Herrington: The Evolution of the Breakdown

Chris Herrington, Contributing Writer

     I believe in the free market of ideas. We need open discussions, because in the open market, everyone has a turn at the wheel and everyone has a conflict of interest, both republicans and democrats. If there is anything that is unclear and yet super-clear all at the same time it is that the media, which is owned and operated as neutral but which we all know is anything but, has at all times an ax to grind. It sells not only junk for venders but ideas for its owners. We are facing an impenetrable wall of propaganda coming from every side and it is really difficult to see how to ferret out what is being said. I can take every side all at once and both from the middle.

     The rich do not want to pay taxes and want to off load any costs they have with employees, and the employees want to be paid a higher slice of the pie to begin with in order to be able to afford those expense of increasing costs of insurance, medical, and technological advancements. To deny the raises and simultaneously to diminish welfare and unemployment support only works to create more Occupy Movements. Why would the rich care, and why won’t those who end up joining the poor? It is a numbers game in the open market. Market share is all this is about in the world of political ideas.

     These are all free market ideas that are up for sale. The question is, “How will the rich continue to talk the poor into voting for them as they continue to disenfranchise more and more people?” The law of diminishing returns herein is when they finally prove Marx right and the only way for the employees to get any real and fair share of the value they help to create is for them to forcefully take it back, which is ironic since it has been held back from them by force of the laws that were created or regulations that were not put into place in the first place or were deregulated in order to slant the access to those who already had a head start.

     Thus the accusation that no laws have been broken on behalf of the rich, by which I mean those who have used the law to cover their tracks, and the poor, who may have been protected at some time in the past but now through deregulation are literally left holding the bag and the costs of everything. An honest wage for an honest day’s work is as slogan that modern businesses do not believe they can uphold. And they sleep great at night. A person who works a 70 hour week and only makes $350 a week take home pay is in fact only surviving on $2.08 an hour for the entire week: food, shelter, clothing, medical, and relationships. Production is up and wages are down relative to profits. Why not simply bring back slavery and at least be honest about it? Swift be damned; there is no need for satire since we’ve run out of a need for humor altogether.

     Many times, what is forgotten is that those in power have already been in power and have used their influence to gain even greater power, control, access, and say so. As more and more people are impoverished, the vote has to be worth less and less until finally, as a republic only, those who own enough to vote can vote, and this is another conflict of interest. Democracy has become a burden to the rich, along with collective bargaining, protesting, and capital gains taxes. Where are they headed? The Queen of England owns more American soil than any other foreign person. She has over 10,000 diamonds. Essentially, she is the avatar for the collective unconscious of the British, a sort of Paris Hilton on steroids. And this is now what we as Americans want, to be paid for the privilege of having our pictures taken. That’s just how hot we are!

     What seems to be missing in the equation is the education of the masses, a feat which was heretofore impossible until the Internet, but which will be remedied quickly. This is the entire reason there is such a rush to control the web and to privatize it as thoroughly as possible, to shut the thing down, ostensibly. The Internet is the most socially conscious and culturally powerful tool ever invented, and it is the singular force presently standing in the way of world political control by the elites.

     But what in the world is wrong with the liberals? If education had worked then we would see test scores in the sky, but instead after all of the bussing and equal everything and justice movements and free everything under the sun, we still meet the world with only modest gains and with horrendous deficits to show for it. We seem to have an increase in poverty, an increase in ignorance, and an increase of objectifying behaviors across the board. If the social programs were going to make all the difference, why haven’t they? And we do not seem to be morally ahead, certainly businesses that were to be started and run by those who came from poorer backgrounds have not necessarily kept pace, run a tight ship, or made significant gains.

     What would happen if we did allow the elites to own it all, take it all in, and privatize it all? The poor do not seem motivated by their ongoing poverty to get themselves out of it but rather seem to be satisfied with their pittance. If the floor were to drop out, would we not see the real guts of our social fabric come to the foreground? Would not the strong rise up and take control of themselves and so survive the mission of adulthood? Wouldn’t we see humanity in its vast struggle in the survival of the fittest? Praise God, they would evolve! Or die, whatever.


This entry was posted in Herrington. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.