Thursday, April 26, 2012
Sponsored Truths & Manufactured Consent
Is it that simple? Is the world a stage for elite family & other concerns? Does the concept of the divine right of royalty linger on as extended colonialism?
Many anthropologists will tell you there is class/clan competition WITHIN any culture. If family groups and small tribes assemble into larger tribes, the existing groupings typically compete for process "space" in the growing aggregate (the corporate history of corporate GM is actually a classic example, as is royal court subterfuge). The sub-groups compete essentially by jockeying to underfund & over-tax competing sub-groups.
Now we have another "sponsored" truth.
The Rise of China
"The Chinese economy is still growing far faster than the United States. These American companies are hoping to seize that opportunity to boost their bottom lines."
"Their" bottom lines? What about the net, compound growth of the USA? Does this imply that elite families & corporations here as well as worldwide would rather see the bulk of their own citizenry underfunded & over-taxed, in order to maintain their ill-gotten financial leverage? For merchants, does nirvana still look like personally pilfering low-hanging fruit from distant sources while simultaneously constraining options for their own neighbors? It was elucidated over a Billion years ago that that strategy - of cheating the aggregate - does not scale! Tom Jefferson & JM Keynes & amoebas all agree that the "merchant" knows no country except the ground he stands upon - and cannot scale up more perfect unions.
Is it possible that the way we calculate 'cost' in the lab or personal finance is not the way it's calculated in nature? COUNT ON IT!! This is so tiresome. There are always even more options emerging, and failure to explore them at pace ... is death in any race between aggregates.
Does personal human wealth breed treason like no other social cause? Shall we simply have done with it, and nominate Benedict Arnold for president? And Quisling for VP? Or, shall we ramp up the manufacturing of dissent?
To successfully adapt, or not to adapt. Aye, that is still the question. The answer, as always, seems to involve trusting but verifying that return-on-coordination is always insanely greater than solitary, uncoordinated hoarding.