Showing posts with label aristotle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aristotle. Show all posts

Saturday, April 16, 2011

What Should Be the Servant has Become the Master.

It's no secret that the ruling class does not want an alert and informed citizenry that can read budgets and ask critical questions. In fact, millions, if not billions of dollars are spent to keep the masses completely in the dark regarding our monetary system. Why? Those who "get it" are far more likely to fight for control.

In an overly acquisitive society such as ours, where the drive to amass obscene amounts of wealth trumps any and all regard for human life, it's time to reform our monetary system. Hence, the reason why it's so important to develop an understanding of what money really is. That is, if we, the masses, wish to not only take back our nation, but, moreover, to maintain our humanity.

Here's the thing, there is so much disinformation circulating, it's not easy to discern the truth. Nevertheless, this is some of what I've learned so far.

Economics is not a science, yet economists - in an effort to make economics, more scientific, I guess - removed "normative values" from its study. What are "normative values"? In one word, morality. Well, removing standards of ethics, honesty and morality from its study might be okay if economics followed the scientific method, and wasn't so intertwined with our survival, but it doesn't, and it is.

Unfortunately, too many economists ignore the historical origins of money, as most are trained to support the status quo...something that is clearly not working. As Alexander del Mar once said, "As a rule, economists do not take the time to study the history of money. It's much easier to imagine it and deduce the principles of this imaginary knowledge."

So, what is money? 

John Locke and Ben Franklin defined money as a pledge for wealth instead of wealth itself. However, it is Aristotle's definition: "money exists not by nature, but by law," that made "money" by it's very nature, a fiat of the law.  Now, despite the ranting and raving of the many against our fiat money system, fiat money, in and of itself, is not the problem; rather, it's fractional reserve banking...the private creation of "money" that is the problem here. Why? In a nutshell, it benefits only those who control its usurious issue.  If the money power is privately controlled, it benefits the few...if publicly controlled, it benefits the many.


It was Jeremy Bentham, best known for his advocacy of utilitarianism, and his influence upon modern welfare economics, who we can thank for redefining usury.  In a series of letters written to Adam Smith, he tried to convince Smith to give up his support for interest rate limits. Originally, the concept of usury was much more comprehensive than the mere charge of interest. According to Stephen Zarlenga, usury was the "antisocial misuse of the money mechanism for private gain".  Our entire monetary system is a usurious kleptocracy. 

Part of the "monetary" agenda consists of substituting the idea of credit for the concept of money, so that we, the people will come to think of money and credit as interchangeable, when that not true at all. Credit is only a promise to pay in the future; whereas money pays at the time of exchange. Not to mention, credit evaporates in a crisis; money does not.

What about Ron Paul and his mission to return to the gold standard?

Essentially, he is mis-defining money as a thing...in other words, as wealth. This will not give our society the ability to advance properly, because there will never be enough gold to keep pace with population and commerce growth. As history has shown,  banks will cheat and issue private bank paper that only pretends to be convertable to gold. One can only imagine the problems that would cause in a crisis. 

So back to Aristotle's defintion.  The only problem with  is that his definition is all too brief. Alexander del Mar later expanded on Aristotle with the following defintion of money:

"What is commonly understood as money has always consisted tangibly of the number of pieces of some material marked by public authority named and understood by the laws and customs that its palpable characteristic: mark of authority; essential characteristic: possession of value defined by law, and it's function: the legal power to pay debts and taxes and the mechanical power to fascilitate the exchange of other objects possessing value." -- Alexander Delmar
In other words, setting aside whatever is used to signify it - paper, metal, feathers, etc. - "money  is an abstract social power embodied in law, as an unconditional means of payment." *

Which brings us to Stephen Zarlenga's three elements (The American Monetary and Financial Securities Act) that he maintains must be included in order to create a monetary system that works for the benefit of all:
  1. Put the Federal Reserve system into the US treasury so it is within our sytem of checks and balances.
  2. Get rid of the fractional reserve Stop the banks from creating our money supply...any of it. If they create even 10%, they're smart enough to get all of it. Billions are being stolen under cover of law, for not only doing nothing, but for damaging and destroying society.
  3. Government prints and spends new money into circulation to pay for infrastructure repair, either printed on paper or inserted on an account The key is that it's not debt; it's money.  Moreover, human infrastructure must be included:  health care and  education, as you cannot build the hardware without healthy, intelligent people. .
Source:

* Stephen Zarlenga, author of the ‘National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2010’ (renamed The American Monetary and Financial Securities Act by Rep Dennis Kucinich, which gets rid of a private credit system, and puts into place, a government money system),  founder and director of the American Monetary Institute, and author of The Lost Science of Money

Read more...

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Transcending the Rat

We choose to be, or not to be, in the Aristotelian sense of what makes us distinctively human, in that we are not bound by nature, as is - as far as we know - the rest of the animal kingdom. If we "refuse" to make that choice, or refuse to be aware that such a choice exists, taking the "ignorance is bliss" path, by default, we choose to remain rats (beast) cloaked in human flesh.

Why rats? Well, ask yourself why scientists substitute rats for humans when trying to improve our quality of life? Consider, out of the entire animal kingdom, the rat's diet most closely mirrors our own diet, hence the reason why where goes our garbage, goes the rats. And, as the old saying goes, we are what we eat.

"The difference between humans and rats is that it isn't as easy to get humans to exercise. Put an exercise wheel in a rat cage and a rat will zoom around on that thing all the time, unless it's sleeping. But putting an exercise machine in your family room doesn't mean you're going to use it." -- A researcher
For this very reason, transcendence is my favorite word. Without that word or concept, to be "human" would mean nothing more than existing at the level of a rat, and I don't know about you, but I hate rats. In other words, transcendence is the gift - or curse depending on how you look at it - that allows us to shrink or rid ourselves of the rat that lurks just below the "man" flesh that so beautifully - or sometimes not so beautifully - camouflages our ratly essence, so that we may become fully human.

Although, beautiful meat suits are looked upon as a gifts for the most part, in reality, the work involved in shriveling the rat becomes much more difficult, because let's face it, what's the point of sprucing up the inside when the outside is so perfect? And maybe that's where the process of aging comes in handy...even the physically beautiful can't escape.
The body is yours - but is not you. The body is a garment that you are wearing, a machine that you are using, a vehicle that you are driving. The body is your possession. Just as a person does not identify himself as being the shirt he is wearing, he should also not identify himself with the body that he is wearing. - Chris Butler
Nevertheless, ratly essence is so comfortable, that many of us fake it, and pretend as if we're striving to be fully human, when in reality, we're nurturing the rat to the point - that if we live long enough - the small, squinty eyes, and naked, scaly tails will begin to emerge, revealing our ugly essence
"Thomas Aquinas adopted Aristotelian biology to explain the biology of the human being. Aristotle thought that human beings were animals, and Aquinas affirmed him on that. According to both, the organizing structure (or form) of the human being was the soul, which was both immaterial and inseparable from the body (unlike Plato who thought the soul was imprisoned in the body). In the Aristotelian view, the human soul had three levels. The most primitive level was the vegetative level that allowed the human being to do plant-like things like grow through cellular division or use energy. The next level of the soul was the animalic level, which allowed the human being to do animal-like things like hunt down food, attack in self-defense, and mate with other human animals. But where humans were distinct from their fellow animal kingdom members was that they had a third level of their soul—the rational part–which allowed them to do things like think, ponder, form communities, create moral codes, resist animal instincts, and wonder about God. Most importantly, it is the rational part of the soul that allows the person to have free will, that is, the ability to act voluntarily and intentionally. The idea of the soul as having multiple levels allowed Aristotle and Aquinas to conceive of the human person as both an animal and more than an animal."
How do I know that this is true? I don't, but I had a dream that the doctor told me I was really a rat after he did an MRI, and then told me how to transform myself into a human. I failed miserably, and in the end, I was eulogized as a rat. Freaky.
If we lived in a State where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us good, and greed would make us saintly. And we'd live like animals or angels in the happy land that needs no heroes. But since in fact we see that avarice, anger, envy, pride, sloth, lust and stupidity commonly profit far beyond humility, chastity, fortitude, justice and thought, and have to choose, to be human at all … why then, perhaps we must stand fast a little--even at the risk of being heroes.--Robert Bolt (A Man for All Seasons)

Read more...
Iraq Deaths Estimator
Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP