Some political notes.
|
INTRODUCTION
|
I’ve written this webpage on politics only
so as to
help people think through their political issues
so that they can move on
to eternal ones.
|
.
|
POLITICS
|
In this webpage I use the word communism
differently from the way most people use it.
I think I use it in its purest sense.
Democracy = every person rules.
Dictatorship = one person rules.
Democracy is more socially complex than dictatorship.
Hence democracy is better
than dictatorship.
,, ,, See earlier
section: GOOD & BAD, RIGHT & WRONG.,,,,,
,, ,, By the
above definition: Proportional
Representation is more democratic
,, ,, than First Past The Post. Perhaps see: Electoral Reform
Society. ,,,,,
|
A
hypothetical, tiny, island nation
that’s so richly blessed that
it doesn’t need money,
cannot have capitalism or
communism.
But it will still need
either democracy or dictatorship.
,, ,, To get agreement on: marriage laws, behavioural laws,
festivals, etc.
This shows that:
Democracy &
dictatorship are about people,
the power structure.
Capitalism &
communism are about money
(which does not
necessarily mean power).
This shows that the two
pairs of mechanisms:
capitalism &
communism
&:
democracy & dictatorship,
can be conceptually separated.
This helps to define them.
|
.
|
Capitalism =
everyone can keep all they’ve made.
Communism =
everyone must share all they’ve
made.
Democracy = every
person rules.
Dictatorship = one person rules.
Hence there are four
possible extremes:
democratic communism
democratic capitalism
dictatorial communism
dictatorial capitalism.
All nations fall within these four possible extremes
(like four corners of a table).
|

|
.
|
Or, more
simply:
|

|
The data for the above, abbreviated, charts
is from:
,, ,, Our
World in Data / Democracy index
,, ,, and:
,, ,, Heritage / index
of economic freedom. ,,,,,
You may disagree with Norway’s position
(I certainly do)
but I just stuck with the data in the above two links.
Perhaps someone else can make a better(?) chart.
|
.
|
Capitalism =
everyone can keep all they’ve made.
Communism = everyone must share all they’ve made.
Capitalistic mechanisms produce wealth.
But communistic mechanisms then give that wealth a human face.
That’s why every civilised nation
has both mechanisms, at least to
some degree:
capitalistic mechanisms
,, ,, ,, o,, Free markets.
,, ,, ,, o,, Property rights.
,, ,, ,, o,, Anti-monopoly laws.
, , , , Perhaps also see:
, , , , YouTube: – Watch: Fighting
the 3 Mutant Capitalisms | Paul Marshall.,,
,, ,, ,, o,, Etc.
and communistic mechanisms.
,, ,, ,, o,, Unions (though they’re needed less as the
economy grows).
,, ,, ,, o,, Tax-paid-for, means-tested,
needs/ability-tested, free:
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Basic housing (to help sustain birth rates)
,, , , , , , YouTube: – Watch:
Population Collapse is a
, , , , , , Massive
Problem - Dr Paul Morland.,,,,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Healthcare.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Education.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Unemployment money.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Disability money.
,, ,, ,, o,, Government imposed limits on private rents.
,, ,, ,, o,, Consumer protection laws.
,, ,, ,, o,, Etc.
,, ,, N.B. People’s actual needs are finite.
,, ,, So, the richer a nation gets
,, ,, the less it will need:
,, ,, ,, ,, the above communistic mechanisms
,, ,, ,, ,, and big government.
|
Why does capitalism, much more than communism,
produce wealth?
Because, even if you are:
a completely selfless person
who lives only to help others,
you would still have:
structured your life
around yourself
(because you control only
yourself
and because you need
resources to function).
God designed
the material of the universe, hence of nature:
& hence the flesh &
souls of animals
& hence the flesh &
souls of humans
, , (though not the hearts/spirits of
humans)
to have concentric circles of selfishness:
inner circle an animal you
midway circle related animals your family/friends
outer circle pack/flock/herd your group/nation/bloc.
Perhaps
see earlier webpage: The design of everything . . .
and earlier section:
THE ORIGINS OF: PAIN & PLEASURE AND FEAR & ATTRACTION. . . .
|
.
|
Capitalism = the
production of wealth –
good
regardless
of its uneven distribution – bad.
Communism = the even distribution of wealth – good
regardless of who produced it – bad.
These goods and bads are impossible to measure.
Hence it’s impossible to measure which is best
between capitalism and communism.
Indeed, it’s pointless to speculate about which is best
since both are needed.
|
.
|
We grow up gradually:
1. First needing supervision (child).
2. Then
needing only advice (teen).
3. Finally
becoming autonomous (adult).
We grow up gradually,
from:
at home, everything’s paid
for
, , So you’re free to be passionate about justice.
to:
you’ve left home, so you pay
your own way.
, , So you’re free to be whatever you can manage to be.
We grow up gradually,
hence the saying:
“If a person hasn’t voted
left-wing
by the time they’re 25 – they’ve got no
heart.
If a person hasn’t voted right-wing
by the time they’re 40 – they’ve got no
brain.”
|
.
|
Youngsters
have always tended to be communistic.
But, these days, in the West,
most teachers, by far, are communistic too.
Hence youngsters’ education today
is particularly politically imbalanced.
See: YouTube: – “They’re Lying About Your History” – Rafe
Heydel-Mankoo.,,,,,
I suggest balancing it by
using Wikipedia.
, , Wikipedia is mostly or entirely unbiased
, , and has got to give its sources.
Also, when you’re on YouTube
etc,
often search for the opposite
of what you’d normally
search for.
That will stop the
algorithms
from keeping you in a
left-wing echo chamber.
This applies to people who
are stuck in
a right-wing echo chamber as well.
, , Actually, YouTube algorithms struggle with this.
, , So perhaps look on two, unlinked, devices.
, , Or, better still, find a sensible person,
, , but with opposite views to you,
, , and have face to face discussions with them.
, , Perhaps also see earlier section:
, , THINKING
TOOLS THAT I USED. . . .
, , Perhaps see
, , YouTube: – Jonathan Haidt on the Mental-Health Crisis
,, ,, and
Smartphones | WSJ News. ,,,,,
|
.
|
Left-wing
and right-wing
should be limited to:
capitalistic mechanisms
&:
communistic
mechanisms.
Unfortunately however:
parties wanting
to increase their votes
and causes
lobbying one party or the other,
result in all sorts of
issues
wrongly becoming party
political.
Such issues might be:
national
(e.g. immigration)
or:
global
(e.g. global warming)
and may need resources
that they don’t consistently
get
as
parties go in and out of office.
, , Regarding
global warming:
, , , Any nation that goes
green
, , , (though nuclear is
best in my opinion)
, , , disadvantages itself
economically.
, , , Hence the
lack of co-operation between the world’s nations
, , , is a much bigger
obstacle than technology & cost.
|
.
|
THE WEST
|
The West (particularly
the USA)
was founded mostly on Protestant Christianity.
I write ‘mostly on Protestant Christianity’
because slavery was one of
the foundations of
early America. And
slavery is, obviously, anti-Christian.
Wikipedia:
William Wilberforce. ,,,,,
Wikipedia:
Slavery. ,,,,,
Hence all Western cultures are currently:
tolerant,
caring,
even balanced (i.e. even
feminine to a degree),
relative to the other world cultures.
Perhaps see: YouTube:
– In Defence Of Western Values | ARC Off-Stage. ,,,
|
You may say:
“That the West is tolerant
& caring
is nothing to do with its
Christian past.”
I reply:
“It would be improbable
for all the nations
that were once morally
characterised
by Protestant Christianity
to now be relatively tolerant
& caring
for some other, un-obvious,
reason.”
|
.
|
DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION
|
The mechanisms: diversity, equity, and inclusion,
Wikipedia:
diversity, equity, and inclusion, ,,,
only occur in
Western nations,
in ex-Protestant-Christian democracies:
Democracies where:
Christians had
been the majority.
Hence that
majority loved everyone
because God
caused them to.
But where now:
Unbelievers are
the new majority.
Unbelievers who:
Reject the:
God
component
of Christianity.
But keep the:
people love people
component
of Christianity.
|
Hence the mechanisms:
diversity,
equity, & inclusion,
were built in:
USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK,
but not in:
China, India, the Middle East,
Africa, etc.
Hence, also, the mechanisms:
diversity, equity, & inclusion,
are powered by:
laws,
not by:
love.
E.G. Not by people saying: “I’m sorry” and: “I forgive you”.
|
.
|
We are made of the same material as animals.
Yet we are eternal.
Hence:
we added: justice
to: the
law of the jungle
to make it: the ways
of the world.
The ways of the
world are everywhere.
And the ways of the world eventually need,
& so also eventually produce,
both:
capitalistic mechanisms
and:
communistic mechanisms.
,, ,, See earlier
cell, starting Capitalism = everyone.,,,,,
Hence communistic mechanisms, which
are everywhere,
are therefore in Western nations.
The Western nations’ left-wing
then combined:
communistic mechanisms
with:
people love people
to make:
diversity,
equity and inclusion,
the legislation of love.
|
The trouble is – love cannot be
legislated.
,, ,, Legislating love
produces fake love.
,, ,, (See: 1 Cor
c13 NIV for a definition of real love.)
Hence Western nations’ left-wing lacks
the communistic mechanism equal income
(many of its advocates are
rich & intend staying that way).
|
.
|
In the following
three cells
I split the mechanisms diversity,
equity and inclusion,
into three parts (easier to analyse).
a)
is good,
b) is good,
c) is only partly good.
,, ,, See earlier
section: GOOD & BAD, RIGHT & WRONG.,,,,,
|
a) Equal social acceptance
of people of different cultures
(i.e. different: ethnicities, classes, religions, opinions,
etc).
,, Inner qualities.
N.B. Some pairs of
cultures
have parts
that are incompatible
with each other.
In which case the only
practical answer
is to value:
the West’s
overarching acceptance culture
even more than you
value:
the individual cultures it accepts
(even if
that includes your own culture).
Hence the maxim:
I disapprove of
what you say.
But I will
defend, to the death,
your right
to say it.”
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Voltaire, via Evelyn Beatrice
Hall. . . .
Notice
that Voltaire’s maxim has
an implied condition in it:
I disapprove
of what you say.
But
I will defend, to the death,
your
right to say it
as
long as your words are not attacking
someone
else’s right to say
what they
want to say.”
|
b) Equal social acceptance
of people of different:
colour,
body shape,
ability,
age,
gender,
sexual orientation,
etc.
, , , Relatively outer,
static, qualities.
|
c) Equal educational outcomes & work outcomes
for all people:
, Relatively inner, dynamic,
qualities.
This can only be done
by restricting the more
able’s applications
so as to increase the
success of
the less able’s.
Hence this mechanism is
only partly good:
Some gain.
Some lose.
If the positions are
important,
(directors, managers,
pilots, etc)
then, if not allocated
jobs by merit alone,
poorer decisions are
made
leading
to loss.
Even with less
important jobs
it may be
counterproductive.
Should there be a law that says that
50% of ladies’
hairstylists & nail manicurists
must be heterosexual males
and include
bricklayers, truck drivers, etc?
Indeed, merit alone, if
it is genuinely alone,
actually solves D.E.I
problems.
Consider the popular
fighter pilot Wikipedia: Ian Gleed,
and, of course, Wikipedia: Alan
Turing. ,,,,,
|
I reckon people crave to see equality of
outcomes
because, ironically, they don’t
see people;
they see only the world and its
hierarchy
and strive to correct it,
try to put some sort of God into
it.
But God & the world are
different.
The world values people
according to what they can do.
God values people – they
don’t have to do anything.
Luke c15 NIV,,
|
.
|
The earlier
cell: c) Equal educational etc ,,,,,
is not guaranteed to improve
democracy & the economy.
The earlier cell: a) Equal social etc ,,,,,
is already a vital part of
democracy.
But the earlier cell: b) Equal social etc ,,,,,
improves democracy:
This is because, in a
democracy:
minority groups
will always fear the power of,
always be at the
mercy of, the majority group.
,, ,, ,, ,, Human rights laws partly correct this, but not fully.
I reckon quality communication is the answer.
Or, to be precise, quality old-school communication
is the answer.
(Internet algorithms have
discovered, for themselves,
that outrage gets the most
clicks.)
Or, to be precise, quality old-school communication
is only part of the
answer.
The rest of the answer is
either: love, or laws.
But laws that favour minorities,
that super-support minorities,
that compensate for their democratic
weakness,
especially if
imposed undemocratically,
or even if
imposed democratically,
cause the same
kinds of problems that they solve.
So the only
answer left is love.
|
To conclude:
In order to
clearly improve democracy,
b) Equal social etc must be added.
And that can only
be done by:
o quality old-school communication
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Interviews, logic & science, documentaries,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, films & plays, talk shows, comedians, etc.
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see my own
contribution:
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, GOD’S WORDS ON SIN down to
TRANSGENDERISM. ,,,,,
,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, (Bear in mind that I
wrote that webpage for Christians.)
o and love.
Admittedly love is not a
mechanism
that politicians (or anyone)
can readily control.
But that’s as good as it
gets.
|
.
|
PRIORITIES
|
The main task
of a democracy
is to make a dictatorship as difficult to form as possible.
Hence, for example, the components of the United Kingdom
are (or were) as overlapping as possible:
the judiciary is above
everyone
yet some laws are made by
politicians
who can be expelled from
office
by a story unearthed by the
free press
which can be sued if it’s
wrong
by ordinary citizens
who also make laws
and can vote politicians into
government
who decide big policies
which affect a lot of people
etc.
So no one person is in
power,
or, conversely, everyone is
in power.
,, ,, N.B. Laura
Spinney writes, in her interesting article:
,, ,, ,, ,, Reimagining Democracy
,, ,, ,, ,, in New
Scientist magazine, 5th
Oct 2024,
,, ,, ,, ,, how the UK’s [&
similar nations’] democracy
,, ,, ,, ,, could be
greatly improved by using digital technology.
|
So if a party,
left or right, values:
its policies
more than it values:
democracy
then it’s a disaster waiting to happen:
They’d be thinking:
“We can see that our policies
are the best ones
for our nation.
So, next time
we’re in office,
let’s tweak
things
so that we’re
never out of office again.”
|
Satan loves
dictatorships:
“So few words.
So much effect.”
|
.
|
Home
page
|
End of site.
|