Evidence That Reinforces a Long Held Belief

This came across my YouTube feed today...

I'm often proud of boasting that I have left social media behind, but I do still use YouTube for how-to vids and discovery of new (or new-to-me) music, so I also get a lot of algorithmic choices laid on the virtual table. The thing about "the toobs" is I have very limited parasocial connection on that medium. Fave artists, challenging thinkers, gifted designers, yes, but I don't call them friends. At most, I have a relationship like I might with an adult education instructor, but to a lesser degree. I publish videos infrequently, I have 28 subscribers and 38 videos and have had my channels since 2005 or so. It's my antisocial medium :-D So, the above video...

There is a strong "lefty" contingent on YouTube, too, or the algorithm is leading me to believe so. These are my people, and the linked video (you really should watch it, dear reader) reinforces with evidence, some of it actually peer reviewed, a thing I have long considered true - the pursuit of profit, AKA capitalism, can never be ethical. Don't get me wrong, we live in a capitalist system so, those of us without the means of production are forced to play the game, lest we starve. The proletariate has a right to put food on the table, that doesn't mean they're condoning the system they have available to provide for that.

On the other hand, the owners of capital are willingly playing the game, and the game is inherently the pursuit of profit at any cost, as per Smith, Friedman, etc. The latter usually being at the expense of human rights, personal freedoms and the environment, in no particular order. Therefore, any attempt by capitalism to look ethical, is a ruse.

I was raised a socialist. These days I see myself as more of what Chomsky calls an "anarcho-syndicalist" although I prefer the more direct label - social anarchist. I beleive the only true freedom for all is in local syndicates of individuals, all equal, those syndicates syndicating with other syndicates, higher and higher to achieve more, but with each level of syndication beyond the local, they are subordinate to the syndicates that founded them. Rather than local, regional and national syndicates having rising heirachy (eg, like Australia's local, state and federal governments), the national syndicate would be equal to, but subordinate in dispute, to the regional syndicates and the regionals would be equal to, but subordinate in dispute, to the locals. The true definition of anarchy, not the idea that anarchy is petrol bomb throwing lawlessness that capitalists would have you believe, rather it would be a system of guild halls, each serving their communities and communities-of-communities, in truly equitable processes of consensus.

Laise faire capitalism is the "anarchy" of the common view, destructive, self serving, doing whatever the eff they want. A wealthy, powerful few, subverting governance to their own ends and hang the well being of all, "JUST GIVE ME ALL THE MONEY AND POWER!" as Elon might well say, and Donny has already."

Then there are the lies these capitalists tell. Nestle being recognised as a responsible global citizen, yet they lock up water and crop reserves for their own profit, union bust, pollute and have even used child slave labour. There are many other examples of companies doing one tiny thing, because it's all they need to do to hide the worst of what they do from us. Talk from billionaires about universal basic income schemes is about setting up a bribe to keep us from overthrowing their established paradigm - that of throwing us crumbs while they take the whole, fucking cake.

The Star Trek franchise is art showing a way forward. Starship captains are portrayed as having a responsibility to their crews, but also a responsibility to listen to their crews, Pike, Kirk, Picard and Janeway all have leadership, but are more first among equals than leaders. They have leadership skills, but these are moored in foundations of trust and community. The Star Trek chain of command above caotains is not leadership but community, where those with experience are deferred to but may be questioned. Even the mutineer, Burnham, redeems her reputation and becomes a Starfleet captain again, as well as a redemmed member of her community again, by proving her worth and her loyalty to all, rather than to authority. Starfleet is its people, despite trappings of heirachy, rarely is it the heirarchy alone, and even then, that tends to be the crisis to overcome. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one, although the one, or the few, may question decisions made in the name of the many. So a starship captain is not a leader, they are a facilitator, a co-ordinator and a mentor. Their junior officers are their source of authority, but only so long as they act in respect of the good of the many and provide sound answers to the questions of the one, the few or the many.

The Ferenghi are seen as "primitive" because of their rapacious mercantile, self-serving culture. The Ferenghi, and their constitutional "Rules of Acquisition" are less of an enemy, but a laughing stock. They sometimes win, but are usually very easily tricked by using their greed against them. We, the people need to begin working on the capitalists of this world in the same ways Starfleet beat the Fereghi, tricking them with their own greed.

Today, I learned of a resistance rising. I find it a little ironic that it's founded on the Patreon platform, however, a resistance needs money to survive in a capitalist world. But a resistance also needs community to bring the financial resources, so Patreon makes sense. I urge my few readers to watch the video I linked at the top of this post, then go over the the Patreon I've linked at the top of this paragraph. We need to change the world. Before it's too late. And we need to exclude capital when they say they "want to help" because what they want to help with is to keep us from changing the system forever. In the end, in a polluted, burning environment, we help each other up and we deny those who refuse to help because "they're doing very well in the system as it." Because that is the very nature of the problem we face.