we have a situation in our economic and political life whereas
we have institutionalize inequality and disparity in wealth and freedom
and influence…Rousseau basic starting point and his first claim
to fame is that men are evil and man is good… meaning
that we are naturally good and that we have been turned to “bad” or
“evil” by our society and its institutuionalize inequality…
the man who was first able to fence in a piece of land and claim
it is his, was the begining of this source of institutionalize inequality…
and the state’s main purpose is to defend private property, as is claimed
by Locke…now Rousseau didn’t want to return to the state of nature,
as Hobbes put it, “life outside of society would be 'solitary, poor, nasty,
brutish and short”… we need society to allow us to escape this
state of nature… but how do we escape this institutionalize inequality
and still not exist in this state of nature?
society and its institutions have created “evil” in men…
but we need society… the GOP and its phony answer is
and is defined by Raygun, being the state itself is the problem,
the government is the problem… but that is not a solution…
removing the state brings us back to a state of nature where,
“life outside of society/government would be solitary…”
so we have a two part question, one, is man naturally good?
and two, is the state part of the problem as defined by Rousseau
and Raygun? The institutions of the state that create and foster
the institutionalize inequality that exists in the state, must those
institutions be eliminated? or do we have to do/try something else?
in my study of history, I understand that as the population grows,
the state/government must also grow to help organize society to
avoid the primitive state of nature that allows life to be "solitary…
the rise of government and its institutions comes from the rise of
population…you want to limit government? you must reduce
the population and that isn’t really possible without
large scale genocide…and thus that answer is not available to us…
we have to find the answer with the understanding that
we have certain restrictions forced upon us…
we have massive population… we have already in place, institutions that
will fight to maintain their privilege place, and we have an autocracy,
one of wealth, that have control over the institutions we have such as
the legal system, the legislative system and the executive branch…
they will not willingly give up their power and the protection of their wealth…
but it is clear in any analysis that it is wealth, that is the driver of
our current system, wealth and the protection of one’s wealth that
is the basis of our government today…
is one person having billions a problem? no, it is the fact and it is a fact,
that 500 people have the equal wealth as half the population of earth…
that is the problem… and those 500 people by virtue of their wealth,
control the means of government by bribes to the legislative and executive
system… why would the wealthy give millions upon millions of dollars
to members of congress if not to buy them? certainly not out of the goodness
of their heart… they are buying influence and buying the government, nothing
short of that…
so when we reduce it down, it becomes money that drives our economic
and political system… so, the answer becomes remove the money
and thus we can recover our rightful place as owners and
participants within the political process… because as of right now,
we have no part in government because the politicians listen to
the money and not to the citizens of this country… you buy
politicians so they listen to you and not the citizens of this country…
so we come around to the understanding that the institutionalize
inequality of our lives is there to stay unless we remove the
buying and selling of politicians…
so is Rousseau right? is men evil and man is good?
I think so… within limits…
Kropotkin