The Luxurist Manifesto

Preface

“Man, the king sure is selfish.” This has been the motivation of countless revolutions.
Seeing as how many revolutions have happened throughout history, you’d think that by now
we’d have some semblance of relative social equality. While we have made leaps and bounds
toward some form of utopia, there still exists mass injustice, crime, war, totalitarian abuse of
power, poverty, senseless suffering, and the devaluation of human life throughout the world.

We live in a confusing era but an era of common greatness. The brilliant minds of the
past and present have accomplished things once thought to be completely impossible. The
advancement of modern technology has created a social and economic climate unmatched by
any previous age of mankind. We can communicate almost instantly. Literature can be
distributed to an entire nation in a matter of seconds. We can build the most incredible tools,
infrastructure, and modes of transportation. We have weapons that can destroy the planet
hundreds of times over. The manufacturing process has been refined into something that can
distribute unbelievable inventions to millions of people, yet we still have not solved humanities
most basic issues.

In this essay I will be discussing, on a purely theoretical plane, the most common issues
that prevent the human race from making positive social progress as a collective. I will not be
providing any specific statistics or quoted scholastic articles as this is a discussion of personal
idealism and philosophy. Essentially, what I am presenting is an opinion and should be treated
as such. My goal is to shed light into the dark corners of existence that are ignored (wether
internationally or otherwise) by popular politicians and media outlets and spark conversation
about these topics. Right or wrong is no matter. The fact is, the focal points of this discussion
exist in the real world. The solutions I offer may be obviously ineffective, but that is not the
point. To offer an improper solution and have it corrected by someone who otherwise would
not have thought about it or spoken up is an ideal situation. I offer raw material for criticism,
open to anyone with an opinion to contradict or believe. That is my prerogative.

I will be pointing fingers. I will be throwing blame around. I will be discussing completely
unfounded conspiracy theories. Why? Because for some sick reason I guess that’s my idea of
having fun while attempting to do the right thing, attempting to be a voice for the voiceless. I
can’t say that I come from a particularly impoverished background, but I know how it feels to
be isolated, alienated, and ridiculed for being different. It is because of this, and a certain
refined fear of others, that I care. While many are able to find lasting happiness and fulfillment
in their personal lives, I have not been able to find my place. I know that I am not alone in this. I
am certainly among millions of Americans that find these times to be particularly difficult. I will
be addressing these difficulties as objectively as possible. No idea is inherently sacred. No
ignorance or ego will be left unquestioned. There will be no undue respect for the
establishment.

It is not my sole intention to offend, but there will be offense where offense is due. I am
not an atheist but I do not identify with any major organized religion. I will be approaching
religion as a set of ideals with a purpose that can be criticized instead of something that is
indefinite and unquestionable. Why can’t I leave religion out of this? If I could, I would. It is a
touchy subject that is held dear by billions and, in many cases, is representative of some form
of culture or heritage. It is not my place, nor my intention to insult religion, but it is a necessary
thread in the fabric of society and therefore must be examined. It has proven to be a motivator
of violence throughout history. As a warning, I am going to “dissect” it linguistically. Apologies
where apologies are due.

I mention religion first and specifically because I have developed what I see as a healthy
fear of collective action. There’s nothing more terrifying in this world than and angry mob with
modern weapons. Hint, hint. Religion is not my enemy! Rather, the exact opposite. Religion can
be beautiful and encourage upstanding citizenship, but I will discuss that in the proper chapter.
My true enemies are fascism, totalitarianism, racism, unfair economic practices, artificial
scarcity, intentional deprivation of necessity, rampant wastefulness, ignorance, apathy,
illiteracy, lack of education, sadism, bullies, criminal behavior, abuse and misuse of drugs,
disturbing warfare practices, and other unethical behavior.

The title of this essay may be suggestive of some type of response or modernization of
the Communist Manifesto. While there will be significant discussion of the wealth gap and the
modern definitions of communism, socialism, and capitalism, the upper class is not my enemy.
While I believe wealth should be esteemed with respect to the responsibilities and powers it
implies, wealth is not, in itself, an evil thing. Humans are all flawed. We have desires for
pleasure, success and personal recognition that capture our focus and blind us to things that
seem to have no immediate bearing on our lives. There will always be people who have
significantly more than everyone else. It is the way of the world and it is the way it should stay.
Wealth is a reward for the deserving and a weapon with no aim for the rest. It, again, is not my
place, nor my intention, to suggest anything regarding doing away with the opportunity to
make it big and get rich. It is especially not my intention to suggest any form of theft or
violence against an individual simply because they have money. The question is: why do they
have money? If they got it fair and square, no harm no foul, but it is my sneaking suspicion that
among the fairly wealthy are criminals in disguise.

It is the American Dream to live a life of luxury. Almost all of us are not fantastically rich
and never will be. That’s okay. Life is beautiful when it’s not stained red with the blood of
suffering. This is not a call to arms. This is a call to organization and collective action with the
intent to work together, for ourselves and each other. To no longer live on the edge of poverty
and to have the opportunity to become skilled. To earn items of value, purpose, and pleasure
while being guaranteed the right to own your own life. To be free.

Part 1: Foundation

Chapter 1: The Realm of Ideas

Since this essay is not an analysis of “factual” information, I will first establish a
definition or a set of premises for the proper way to interpret the information I will be
presenting. I will follow in the footsteps of Issac Newton in the sense that I will be making an in
depth analysis of something that everyone notices and participates in, but doesn’t necessarily
understand. Similar to theorizing the existence of gravity, making a definitive analysis of Ideas
and their various forms and functions will allow for calculations to be made and constants to
be identified. Essentially: word math.

In his time, everyone noticed gravity. We couldn’t live without gravity. It’s strikingly
obvious, but at the time, it was not specifically analyzed. It was Newton’s observation of the
obvious that led those actively participating in scientific research into a new age of
understanding and ability to accurately predict the behavior of matter. It is my goal to establish
a method of interpreting the structure of belief in effort to more deeply understand human
behavior and motivation. I will be using inferences to guess why individuals think the way they
do and how this effects the overarching establishment of government, business, and social
structure.

As I hope I have already made clear, this will be a very subjective essay. Incidentally, the
differentiation of objective and subjective is the foundation of understanding what an idea is.
Fact vs. opinion, reality vs. imagination, and the grey area of hypothesis and theory that exists
between.

The ultimate truth in this world is that you can never quite know the whole truth in all of
its individual parts. There is entirely too much to know. While we know that atoms make up
matter, what makes up atoms? I “know” what’s happening around me but what about 2 miles
in any direction? We can theorize that a God created the universe or everything came from the
Big Bang or that there are parallel universes occurring simultaneously but even in knowing that
I’m typing on my laptop right now I have no idea how this thing actually works. So is it a truly
objective statement that I’m typing on a laptop when the word laptop is actually a blanket term
used to describe a system of factual information, theories, and solid matter all working together
to make up my complex present reality. We all know what a laptop is right? Or do we? It is a
laptop, correct? Or is laptop a word; a symbol for that actual objective reality? The word laptop
itself is an idea and its definition is built on, for me, my own personal understanding of how a
laptop works.

This leads us into the complexity of the linguistic portion of the ideal realm: the way we
define words with other words (or visual memories/imagination, discussed throughout), how
the words that define our vocabulary differ from person to person, and how this effects our
ability to understand and relate each other’s unique perceptions of the world. This is the basis
of understanding. While the basic idea of a laptop is probably going to run pretty consistent
from person to person, since most of us in the first world own one, the idea of a laptop to a
man who designs computers or writes code for a living is likely very different from that of the
many different consumers of his product.

The creator likely has a very deep understanding of his product (or, at the very least, the
specific part of the laptop he is tasked with developing) and the thought of the laptop probably
inspires feelings of pride in being part of developing one of the most advanced things on earth.
Maybe frustrations with the difficulty of creation. Maybe he is competing with a coworker or a
different company. The average consumer likely has little more than an aesthetic knowledge of
the hardware and probably a good understanding of how to make use of the laptop for
entertainment or work. The thought of the laptop probably inspires a sense of success and
happiness in being able to purchase advanced technology and enjoy its many features. To the
person who lacks a good understanding of modern technology, the laptop may inspire a sense
of frustration at not knowing how to use many of its features and even possibly a sense of
inadequacy or fear toward this new era of machines.

 These three examples of the understanding of the word laptop are just vague
generalizations compared to the amazing depth of human understanding and memory. The
specifics of all of the memories associated with laptops in each human will be completely
different! Maybe you remember your first laptop and the happy memories associated with it or
maybe someone stole your laptop and that word is associated with those negative memories
or any number of practically infinite ways to understand and associate to the word laptop! One
word can lead to so many different ideas! And you thought the term laptop seemed so specific
and easy to understand! What about broader words used in conjunction with more complex
ideas? What a mess, right? Let's try to organize it!

The idea of a broad term such as politics is going to have some pretty drastically
different definitions attached to it.

One of the biggest obstacles to overcome in creating a political language that runs fairly
consistent from person to person is the emotions and tangent thoughts that words can inspire.
This is my primary concern with words and the root of my obsession with them. One of the
most frustrating parts of my own life is being told that nobody has any power over you and you
are purely responsible for your own actions. But let’s face it, nobody particularly likes being
called derogatory terms on a daily basis and, at some some level, the things people say to you
really do have an impact on the way you feel. Why? Suppose a stranger who you find to be
attractive smiles at you. How do you feel? Suppose a stranger who you find to be attractive
gives you a look of disgust. How do you feel? Even nonverbal communication and another’s
basic appearance can have an impact on our emotions. These observations pose many
questions and the necessity to define some terminology.

While I cannot (and likely anyone else) describe exactly how the human brain
remembers things, there are a few important observations that can be made and used to better
understand, and thus optimize, the way we think. When we go about our daily life, many of us
do not think about the way we think and act. We have already justified the way we behave and
think. It works for us. Many of us are full of repressed thoughts and memories. Things that
effect our emotional state negatively. Things that scare us or make us want to respond with
anger or violence. These are commonly referred to as “triggers.” We repress these things
because it is the right thing to do if we want to function properly within a typical, legal, social
construct. There are things we don’t understand, things we don’t want to understand and
things we think should never even be considered. We know our place and we function as such.
Unfortunately, this poses a problem. Since so many of us believe along the lines of “that’s just
the way it is,” changing the overall direction of a society becomes very difficult. Everyone is
focused on maintaining what they currently have and not losing any more with a white
knuckled death grip and a smile on their face. We don’t share what we think because it could
trigger others or because it really is just flat out sick and we know it.

This brings us to tangental thinking. To understand “triggers” and how they affect our
political communication we have to understand this basic observation of how the mind works.
The root of this theory is Associative Recall. This means our entire memory is built on one thing
referencing another thing, referencing another thing, and so on until there is a massive web of
visual memories, emotions, and words all tied together in a vaguely organized glob of
information called the mind. Everyones mind glob is organized differently.

One of humanities most functional and debilitating qualities is we can only access a
small amount of memory at a time. This means, in addition to the power to remember, we have
the power to forget. What we are thinking and feeling in the present moment is only the tip of
the iceberg. Lurking beneath whatever we are actively expressing inwardly to ourselves or
actively expressing outwardly to others is the inexplicable, chaotic disaster that is primal
humanity. Luckily, the conscious mind is very powerful and we have a great deal of control over
it relative to a few factors that will be discussed later. We can ignore internal or external
thoughts or ideas because they trigger negative emotions such as guilt, fear, shame or anger.

Tangental thinking is the root of how we will go about understanding, well,

understanding. What does it mean to understand something? Is it knowing a fact? The simple
this equals that formula? Is it the ability to apply that fact in the real world, to make use of it?
Or is it something much more? For the purpose of this text, I will define understanding as the
awareness of a fact or opinion, true or false, and its implications. Just because you can state
the words that reference a factual pattern or a belief doesn’t mean you perceive the
ramifications of what those words are referencing. One of the major words that I will be
dissecting later on is the word Capitalism. Do you really know the implications of a totally free
market or the right to massive ownership? Knowing what the dictionary says, in my opinion, is
not understanding. Understanding is the intentional creation of an organized web of information
within the mind capable of dynamic change relative to the introduction of new and even
conflicting information. A sort of truth checker and a means of collecting all information, good
or bad, right or wrong, simply for the purpose of knowing, should a need for it arise. So, while
the process of total understanding is never complete, one can reach a level of success in
which information can be extracted from the lack of information or incorrect information. In
other words, if you are presented with a lie, you can imply the truth from the lack thereof. True
understanding is dynamic and accepting. Nothing is quite 100%. It is kind and does not
respond with anger, even in the face of linguistic conflict.

So, what then is a tangent thought? Typically, when we think of someone going “off on
a tangent,” it’s because they’ve said something that seems completely unrelated to the
expected direction of the conversation. Exploring the exact metaphor of the word tangent,
which is a line that intersects a function at exactly one point, the function will be the
conversation and the tangent line will be a train of thought related by that point, which in this
context could be emotional, linguistic, etc. So, if you were not expecting the idealistic flow of
the conversation to change the way it did, chances are high that the other person has an
associative memory or emotion that you do not. While this takes you off guard, it is perfectly
natural for them as their automatic associative recall fires and they remember something which
is then communicated by means of words or nonverbal signals such as facial expression, body
language, or tone of voice. Tangental thinking can also be a means of intentionally associating
things that may not seem as if they are related, but they are, as all things relate to each other. It
is the nature of reality.

Certain topics are triggering for some individuals because of tangental thinking and the
automatic associative recall caused by the reintroduction of the idea into their conscious mind.
When their conscious mind comes into contact with an actively repressed or rejected ideal, the
person will often respond emotionally, rather than rationally (a learning response), like fight or
flight, but with the mind. When it comes to certain genres of idea, the “ego” is put into a
vulnerable position and the person will either fight and reject the idea by “disproving” it with
some form of logic or flee from the idea by repressing the entire memory of the exchange and
never thinking of it again. While this effectively protects the ego and maintains overall
emotional stability, it prevents any type of learning from happening, other than, of course,
learning to more effectively repel conflicting ideas or a devaluation of personal status.

Chapter 2: A Functional Definition of the Ego

In this chapter I will provide a functional definition of the “ego” as it relates to overall
world view, psychological and emotional maturity, and the resulting patterns of behavior. The
personal ego is important to overall society as it has a heavy influence on habitual decisions.
As we know, human beings are not that different from one another fundamentally, meaning if
one has a sustainable habit, in all likelihood, there are many others with the same habit. These
groups of people with similar habits are best observed from a marketing standpoint. The
overhead required to sustain a mass movement of people toward a similar thing is the root of
economics and the creation of infrastructure. The way we see ourselves is dependent on the
things we do. Maybe someone is a “car guy” or a “smoker.” Maybe someone is a fan of
something or proficient at a certain hobby. These things define who we are, which is why they
are so important to the ego.

The typical definition of the ego is the part of the mind that deals with one’s view of
themselves and their self importance. While there are many available endeavors into a
comprehensive exploration of the “ego,” it is simply a word, and as we have learned, words
mean very different things to different people. This is my exploration of the word’s meaning for
the purpose of developing a concept of why political discussion is so difficult. The endgame of
this exploration is to find enough common ground about what it means to be an inherently
fragile and flawed human being to come to some conclusions about what is necessary to
continue life on a massive scale and the compromises necessary therein.

The ego is very important because it is the often the reason to choose ignorance over
objective perception. The ego is comprised of so many things besides the valuation of self, but
valuation of self does fall in the primary subjective category that the ego thrives on: judgement.
We as human beings are incapable of not judging. We must judge. It is how we differentiate
good from evil, or, more functionally, things that will kill us from things that will not kill us. The
moment someone tells you not to judge, you should probably do the exact opposite. Chances
are good that they are hiding something sinister from you. The real enemy in the realm of
judgement is improper judgement. In other words, when we think something is one thing and it
actually turns out to be something else. Something that hurts us, or worse.

We have come to the part where I begin to differentiate right from wrong. This is why I
am careful to alert you of the fact that this is an opinion, which I place before you so you can
judge me. I will be using generalizations to make points, not proof. It will be up to you to decide
if you agree or not, and why. This, again, is intended to be a discussion starter, not a statement
of facts. I will state everything as if it is the truth, as it is my truth at this time and, hopefully like
everyone else, my truth is up for improvement and commentary, as I am aware of the
mysterious and unknowable nature of reality. Also I will be guessing at things that I suppose are
technically private informatio. It’s not libel or slander if I’m not claiming to have the undisputed
truth or naming names.

 The entire point of the mind is to store and manipulate potentially useful information in
effort to prolong survival and promote the development of an “artificial” environment maximally
conducive to the necessities of reproduction and child rearing or, for some, the acquisition of
pleasure. But this is exclusive to “higher thinking.” The average human is still heavily
dependent on emotions for decision making. It is widely accepted that the primary purpose of
emotions is to make split second survival decisions, encourage reproductive behavior, and
draw an organism to things considered to be “pleasant.” Unfortunately for us, emotions tend to
be less effective than the conscious, rational mind at making good, long term decisions, or
plans, hence the evolution towards thought over feeling. There exists though, a grey area
between emotions and ideas. This is an extension of the imagination. As previously discussed
with triggering topics, emotions are closely related to words in the sense that words can trigger
emotions. This has proven to be extremely problematic.

How can you teach a man who refuses to learn? Hurt him. This is the basis of warfare
and the basis of politics: where should we point the gun? Why would someone so
wholeheartedly cling to incorrectness as if their life depended on it? The answer is in ego. Most
of us long for praise and acceptance. It makes us feel good to know that we have done
something worth doing. Some of us begin to fulfill this need by self stimulation, in other words,
we constant reassure ourselves that we have made the right decision. Heathy ego comes when
we believe that we have done something worth doing when we receive positive affirmations or
praise from others. When in the face of a conflicting view about what we think or do, we must
either make the decision to reenforce our own stance with the things that we presently believe
or change the way we think or act according to the feedback we are receiving from another.
This can be tricky, as sometimes, the conflicting party is incorrect in their imposition of
judgement. Right or wrong in what we are doing, most of us are also guilty of letting our
emotions make the call for us. We are emotionally attached to the belief that we are justified in
our behavior or thoughts which causes an internal struggle between what we want to believe
versus what is correct.

The greatest sign of emotional maturity is not becoming angry or resentful in the face of
conflicting information. When we are completely at peace with who we are, there is no need for
emotional response to conflict. We know what we do and why we do it. We know that others
are permitted to have opinions and tastes that are not the same as ours. When we realize we
have made a mistake, we admit it and do our best to change or grow out of old, destructive
habits. The most difficult obstacle to overcome in the pursuit of self actualization is admitting
that we are only as good as we are with room for improvement. The emotional self that wants
to believe everything we do is right is seductive in its convenience of self assurance. The more
we rely on these feelings, the more it hurts our feelings to admit that we were wrong and
change the way we think and behave. It is a vicious cycle.

One of the most important lessons religion teaches us is that it’s not what’s in the mirror
that matters, It’s what you do to help others throughout their lives, what you do to contribute to
the whole of society, how you respond to your flaws and your shortcomings, the example you
set and what you do when you learn that you’ve made a mistake or have been proven wrong,
as we all are at some point. But what happens when we simply ignore others and tell ourselves
what we want to hear to make ourselves feel good about what we do or have done? When we
ignore what’s right in front of us and charge headlong into the exact thing that is destroying us.
Unfortunately, as a collective, we are too numbered to not have a lasting impact on the finite
world around us. We feel as if we are just one, and one is not going to effect anything that
much. Or maybe everyone does it so its okay. These are just two of the most common
improper justifications for repetitive destructive behavior. Why do we engage in destructive
behavior? For pleasure! The emotion: pleasure! How ironic, is it not, that in the pursuit of
happiness we contribute to our own suffering.

As I write this, I feel justified, I feel intelligent, I feel as if I am finally accomplishing

something I have only dreamed about. I’m writing my own political philosophy with roots in
human psychology. But why am I even doing this? It is my own pain that has motivated me to
sit here for hours on end writing something that I know could be dangerous or offensive, or
worse, utterly ignored and pointless. So why do I continue to do this? Because for whatever
reason I can relate to particular philosophers of the past. I want to be like them. While I have
had my share of pleasure and at times happiness, I have lived a life of mistakes and misery,
many of which were imposed by my own hand. So, am I, writing this, chasing my dream, or
charging headlong into what is destroying me? Maybe my dream is the culprit. My own need to
find a solution to the worlds greatest problems and solidify my place in history! Ego! I do not
set myself apart! Is the world really a safe place? Have I really been the cause of all of my own
problems? Just a troubled child grown into a troubled young adult? Or is this my redemption?
Proof that I have learned more from my mistakes than I could ever learn in a classroom? Proof
that my whirling, angry, THC fueled meditations on why the world seems so damaged and
unfair were actually worth something to the world? That maybe I have collected enough
information about the basic facts of life to serve some purpose besides wondering if everything
I do is a mistake and that I am an arrogant fool chasing a pipe dream. If I seem self-assured it
is because I am acting that way. To make myself feel self-assured! Self stimulation: my self
destruction. Considered by me to be a process of learning and self driven maturation. Nobody
has venerated my efforts as of yet and all of this is likely futile relative to the pursuit of
recognition, but still I push on, with only my own judgement guiding me. Swimming against the
stream in hopes of reward. So human! But the truth is I don’t know. The fact is I may fall flat on
my face. Those who inspire me were met with much resistance! The masses have always
gravitated toward the popular, which is typically safe or at least pleasurable. Why not!? But it
was not I who did not accept them, it was them who did not accept me… at first. And so far I
have not been met with any resistance, because I am alone. And that is why I write. For my
ego.

My primary subject of research is of course my self! How can one see into another mind
save for talking, drawing, writing, and now digital communication? Especially when so much of
what we communicate is simply a lie for entertainment and some of us are so motivated to
make ourselves appear to others (and ourselves) as better than we are. Why do we do this?
Otherwise life seems so meaningless and boring. I have full access to only one mind to study,
my own. To know yourself is the only way to learn to control yourself with meaningful intent. To
admit to yourself all of the things that cause you pain and face them as they are. To face
yourself as you are, at this point in history, as what you are a part of, to see what you have
done. What have I done? Most of us are not quite sure as the fragility of human consciousness
permeates all of our experiences differently.

The ego is what we see in the world, or rather, what we want, or must, see to feel okay.
All of us probably believe something about how the world came to be or our place in it. What
happens when we die? Am I a good person or not? Because words have a distinct emotional
power, the words we use to form our concept of our surroundings have an impact on our
behavior and the things we are willing to do. This is where I must perform an objective analysis
of religion, as it is a prolific tool of judgement, meaning it is frequently the root of an individuals
ego. This is the root of mine, which I choose to share with you so you may judge me. Hopefully,
even if you hate me, you will think something you have never thought before and maybe, I can
show you a way of thinking that is either so wrong it is the perfect opposite of what is right,
thus showing what is right, or something that you agree with and encourages you to harness
your own creative and productive abilities to make the world a better place. Religion should not
be something that controls your mind, but rather a link into your community that provides a
wonderful look at other upstanding individuals for you to interact with. But think, if an evil man,
by threat of violence, could alter the message prophets of God had given their lives to spread,
would he?

For much of humanities existence, religion has permeated culture and organization.
Why? We need something to believe in, to calm our uncertainties of limited existence and
make us less afraid when times are terrible and war is afoot. Fortunately, for most of us in the
United States, times are not terrible and we are living in abject abundance. There is far less to
fear. I do not dispute the existence of God, but potentially the way we organize in order to
appease this universal being. Religion is very useful but this is the problem: the way we
function in response to the thought that there is an all powerful being protecting the good and
punishing the evil. This thought can lead to an ineffective way of considering the world’s
problems. God must be just, God must be fair, we think. But the truth is something very
different if you believe that evil has any power to hurt us. We see violence on the news every
night but we learn to tune it out. We become desensitized to the suffering of others that are so
far away from us. We live in sometimes perfect comfort, believing that what we have done or
what our family has done makes us deserve what we have. Why? Only because we believe
God is all powerful and places people were they need to be.
This seems like a strange tangental thought process when discussing the ego as you
had known before, but as you can see, I have linked ego to judgement, and judgement to
religion. This is the power of tangental thinking, and the power of skepticism combined with a
desire to know everything, even things that are scary or disturbing. The total truth of reality is
unknowable. You cannot contain the entirety of existence within your mind. You don’t even
know what’s going on down the street. Not knowing is scary. It’s scary for everyone. It’s scary
for me and I’m betting it’s scary for you. It would be nice to know that I am safe. It would be
amazing to have total trust in the future, to know that everything I do is the right thing to do.
That those I follow are delivering a message of truth guided by the ultimate hand of God. Why
do we feel this need to know and to trust? How do we know what to know and who to trust
when the information and ideas in all of our minds is mostly from some outside source? This is
the story of our development from child to adult. From complete ignorance and innocence to
knowing the “real” world and acting on ones own will and desires.

Most of us are born and are subsequently raised by our parents who were born and
raised by their parents who were born and raised by their parents and so on and so forth to the
beginning of life itself. When we are infants we are defenseless. We are completely dependent
on our parents for everything. As we develop into tiny, walking, talking humans, our parents
teach us how to talk, how to behave and treat others, how to function, as their parents did the
same for them. We copy their behaviors unknowingly. Our parents are the first people we learn
to trust, or distrust as we begin to think for ourselves. But we are not so isolated as to be
effected by only our parents. Looking back throughout history there has been such a
staggering amount of violent conflict I almost don’t believe it. It seems strange from a
perspective of living in such relative peace but people killing each other by the thousands was
a reality once upon a time. Frankly, it’s terrifying and for someone who would rather believe that
safety is reality, it’s easy to gloss over and discount as a lie. Most of us have never seen war.
We live in a time of incredible prosperity and technological advancement. It’s very easy to think
that God has given us access to all of these things we are able to manufacture, but the truth is
far more sickening. War has given us all of the things we love. Without constant conflict, what
motivation does the human race have to push foreword? Without the threat of death and pain,
what is the reason to survive? More specifically, what is the reason to toil without the threat of
never-ending torture? Mankind has some strange tendency toward animalistic domination and
enslavement of those thought to be weak or inferior. That is primitive war, not the global
policing we assume to be the case today.

War and slavery are the most sickening and disgusting practices that the human race
partakes in. Religion has, in the past, been used to motivate war and unite countries against an
evil force bent on destroying everything sacred. As we mature, it can be observed in groups of
children and adolescents, the natural gravitation toward warfare. I am the strongest, the best. I
am the leader. This mate is mine and I will fight over it. You are my subordinate, I tell you what
to do. You are not good enough for our group, you do not fit in here. Improper judgement and
emotional reactiveness is the primary setting. Religion is supposed to be the voice of reason,
the means of transcending our animal urges to take without thinking. We want what we want
and we deserve it. Not much thought is put into punishing another for their indiscretions
against you. They deserve it. An eye for an eye. But let’s be fair, it’s never quite so simple, and
this is the root of conflict, another example of improper judgement. Someone hurts you so you
hurt them back, but they don’t think that what you thought they deserved was actually fair and
just. Now they feel as if you deserve to be hurt back again. And frankly, you don’t deserve that,
because they got what they deserved, now they are just lashing out on some stupid idea of
fairness that is clearly not correct. So you ask your friend, and they ask theirs. Some agree,
some do not, but now there is a conflict past two people, now there is a war.

Both you and them see themselves as justified in their actions, neither believes he has
made a mistake. So they continue their feud. On the most massive scale we have seen
different religions murder each other over being right or wrong, over one side perpetuating a
belief that is clearly lies to corrupt their women and children, to corrupt their soldiers and their
entire social organization. We have seen people of the same religion kill each other over who is
the true leader or what interpretation is correct. Over what rules should be in place. But every
side believes they are the undisputed truth. The way they imagine the words that symbolize the
things that they believe in is their ego. It is they way they see themselves and their place in the
world. I am a child of the one true God and if you do not believe in the one true God then you
are my sworn enemy, as I must defend what is sacred. This is a rather extreme, and in most
cases, a dated, view on God, but in lesser developed countries it still exists as an emotion, as a
belief.

When someone does something bad for a good reason, they probably will want to
always believe that reason they did that bad thing is the absolute truth. The more you commit
to an ideal, the more you act on it, the more you do things that are evil for that good reason,
the more you must stick to your guns and stand by what you have done. The more you pray, or
think the same linguistic pathways over and over again, the more you bow to your leader or
praise your God, the more you must stick by what you believe because knowing that your life
has been devoted to something awful is too painful to bear. This is not a point against
practicing Christianity in its modern form, I am an American, I live in America, and I am aware
of the massive christian population in this country. There is nothing wrong with anything you do
if you live your life like Jesus Christ would actually want you to. There is nothing wrong with
teaching your children to pray and have faith in another day. To teach them that there is always
someone watching and to have integrity. My point is that there is also nothing wrong with not
being a Christian.

While I have never read the bible, it is my strong assumption that there are many things
within the book intended for surviving more primitive times. We have such a different society
now. In the past 50 years we have probably made more overall progress as a species than in
the past 5000 years combined. We have a different standard of cleanliness, a different standard
of what it means to be free, and above all else, a massive trove of scientific information that we
use to save ourselves from disease and build powerful machines. Our progress is glaring! The
brilliance of mankind is more obvious than ever! There are so many beautiful people and so
many beautiful places. There is so much to love! But still so much to fear, as we have created
mortifying tools of pain and destruction. We live in a different time. If you have any sense that
the rate of our consumption and waste could soon bring rampant destruction to God’s
creation, what do you think Jesus would want you to do? Double down on your ego, on your
sense that what you do day in and day out is the right thing to do, that your leaders are the
voice of God and are guiding you in the direction of prosperity and happiness? If he died so
God would forgive you for your sins, do you think that means that you are free to just keep
sinning? It would appear that the continuation of humanities “sin,” which for me, I consider to
be warfare, slavery, and turning the blind eye while it happens and reaping the benefits, that we
will destroy everything. Want a real apocalypse? Want real judgement by the real God? Just
keep assuming that what you do has no impact. Just keep assuming that the “leaders” (if they
even deserve that title, which is certainly up for debate) are making choices that are in
everyone’s best interest, not just theirs. Look at Soviet Russia. A shining example of rampant
greed and poor organization. While their climate was certainly not doing them any favors, they
went from a totalitarian monarchy to a totalitarian oligarchy “in the name of the working class",
to now, still, a totalitarian oligarchy with more technology, production power, and nuclear
weaponry. The question now is, why is it still like this? Why are we not equal all throughout the
world? How do certain men manage to have so much power and others so little. Is it God that
has established this hierarchy? Or is it man acting on his original sin? If we have free will, then
God cannot be an all powerful being, but rather a being that is fragile like us, that we can hurt,
that we must protect from chaos and evil. We are responsible for the fate of ourselves and the
fate of our God, whatever God that may be. If everyone dies, who will be left to appreciate God
or his creation?

This is why we double down on thoughts and feelings that are clearly improper to
anyone observing our behavior from the outside. Because we want to know that we know we
are right, and what’s the easiest way to know you’re right? Just believe it. Simple as that. I’m
not saying that anyone’s religion is wrong or bad, I’m simply saying that judgement is easily
misused and belief is incredibly powerful. It’s not usual that people are stupid or easily tricked,
it is that people are fearful and do not want to be hurt or killed. When we are disciplined by
parents or caretakers when we are young, those feelings and habits linger throughout
adulthood unless some dramatic psychological change takes place.

Obedience comes typically from either love or fear. When we are children, if we love our
parents and our caretakers, if we are happy and grateful, it seems logical that we would want
to try to make them happy and do what we can to earn their love, whatever form it may come
in. We respect their beliefs and often accept them as our own. If we come from a chaotic,
disorganized household or a household that values strict obedience with the threat of
punishment, we, as children, live in fear. In the chaotic household we are punished for
seemingly no reason. Things happen in our parents lives that spill over into ours, maybe
through an abusive parental relationship or addiction. Maybe they run out of money and we go
without food or a dangerous stranger introduces us to something sinister. Whatever seems to
alleviate the fear, children of these circumstances will gravitate toward. In the totalitarian
household, there is always the fear of making a mistake. Sometimes the totalitarian parent is so
fearful or paranoid that you are doing something wrong that you receive punishment in the
form of anger for no reason. You live in constant fear and seek anything to alleviate this fear.
Unfortunately, what many find is nothing good. Some, though, will cling to education, the
rational decision, but many will become a victim of their own misunderstood emotions and lash
out against themselves or others. Many find drugs or some form of depraved sexuality.

The entire structure of our society is built on a world war! In the past we have done
things to survive and cooperate in the face of what is essentially a group of bullies with guns or
swords! Let’s say you are in a confined space with ninety nine other unarmed people. There is
a limited amount of food in this space. Some of the women are very beautiful and others are
average or maybe sick or elderly. There are ten men with weapons. One suggests that they can
control the supply of food and take the most beautiful women for themselves, against their will,
by simply threatening violence. Some of them disagree. The dissenters are quickly slain and
the most willing to act violently become the most powerful men in the space. There is work to
do. The unarmed men who refuse to work are slain. The unarmed women who refuse to
perform sexually are slain. The unarmed population is stricken with fear and acts submissively
to the threat of violence for the sake of survival. This is a small scale example of the typical
results of war. So what is politics? Since the world is so massive and contains so many people,
politics is the attempt of the hopefully nonviolent and rational to encourage the armed and
unarmed masses to work in a particular direction. In the real world, we hope that the American
militant powers are working for the common good. What are we working for? Is it the profit
alone?

We all want to believe that the work we do is important, we want others to think that
what we do is good, we want to be liked. We want to think that we deserve what we have. We
want our ego to reflect to us that we are good. That is, I would say, “normal.” But ego can be
based on things other than “good.” For some of us, our ego is hateful. It is not founded in
anything even remotely good. These would be the “Godless” or the “Nihilists.” People who
wholeheartedly believe that there is absolutely no reason to live a life of restraint and
productiveness. They take pride in people fearing them and are attracted to others who strike
fear in the typical person. They seek pleasure, material possessions, and above all, power.
Unfortunately for those of us who are faithful and live safely, the nihilistic psychopath is hungry
for unlimited consumption. His or her ego is boosted by sexuality and acquisition. He does not
care who he hurts clawing his way to the top through violence or other nefarious means, nor
does he care how much he waists in the pursuit of pleasure. He hides his true colors under a
cordial mask but he does not care what happens to anyone but himself, nor does he care if he
destroys the earth in pursuit of domination. It is not that religions indefinitely create a corrupt,
dysfunctional ego, it’s that they tend to create an ego with an ultra-positive perspective on the
world, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but when there are people willing to hurt others and
your ego does not allow you to think that something must be done about this, because you
think that nobody is bad, because you don’t personally know any bad people, there is a
problem. You, as an individual, have power and influence within this nation and it is your
responsibility to make the right choice. But what is the right choice when everything already
seems so complete and functional within our country? We see the world through the lenses of
first world success. We only always have just enough for the enormous amount of stuff we
want. Or just barely enough to get by.

So after much tangental explanation, we return to the major influencing factor of the
ego: emotions. As we have established, words influence emotions, and emotions cause us to
derive happiness or pleasure from a thought or they give reason for dispute or simply forgetting
the offensive idea. What would life be without emotions? Despite the fact that they get us into
trouble or cause us pain, they are also what bring all sorts of positivity and enjoyment. Those of
us who attempt to separate ourselves completely from our feelings, there is a reason for this,
and the reason is probably that you have endured something unfair that was never quite
reconciled. There are words that make us feel good. You are safe. You are okay. The world is a
beautiful place and you are loved unconditionally. There are words that make us feel bad.
Danger could be anywhere. You never know who anyone really is inside their mind. There is a
large scale economic and proxy war taking place and there are enemies plotting against our
country. The number of automobiles and our consumption of electricity is a ticking time bomb
that could destroy our atmosphere. Anyone could be moving drugs in their car and you would
never even know. There are people that hate you all over the globe because of the country you
live in or the color of your skin.

It almost seems like the words that make you feel bad sort of disprove those words that
make you feel good. Sort of disconcerting to say the least. Many of us have friends and
families and love our lives and use the options available to us through our countries private
production infrastructure to, well, pleasure ourselves. We want to be happy. Who doesn’t? We
don’t want to think about all that negative stuff because what can I do about it? Isn’t that
someone else’s job? I’ve got enough to worry about! I’ll leave politics up to the politicians and
business up to the businessmen. Big mistake. What makes you think anyone with the option to
make unlimited profit and doesn’t do anything but “donate” money to “charity” is even
remotely trustworthy? Wealth is the ultimate temptation. It opens every door to any pleasure
you could possibly imagine. I don’t see a single one of them working to fix the economy. In
fact, when I look at our government, I see a machine that has had a wrench thrown in every
gear. When I look at our businesses, I see unbridled greed and elitism.

What is the emotion that must be overcome to change the way the world works? What
is preventing our country from actually doing what needs to be done? What is preventing us
from openly discussing politics and religion? Anger, envy, fear, guilt, shame, pride and all the
things we secretly desire. The seven deadly sins. I would say envy and pride walk hand in hand
toward pain and ultimate demise. We all have a need to feel as if we are important or special.
We all want what we want and many of us will go to great lengths to get it. These things are
distracting from the ultimate goal: survive. Despite our differences, we are all in this together,
and if we choose to fight rather than compromise and learn humility and sacrifice, we will
become massively successful at destroying everything we love.

I could try to identify the mistakes we make in our ego’s, but it would be pointless as we
all have flaws and always will. If everything were perfect life would be a bit boring. Luckily, even
in utopia, it wouldn’t be perfect. There would still be conflict, discovery, growing up, dying,
natural disasters, exploration, entertainment, mistakes, and so much more. Just no all out war.
Nobody will every see the world or themselves perfectly, it’s not in our nature. No point in
criticizing for the sake of criticism. I think the main issue we face is simply distraction and a
lack of information. We all know there are terrible things happening in other countries, but we
have no easily accessible outlet to help other than supporting the troops and donating to
charity. But, simply believing that some things need to change and that there is, in fact, a better
way, is a step in the right direction. Because eventually, something will happen, and if you’re on
board already, then you’ll be on the front line of history, helping make the transition from war to
relative peace. “Utopia.” It seems idealistic, but it’s not perfection, just highly functional
organization of all people toward the common goal of survival. The first step is getting to know
yourself for who you really are and conquering your ego. Admitting to yourself the things you
secretly desire and forgiving yourself for your past mistakes. We are all human and at the very
least we can all learn some compassion. The strong are meant to defend the weak, not take
advantage of them. It seems counter intuitive for the strongest to lay down their lives defending
the weak, but that’s already happening. If the strongest of the good do not destroy the
strongest of the evil, the evil will keep growing until it consumes everything. It is parasitic at its
core and has no place on earth.

Part 2: Government

Chapter 3: Standardizing Forms of Governance

One of the major issues with thinking that voting is actively participating in government
is that there is serious grey area between the common forms of government. What are we really
voting on? It seems like the only power the government really has is to spend money that they
take in the form of taxes. Seems highly inefficient. Both parties tend to yield similar results as
our government tends to remain in a state of gridlock. Similar to psychiatric diagnoses, which I
will be discussing at length later on, if you look hard enough, you will find all forms of
government within the United States and the world. I will attempt to redefine the most common
forms of government in more generalized ways as to simplify how we see what government is
and to construct my own form of idealistic government: Luxurism.

When you take a look at every popular form of government you will notice something:
they exist together within our nation on varying scales. We think of the United States as a
“capitalist” country but there are elements of “socialism” within it as well. We think of the US as
a democracy, but there are elements of meritocracy and oligarchy within. We almost never
think of the US as having elements of totalitarianism within the government, but there are
organizations within the US that operate like a totalitarian regime. Many of these organizations
are not necessarily affiliated with the government, but none the less, they exercise their
influence over fragments of our nation. Since this country is such a multifaceted melting pot of
culture and organization, it seems logical that we should have a more accurate way of defining
exactly what we are doing here.

Government is simply a collection of communication channels between individuals

working to accomplish specific tasks using specific resources. The type of task and the way
they are accomplished defines the style of government.

Anarchy is the simplest form of government as it is the lack of government. It seems like
it could be functional. No taxes, free trade, no pesky police force to worry about, everyone
should be able to take care of themselves and live the way they would like to. Anarchy is the
oxymoron of government. It will always result in totalitarian control. Not only that, but how
would we even go from where we are at now in the US to anarchy without some sort of terrible
catastrophe? Without an overarching means of keeping the peace, the smallest of
disagreements could turn into something major if left unchecked. A few bad apples could take
advantage of the lack of structured law and order and build an army. The biggest gang will rule
and government is inevitable. Humanities natural inertia would draw us into conflict and
eventually death. It would be fighting necessity to deny mass scale cooperation as, otherwise,
something so simple as the weather could mean widespread famine with no allies to help us
out. A starving man facing death is far more motivated to commit an act of violence than a man
who helps others and is helped in his time of need. Anyone claiming anarchy is the best form
of government should probably not be trusted as they are probably involved in activity
considered to be illegal in our current government.

Totalitarianism is the enemy of life. It is a parasite that propigates warmongering and

fear. It is generally thought to be one supreme ruler with total control, similar to a monarchy, but
ask yourself, how does one man secure a position like that with zero dispute? He can’t.
Totalitarianism doesn’t exist and neither does a monarchy. The supreme leaders (kings) are
symbols of a regime that looks a lot more like a militant oligarchy. While the king does possess
a significant amount of power, he is not the source of his own power. Wherever there is a king
or a dictator you will also find a class of very wealthy men. The king gets all the attention while
the rich relax, protected and unknown to the public. Without reward in addition to fear, there
would be no motivation for the anyone to act. The rich upper class is the source of the kings
ability to pay his soldiers. The slave class or impoverished class is the lifestyle comparison the
soldier needs to feel superior. This class is his to abuse to a certain extent based on racism or
other prejudice ideology. Alcohol and drugs are also a major component to the success of a
“king” as a drunken, stumbling public is far easier to manipulate for resources that an
educated, literate one. The feeling of power a soldier gets from killing and manipulating is
almost reward in itself. Loyalty is somewhere in there, but every instance is different.

An oligarchy is the most common form of government that exists. Some oligarchies
allow for more consumer input and richer lower classes than others, but they are oligarchies
none the less. A “member” of an oligarchy may not have any say whatsoever in the way the
nation is structured other than the things his dollar orders to be done. The things this class of
people consume call for manufacturing overhead somewhere: employees, servants, etc. The
defining characteristic of an oligarch is financial freedom. This means simply that the person is
allowed to do basically whatever they want as long as they can afford it, which they probably
can. They do nothing to earn a privilege which shouldn’t exist anyway. Consider them the
biggest consumers. In places we don’t care about, maybe an oligarch is just a high ranking
member of the militant organization that rules the country. He may have more responsibilities
than the global elitist of today, but he is still a very wealthy and free man compared to his
constituents. Oligarchs tend to defend being ultra-rich rather than having any worthwhile
political motive for the rest of us, as true public cooperation would be the end of anyone being
ultra-rich. Many of them are simply unmotivated and do as they please. It would not be the end
of being rich, rather, the end of being poor. As long as we do are not in violent rebellion or on
strike, everything is fine for them because we are essentially forced to buy what they sell
because they “own” the resources that we need to live and the businesses that we work for.
The working class does all the heavy lifting while the big money sits back and enjoys the fruits
of our labor, exercising their God given freedom.

A democracy is usually a lie told by an oligarchy to make the public feel like something
is being done for them, which is usually just enough to keep the masses mostly satisfied. War
is the single largest motivation to support any government, God being the second, but most
people in America don’t agree with war and there is a promised separation of church and state.
Just follow the money, who gets rich off this war or that war? Good luck finding that out,
private finances and all. But let’s just say more than half of our tax dollars go to war. War
motivates us with fear. We are afraid that the enemy will come to kill us if we do not unite
against him under our great leaders! If you’re not with us, you’re against us, this is war time.
Treason means death. Hopefully that phase of US history is over for good, it does seem that
way. We vote for our governors and senators and presidents, but what power do they really
have? The power to spend our tax dollars! And where does the government get tax dollars?
From businesses and citizens who participate (pretty much everyone, it’s not really a choice) in
the US economy. What are those tax dollars spent on? Mostly big guns, soldiers, and other
stuff that people need. When you think about how that money is spent, it can be grouped into
two major categories, human resources (people’s time and effort, which eventually turns into
natural resources or savings) and natural resources (raw resources from the ground that human
resources remove and refine). So we spend a whole lot of time voting on people who vote on
how to spend money when we should probably be thinking about overarching sociologistical
organization relative to human resources and natural resources. How much are you worth in
terms of money? Does money represent you? How much money would it take for you to let go
of your own life? Ethically, the answer should be human life is invaluable and worth preserving
no matter the type of person, but that’s not the way everyone sees it. My main point is that if
we were to organize ourselves based on efficiency of survival and conservation of resources
rather than blindly stabbing at making a profit in a market that is already dominated and
controlled, a vast majority of us would experience an improvement in our quality of life. Let’s
account for and vote on the distribution of human and natural resources to create, first, the
basis of survival, then the ability to pursue luxury lifestyles and personal freedom.

Meritocracy is the idea that promotions and advancement within a government or

organization are made based on achievement, trust and devotion. The Google definition is
advancement based on ability, the irony here is that within a government that is not aimed
precisely at the common good of the people, advancement will be based on the ability to keep
the current standards of operation rather than improving the standard of living for all people or
restructuring the way things are done in favor of efficiency over personal profit. The irony of
advancement based on ability in an organization with goals in the best interest of the wealthiest
class is that the selection process will almost always favor obedience rather than ability. The
most intelligent and compassionate people are kept on the outskirts of large organizations
because of their “extreme” and “dangerous” ideologies or their “conspiratorial” views of
society, but the reality of reality is far darker than many of us would like it to be. The most
fearful are likely to be the most intelligent as a closed off, secretive group of leaders never
bodes well for the public. And if you think humanity is not capable of atrocity look at Britains
imperialism, Americas slave era or the obvious example, Nazi Germany. War is conspiracy.

Theocracy is government based on religion. Despite the fact that the United States
promises a separation of church and state, religious leaders are still allowed to participate in
government, and thereby allowed to influence laws based on their own religious views. If we
look at countries overrun by religious extremism, their governments are highly influenced, if not
dictated, by religions morals. Religious law is imposed through militant enforcement and
dissenters are slain. The masses are ruled with fear and anyone who may decide to speak out
is murdered. In modern day America, christian extremists have managed, again, to prevent
social progress in the realms of sexuality, women’s rights, homosexual rights, and drug laws. It
is not that religion is bad, it just simply has no place in government.

Capitalism is the market equivalent of anarchy. In no way am I in favor of a command

economy, which is why I am in no way in favor of raw capitalism. The most basic pillar of
capitalism is the right to own something. You can own stuff! Thats what capitalism means. The
lack of regulation of how much you can own and what you can reasonably own is what our
modern day robber barons are fighting for. In completely unregulated capitalism, the biggest
gang will eventually grow to command the economy, leading, ironically, to what capitalism is
supposed to prevent: a command economy, or monopoly. One, or just a few, people in charge
of just about everything that is produced. If you think having a few massive “private”
corporations to choose from satisfies your idea of a “free market” and preserves the American
Dream of owning or participating in a unique, small business with your friends and other people
you love, then by all means, support the idea of “supply side” (command) economics.
Capitalism is the most basic requirement of a functional society. People need the right to own
things in order to be free.

Communism, in its most basic definition, is the specific organization of the smallest,
non-individual unit of a nation: a community. While we all think of communism being something
that implies a large, militant government ruling with an iron fist, it is exactly the opposite.
Dictators have a tendency to lie about their goals for a nation. For example, the Soviets
promised a system intended to bring the peasants and working classes out of abject poverty,
but what did they actually do? The exact opposite. They simply took total control of all means
of manufacturing, outlawed private industry and the nation went from one brutal dictatorship to
another brutal dictatorship. The only difference was that the new one lied better and forced
citizens to consume propaganda stating a revolution for the working class was at hand while it
was simply doing the exact opposite of what they were saying. In the communist manifesto,
step one is to centralize manufacturing overhead and power with the intent to fairly distribute
goods to the entire population. Soviet Russia literally failed on step one and the told the world
they were communists. They were the exact opposite of true communism. In fact, communism
was what Soviet Russia and the United States were fighting! They had a mutual enemy, that
mutual enemy being the traditional village economy! The perfect example of communism is a
small village! A small, self sustaining village where all members have a job and everyone helps
sustain everyone and nobody gets a free ride, not even the “village elders.” The question is
why is a traditional village the enemy? The answer is it is not profitable. A traditional village
does not use technology, it does not manufacture or export, it does not participate in the game
of paper finances and it does not have a need to collect whatever caches of natural resources
may be available on the land they occupy. What the United States and Soviet Russia both
wanted was resource control and cheap manufacturing. With a group of people who basically
live off the land and have little need, if any, for money or the things it can buy, it is easy to
organize what is essentially outsourced slavery. While we slowly improve their “quality of life
standards” after completely destroying their original way of life, our “leaders” exploit their
weakness and our public’s lack of awareness of what goes on overseas. We assume that we
are exporting our awesome way of life, but really we are robbing people of what is theirs and
enslaving entire undeveloped nations for the purpose of satisfying our lower classes with
cheap, “quality" goods that could NEVER be manufactured for the “price” they are
manufactured for in slave nations in the United States, as our “cost of living” is too high. There
is an economic imbalance when one class of people consumes far more than they should ever
be able to. This leads to some not having enough which leads to revolution in most situations.
By “outsourcing” the most repetitive, difficult jobs to undeveloped nations, this imbalance is
patched with a band-aid. The only issue is moving these resources from their place of
manufacturing to the place in which they will be consumed after imposing militant control on
the population. America’s military does not have to do anything as making a few men rich
enough to build their own rich military made up of locals is not difficult. This is part of where an
unspeakable amount of petroleum is spent, moving processed goods overseas because we
can’t responsibly balance our economy from within, despite having the means and intelligence
to do so. Ever seen goods so cheaply manufactured that they are essentially garbage to begin
with? This is a symptom of a command economy. If a distribution company, such as WalMart
will purchase the good, the manufacturer profits, whether or not the product is even purchased
from the vendor. The “profit motive” leads to a massive amount of completely unnecessary,
wasteful manufacturing that benefits exactly nobody but the owner of the manufacturing
overhead. Maybe it “creates jobs.” What a joke. Looking back on all of the unsold trinkets and
breaks-on-the-first-use goods manufactured throughout history, it is amazing to me that
nobody stopped to think, maybe we don’t need all this stuff. Reaganomics, or trickle down
economics, or supply side economics or even more directly, a command economy decided by
the wealthiest individuals is to blame. The wealthy decide what needs to be manufactured and
hire people to figure out how to get it done. China’s government claims to be communist. But
look! Manufacturing overhead that caters to the lower classes of the United States of America
for profit to be had by the owners! Textbook “capitalism,” or better yet, raw totalitarianism. The
Chinese government is in no way communistic. The North Korean government is in no way
communistic. The definition of communism has been so bastardized that people believe it is a
dangerous ideal! But the reality is they don’t even know what the ideal is! Basic communism’s
fundamental suggestion is that the manufacturing overhead necessary to sustain human life be
owned by the people as a whole, meaning nobody profits off of it. Or better yet, in effort not
to massively disrupt our economy, the government reaps the profits and spends it on public
infrastructure. That is proper “communism”. Not the mess that always becomes of a militant
oligarchy.

Socialism, in its most basic form, is the way a society goes about connecting
communities logistically and informationally. In modern times, maybe one community is
centered on farming or animal husbandry and another manufactures and improves a type of
technology. How are these communities connected to provide for one another? The modern
“socialists” are simply super-capitalists. Let's give money to people so they can buy what they
need! Sounds like a good plan right? Wrong. It’s the endgame of Reaganomics. By providing
first world countries with something like “universal basic income,” which, in my opinion, is the
worst idea anyone has ever suggested in the history of the human race, you are providing the
right to own something manufactured by a labor outsourced country for literally no trade. It is
the most unfair thing I think I have ever seen proposed in modern politics. Let’s give all United
States citizens the right to take advantage of Chinese slave labor! Wow! So convenient!
Machine manufacturing can only do so much, there will always be a degree of necessary
human intervention in the building and manufacturing process. In the maintenance of machines
and in moving things from one place to another. By not balancing our own economy internally
for the purpose of preserving the “freedom” to be rich and not work a day in your life, or the
freedom of every person to have an inefficient petroleum powered vehicle, we are destroying
the earth and harming billions of lives. Instead of working to solve a problem for the long term,
we look for a way to keep the consumer coming back. To produce something that is designed
to break or slow down. Raw capitalism, as is something as absurd as anarchy, is fundamentally
unethical and will always result in brutal selfishness and elitism. I implore you to never trust a
man with excessive money, for temptation is always at his fingertips.

Chapter 4: Luxurism and it’s Implications

What is Luxurism? Luxurism is the idea that all people, regardless of race, ethnicity,
nationality, or background are guaranteed the most fundamental necessities of life by a
compassionate government that works in favor of the common good of all people and allows
everyone the ability to pursue personal reward in the form of luxury goods and lifestyle. This
will reasonably prevent death and create “jobs” to aid those who cannot provide for
themselves as a means of others to earn greater luxury. By creating a part of the economy that
functions independently of money, but provides reward for those who drive it, we can escape
impending inflation, relieve poverty, help individuals out of abusive situations, create a more a
efficient way of manufacturing advanced technology, improve infrastructure independent of
finances, decentralize the food industry, encourage small but interconnected business, and
ultimately prevent an impending war and environmental disaster.

Why have anything available for free? What would motivate people to work if they were
guaranteed a basic lifestyle? Before I clarify, I would like to first debunk an argument against
providing anyone with anything for free. One of the most annoying things I see in modern
society is inheritance. The children of the wealthy are guaranteed far more than a basic
lifestyle. In fact, they inherit a luxurious lifestyle. These people get the things that most of us
have to work for or go into debt for for free. It’s almost like a modern dynasty system.
Someone with money can use their money to fund a startup to get more money without having
to lift a finger. It’s not difficult to survive as long as you have plenty of money in America. So,
what’s the motivation for them to work? Boredom? Many of them do not work simply because
they don’t have to. It’s not the millennial generation that is entitled, it’s a class of people who
were born into money in the modern age. You don’t even have to be an elite to have a fall back
in case you get into legal trouble or need something, but most of us do not have this luxury.

It seems relatively fair that you should be able to pass what you’ve worked for down to
your children as the age old slogan of making a better life for your children is a fair point. What
we really pass down to our children though is a system. As long as we uphold the valuation
system called the United States Dollar, and currency we pass down to our children will be valid
to sustain their survival and whimsical desires. What if there was a potential for a better system
that would do the same, but in a more fair manner? We’ve all heard of (or experienced) the rich,
snobby kids that have everything and are dismissive to everyone they deem to be lesser than
them. To me, that seems like something that should be avoided. While we have an education
system that, in some places, is highly functional and churns out many intelligent, educated
people that go on to pursue higher education and gainful employment, there are areas within
the united states that are barely functional. Again, this comes down to a money issue. Strange,
right? While there are so many willing to give their time and this is a massively resource
abundant country, there isn’t enough trade representative to facilitate the trade. There are so
many who volunteer their time for nothing because they want to do good in their communities.
There are mission trips heading out all the time. All these willing people but nobody willing to
share resources.

In terms of basic survival instinct, the human animal should fend for himself over
anyone else, guaranteeing his own survival and the privilege to procreate. This instinct is the
opposite of altruism, as self preservation, in a survival circumstance, could mean the untimely
death or deprivation of another. When your own life is at stake, it seems natural to defend it. In
modern times, the human being is a bit more complex than live or die. Circumstance has
allowed many of us to “evolve” past the point of basic survival driven behavior and into ego
driven behavior. No longer is our life being threatened by the environment, predators, lack of
food, etc. allowing us to pursue our own idea of what life should be like for us. The upper
middle class suburban “bubble” effect is a great example of this. A child is raised in what
seems to be a completely controlled environment where little, if any goes wrong and acts on
his or her own desires relative to expenditure of money, self expression, media consumption,
friendship, relationships/sexuality, religion, career, etc. The child is rarely, if ever threatened on
a primal level because there is always enough money to get what they need and usually
enough to get what they want as well. While there are plenty of things that can go wrong, even
in the bubble, this individual will likely still be thinking along the lines of self expression or
communal belonging rather than being locked into

Welfare is the second instance of people getting something for nothing in this country.
While it is fairly difficult to collect these benefits due to the long and discriminate application
process, many still are able to collect money from the government in order to survive. One of
the major issues with this is many who need or deserve it are not able to get it because there is
only so much money to go around. Welfare is undoubtedly a controversial issue and there are
many who would like to do away with the process altogether. The only problem with this is
individuals in less fortunate situations would likely not survive otherwise. The other issue with
the government cutting a check is the fact that money can be spent on anything. Not only that,
but food stamps are able to be spent on unnecessary or unhealthy items

Part 3: A Critique of Society