zandtao has moved away from calling the system "system-for-the-rich", and has started to call it "system-of-accumulation", and this is because of the divisions discussed in not-seeing-class. As soon as we describe "the rich" we have division; there is no division, we are a Unity that is conditioned.
Whilst that Unity is totally true, it does sound a bit idealistic - and is contra-indicated by observation. If we use the term system-for-the-rich there is a tacit implication that the rich are working for their money, that they control the system, and that in their control the system continues to cause all the harm - wars etc. When we see conditioned Unity, we see that the rich are not completely in control even though they clearly benefit. Their egos such as Musk might claim they are in control but what is in control is the system - the very accumulation itself.
 Accumulation during the pandemic
Let us consider the pandemic. The rich got richer but how many of those rich people said "how can we use the pandemic and the deaths of fellow humans to make a profit?" Few, if any. What happened grew out of the needs of the governmental system for accumulation to pay for the medical equipment and needs? The system sought the accumulation, the accumulation fulfilled those needs, the pandemic eventually became controlled by natural immunity - helped by vaccines or otherwise depending on viewpoint; many rich people became richer from their accumulations whilst many became poorer. It was conditioned responses of the system-of-accumulation - not particular intended creative actions. Of course there is a legitimate criticism of those rich people who benefitted; given that the conditioned system is the way it is, why didn't the rich try to counteract the conditioning through benefaction? What this aspect of the pandemic showed is that the system-of-accumulation controls rather than people, and all people including the rich need to fight against their conditioning to bring harmony and Unity. The rich need to consciously consider their accumulation, and develop strategies of harmony for using that accumulation - accumulation arises from their upbringing and conditioning, their path counters their conditioning. With accumulation comes the need for compassion, compassionate handling of the accumulation.
Two Economic Systems
We discussed the "bottom line is accumulation" here. We need to understand that there are two economic systems:-
 The economic system of accumulation
The economic system of daily life
In our economic system of daily life we live by economic rules such as supply and demand, we live by transactions such as at the local food market, and we need money to buy. Tacitly we assume that these are the economic laws of accumulation but that is far from the case.
The Economic Laws of Accumulation
Accumulation has its own economic laws. These are laws which include coercion, power and influence. Why do the big companies not pay tax? This is part of the economy of accumulation, accumulation is needed too much to pay tax. With regards to taxation, accumulation is in charge and not government. When accumulation comes to a community as a new company and factory, it can provide benefits bringing jobs and consequences that create a thriving community. To attract the accumulation local government offers the company benefits such as the tax breaks and other perks. Supply and demand applies to the products and the lives of the employees but accumulation has its own rules.
Governments support the System-of-accumulation
When governments lose control such as in the financial crisis of 2008, they do not follow the laws of local economics. In the financial crisis of 2008 they printed money - what is often called fiat money. It could be argued that if the government had paid all the mortgages of the sub-prime loans the crisis could have been averted. However they supported the system-of-accumulation, printed money to support the banking system, and gave bankers bonuses. This is system-of-accumulation economics - when it has failures governments re-finance it.
Accumulation and Investment
What drives our way-of-life is this system-of-accumulation where the accumulation is always looking to make the highest profit; accumulation is always looking to be invested. What are the economic laws of this investment? The investment makes profit - usually immediately, or it is withdrawn and moved to a new investment. Accumulation is an ongoing merry-go-round in which there are continued profits. If there are profits from the investments then that system is working for itself. The biggest implication of understanding this system-of-accumulation is that the system is not concerned about people - only dividend returns on the investments of the accumulation. This complete lack of compassion is integral to the harm that occurs in daily life, we have a system without compassion so our daily lives get no compassion from the system - only from each other.
The sub-prime crash shows this. For however long they could find customers the sub-prime mortgages were offered to people who could not pay, these mortgages were then disguised in hedge funds which were traded investments - comedic explanation. This worked for as long as it did - until it didn't then people lost their homes and there was a financial crash. This was not a failure of the system-of-accumulation because when money was printed the system continued. It was however a failure of government and its people in that both followed a system-of-accumulation that did not work for the people.
Sub-prime crash linked to internet bubble??
This following is partly a theory. Back in the 90s, accumulation invested in the internet. Whilst there was an internet bubble, accumulation was happy. Investments in the internet bubble made profits but when the bubble burst investment was looking for a place to invest. Here is the theory, was the increased accumulation of the internet bubble the source of the finance at the basis of the hedge fund mortgages of the sub-prime crash? Investment needed to be made?
It is worth considering the internet bubble to understand accumulation. Investment in the internet far outweighed any produced value. We don't see this because such total accounts are not presented. But the profits that have accrued from the internet are far less than the totality of investment and the investment dividends. But for the economy of accumulation that doesn't matter. Accumulation makes investments, takes its profits and moves on. We got the internet, investments got their dividends, but what was the long-term social cost? Investment driving invention is concerned only with profit and not human costs. With the internet there are many in terms of the impact of social media, and if the projected sub-prime theory is correct many other social costs. A system-of-accumulation based on investment and dividend cannot consider social cost because the social cost has no dividend.
Accumulation for AI
Our economic system is still based in accumulation, and currently the vehicle for that accumulation is AI. Again the AI investment is measured only by dividend so whilst the AI companies can pretend that there is a product and benefit - as with the internet bubble - investment will continue. Accumulation will therefore increase until the AI bubble bursts, and then there will be all that accumulation looking to be invested. With nowhere to go. Sub-prime again???
Asimov's 3 laws??
What about all the ethical issues arising from AI? When will there ever be investment in the equivalent of Asimov's 3 laws of robotics? There is dividend in inventing a robot that sells, but there is no dividend in protecting humans - OK not completely true robots that kill owners cannot be sold but the invention and selling of robots is what drives that aspect of investment.
MIC
Throughout all of this analysis investment continues to drive the MIC; governments always have a war budget. When the AI bubble bursts will there be an increased focus on weaponry - more robots/drones to kill to avoid a Vietnam backlash? When the AI bubble bursts will there be war or another crash?
Working harmoniously with the rich??
One of the political adages bill used in the nurses strike of the 80s when he still saw in terms of class, nurses get a pittance whilst the rich get 0s in their accounts. At that time he blamed the rich because he saw class. In their apartheid stratosphere of wealth, the rich defend themselves from class attack so they don't see common interests. They fear class attack and complete redistribution of wealth so they influence governments to protect them; their fear also recognises that they do nothing and yet get wealthier because of the system-of-accumulation. It is all as a consequence of the system-of-accumulation - not human volition and intention. If we find a way of harmonising some redistribution the rich can give back. If we connect accumulation to war - the rich can also suffer in war if they live on the "wrong side", they will see the value in controlling the system-of-accumulation. The system-of-accumulation makes people poor - not rich people, let's work with compassionate rich people to redistribute some of their wealth and control the system-of-accumulation. When other rich people feel safe they will also redistribute. Harmony and unity - not class and division.
PS zandtao revised zeer-consciousness based on this advice but has not altered anything in zandbag. In terms of consciousness and personal development this change was simply a change in terminology but it is an important difference in pathtivism - activist strategies.
| RADICAL LOVE AS GRASSROOTS ACTIVISM |
 | | RADICAL LOVE AS PATHTIVISM |
|
|
Books:-