonna bomb you for Humanitarian reasons.
Hindsight Hillary Clinton loses to Donald Trump and she blames the Russians. The problem being with such protestations is that, while there is no proof of such claims, the specter of war with the second largest Superpower looms and not in some hyperbolic way. Trump's blustering and the claims of Clinton and the Democrats have added to the fear created when the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the Doomsday clock to two minutes to midnight; midnight indicating Global catastrophe. For reference, the only time that the clock has been at two minutes to midnight was in 1953 when the first hydrogen bomb was tested. And, every time Mrs. Clinton speaks about attacking or not attacking some other country, she always seems to choose in favor of aggression.
One thing for consideration is that our leaders always tell us to be strong in the face of retaliation for our aggression: I am paraphrasing in each of these examples, but you can look it up for yourself.
1) Bush told us to go shopping to show the terrorists that we weren't afraid of them.
2) Obama basically said to go about our busy as if terrorist attacks had no impact, even when committed on American soil.
It's funny how we're all told to be brave even though most of us don't have a detail of secret servicemen and women protecting us 24 hours a day.
While you're thinking of ways to be brave t, consider how America benefits from all of the acts of aggression that our leaders commit in our name? Is our reputation enhanced by bombing runs? Unless we're bombing people with kittens and puppies, I don't think so. Are we made safer by killing more people around the World? If we are, why do I feel compelled to act like as if I'm from anywhere other than America when traveling abroad? Do most Americans profit from weapons of mass destruction or do the profits from said mass destruction only benefit those who build the WMD's that are used to combat other countries with supposed WMD's? I only ask because, if We, the People are going to take the blame for all of the death and destruction caused by our military then We, the People should at least profit from such devastation. At the very least we should get a tee shirt expressing how our complacency allowed our leaders to spread evil across the planet in our name.
Well, that's enough to digest for now. In my next few posts I will be pointing out how money influences all aspects of life, including those which it shouldn't: the environment, schools, criminal justice, politics, healthcare, news outlets, food, shelter and guns.
Once I have presented the ways in which money impacts the most important issues in our lives, I will offer solutions or alternatives for each. While I will strive to offer my own solutions, I will present suggestions offered by others that I believe can provide steps towards a final solution, if not serve as that final solution. There is a man-made solution for every man-made problem. Whether we like that solution is becoming more irrelevant, as our leaders choose doing nothing over all other considerations these days. What's important is that we realize that doing nothing is getting us exactly where do nothing tends to get one . . . nowhere.