IMPORTANT NOTE:
This is a working revision of my 2012 version, which was on my previous website.
How able an organism is to do a particular thing fundamentally depends upon that organism's genetic make-up. Nobody gets to choose their genetic make-up, as it is established at conception. Furthermore, it is unique and unalterable; however, life experiences can activate and deactivate gene expression—epigenetics. Ability includes, of course, the ability to identify and exploit opportunities, such as a job or setting up and running a business, which will demonstrate the extent of one's ability to earn money.
The greatest of abilities is intelligence.
One can put only as much effort into something as one is able to. It makes no sense to put in less than that, but no matter how much effort you do put in, you can never achieve beyond your innate ability.
See the "Effort Myth" entry.
See the "Disability" entry.
Capitalism is a type of economic system that allocates resources according to the criterion of ability. It is, therefore, eugenic; Darwinist.
Organisms have evolved to be selfishly greedy. Thus, each organism is naturally driven to acquiring for its own1 exclusive benefit as many and as much of the resources in existence as it is able to. Capitalists are fond of pretending to others that one can achieve anything by simply putting one's mind to it and making the effort; that lack of success demonstrates a lack of interest and/or laziness. However, that is utterly disingenuous—see the "Effort Myth" entry. Thus, one's wealth-gaining ability fundamentally depends upon how selfishly greedy one is, and, given that, how able one is to actually acquire that wealth. If the organism makes it to reproduction age and reproduces, its selfish greediness and abilities are passed on to its progeny; this is genetic inheritance. Not only that but acquired resources are passed on too, an investment by the organism in its offspring, giving them a boost in life relative to others, for example, when a parent pays for a private education for their children at a highly-regarded educational establishment, or, upon the death of a parent or relative, the passing on of resources via a legal will; again, a boost to survival—or, indeed, "thrival" (as in "thriving"; more than mere survival) chances—relative to others. And the cycle goes on and on. The unavoidable result of any of this is an economically unequal society, the economic gap between the poorest and richest growing ever greater, at an ever-accelerating rate. The more able increasingly dominate and exploit the less able, causing the latter to become increasingly resentful. It's a recipe for civil unrest. And when inequality exists between countries, it's a recipe for war. That benefits no-one; it's hard to do anything in a war zone.
Few, if any, countries in the world are only capitalist. Even the USA has a state sector of its economy. What capitalists will not admit to you is that the absolutely essential foundation of all modern economies is the bedrock that is socialism—see the "Socialism" entry.
One is rewarded or punished—deprived—by capitalism according to how selfishly greedy one is, fundamentally how able one is. Abilities are fundamentally genetic, so capitalism rewards—and punishes— according to one's genetic make-up. It might as well reward and deprive each person according to some or other particular genetic characteristic, such as hair, eye or skin colour (imagine that).
Capitalism is intrinsically competitive.
1(and, in order of decreasing extent, its partner's, offspring's, relative's, community's, society's, country's, where these exist—see the "Discrimination" entry)
Any instance of two or more entities working with each other to achieve a goal common to them.
It has none of the disadvantages of competition.
Any instance of two or more entities striving independently (and in secrecy) of each other to achieve a goal common to them.
Competing entities need not be hostile to each other, actively competing: a population of organisms, each peacefully seeking resources for itself, is an example of passive competition.
Biological evolution could not have happened at anything like the pace it has without the brutally efficient filtering out of less able organisms in a world of active competition that is the effect of selfish greed.Economic competition hinders human progress, wasting time, money and other resources: in competing with each other, businesses hide their own research and development discoveries from each other, withholding pieces of a same jigsaw they're each trying to complete. This results in research and development duplications, independently reinventing the same wheels.
Capitalism intrinsically involves competition.
The better alternative to competition is collaboration.
Democracy is governance by the people. In a direct democracy, democracy's purest form, proposed laws (within some or other prescribed scope, which, itself, has been directly democratically agreed upon2) require the agreement of each of all the people3. In a representative democracy, the people vote for candidates, those who have put themselves forward for election and who, if elected, can propose and vote for or against laws, or abstain from voting, on their constituents' behalf in a legislative forum; however, an elected representative is not a delegate: he or she does not have to take into account the will of his or her constituents and may vote according to his or her own view.
A great many people suffer the delusion that they are living in a democracy, despite also having an economic system. Economic systems put a price on everything and that determines how free your speech is, how loud your speech is, and how high up the socio-politico-economic scale your voice will find ears willing to listen. Remember: resources—money—"talks"; the real voting slips are the notes and coins in your pocket.
Economic systems and democracy cannot exist at the same place at the same time; they are mutually exclusive. See also the "Freedom" entry.
2(where, without which scope, there would likely be practical, logistical difficulties given the amount of issues to be considered and agreed upon and the method by which votes are cast and counted. In this modern age of technology, particularly in terms of the Internet, mobile (cell) phone; public payment-transactioning networks; etc, this could be significantly mitigated)
3(with possible exceptions, such as in having a minimum voting age; however, every exception is a logical impossibility: such exceptions can only be agreed by all voters, that is, voters included in which are the very people the exception seeks to exclude from voting)
Think of "the disabled" and you will probably imagine people in wheelchairs, or the blind or deaf, etc. In fact, we are all disabled, since disability is simply the inverse corollary of ability and we all have different abilities; this is the same as saying (equivalent to) we all have different disabilities.
It is a fact of capitalism that, in any attempt to somewhat mitigate its negative effects, by way of, for example, socialist interventions, such as government welfare programs, we are forced to scrutinise certain people—the wheelchair-bound, blind, deaf, or whatever individuals; those "traditionally" defined as "the disabled"—setting them apart from everyone else—those traditionally-defined as "abled". But this often provokes prejudice, discrimination and dangerous hostility by others in society towards them.
If only we all realised that we are all abled—or "disabled"— whichever term you prefer, each of us being on one, continuous spectrum of ability/disability, again, whichever term you prefer. We'd have so much more a happier and peaceful society rather than a "them" and "us" attitude.
Discrimination is one's behaviour that is in accordance with one's prejudice. Those perceived to be sufficiently dissimilar to oneself are disfavoured in forms such as racism; xenophobia; etc. It's all about helping oneself and those perceived to be like oneself and diminishing the agency of those one deems insufficiently so.
An economic system is a system that allocates resources according to some or other particular criterion or criteria.
Economic systems may be consciously devised and implemented, or, in the case of, for example, capitalism, simply reflect human instinct ("human nature") (in the case of capitalism, the instinct is selfish greed).
Capitalists and their lackey politicians would have you believe this myth, but don't be fooled. This is the suggestion that getting what you need and want in life is simply all about effort, and is often accompanied by the suggestion that one can be and do anything if one puts in one's maximum effort. But this would only be true if everybody had the exact same—apart from selfish greediness—ability, whereas, in fact, each individual is unique. Effort "is ability"—one can only put as much effort into something as one is able to—see the "Ability" entry.
Freedom is the absence of hindrance in doing something.
A great many people are under the delusion that they live in freedom despite also having an economic system. Economic systems put a price on everything and that determines how free your speech is, and what you are able to achieve in life. Remember: resources—money—"talks".
It's simple: you cannot be living in a free country if anything you look at has a price sticker attached.
Economic systems and freedom cannot both exist at the same place at the same time; they are mutually exclusive. See also the "Democracy" entry.
Freedom of speech is the absence of hindrance in expressing your thoughts and feelings.
A great many people are under the delusion that they have freedom of speech, despite also having an economic system. Economic systems put a price on everything and that determines how free your speech is, how loud your speech is, and how high up the socio-politico-economic scale your voice will find listening ears. Remember: resources—money—talks".
Economic systems and freedom of speech cannot both exist at the same place at the same time; they are mutually exclusive. See also the "Freedom" entry.
The increasing of international trade, as a whole. Most countries are capitalist, thus most international trade is capitalist: global capitalism.
Greed is the desire, satisfied or not, for resources in excess, in terms of quality and/or quantity, of effecting satiation of immediate needs. Greed is essential for human progress, however there is world of difference between its two types: "Greed: Selfish" and "Greed: Unselfish". Greed is often contrasted with need.
Selfish greed is the desire, satisfied or not, for resources for oneself4 in excess, in terms of quality and/or quantity, of effecting satiation of one's4 immediate needs. Biological evolution could not have happened at anything like the pace it has without the brutally efficient filtering out of less able organisms in a world of active competition that is the effect of selfish greed. See the "Greed: Selfish, Irony of" entry.
4(and, in order of decreasing extent, its partner's, offspring's, relative's, community's, society's, country's, where these exist—see the "Discrimination" entry)
The Irony of Selfish Greed refers to the fact that although selfish greed may seem to be advantageous, it is, in fact, intrinsically disadvantageous to everyone— including the selfishly greedy. This is because, in securing resources for one's5 own exclusive benefit, one denies or hinders the exploitation of those resources to the greater benefit of others, including the selfishly greedy.
5(and, in order of decreasing extent, its partner's, offspring's, relative's, community's, society's, country's, where these exist—see the "Discrimination" entry)
Unselfish greed is the craving, satisfied or not, for resources for everybody, in excess, in terms of quality and/or quantity, of effecting satiation of everybody's immediate needs. Note that, for example, an individual may be unselfishly greedy towards other members of his country, but crave for his country, as a whole, to be selfishly greedy to the detriment of other countries. For the ultimate in unselfish greediness, by "everybody" is meant "all others known to exist".
Intelligence is the greatest ability .
Stephen Hawking, the world-famous scientist, was severely limited physically due to his medical condition. But that didn't stand in the way of him exercising his brilliant mind, pushing forward the boundaries of knowledge. And it was financially profitable for him too, for example, as the author of several internationally best-selling books.
Intelligence emerged from the evolutionary timeline and was a game-changer, developing to the level we, as human beings, enjoy. It's not surprising. It allows one to understand things, solve problems and to theorise the unknown. With intelligence, one can achieve much faster than one could without it. And one can strive in deliberate directions. Having intelligence automatically gives oneself freewill—the ability to make choices (without intelligence one would not even know that there was choice at all in the first place, being blind to all opportunity, and actions would be completely either instinctual or arbitrary, random).
Any instance of resources being insufficient for survival. Need is often contrasted with greed.
Ownership is any instance of a resource being notionally secure against the losing of it (to others).
Possession is any instance of a resource being physically secure against the losing of it (to others).
"Mother" nature laid out her bounty, assigning none of it to anyone; it was simply there: the land; seas; fields; deserts; beasts; fowl; mountains; streams; flowers; trees; and so on. However, each man, according to his selfish, greedy "heart", however, was instinctually driven to seize and possess as much of it as he was able, for his own, exclusive, benefit. In that world of limited resources, thus came conflict and war, as man fought against man to increase his personal stock. And, though, after a while, when the costs of all-out hostilities might be so great that all might perish, trade was invented, it remained war, with notes and coins the new bombs and bullets (capitalism, being a competitive system, is an example of war, between individuals within a society to inter-societal (international) conflict). And so it continues to the present day.
As ownership and possession of resources get passed from one to another, down the generations, inherited, things won, lost, seized by others, bought and sold, all are made handlers of stolen goods. In his selfish stealing from nature, a man steals from all others. But it's worse than that: for, in doing this, each man steals from himself! In demanding a price for his labours and that which he owns, so he limits their exploitation by and to the benefit of others, including himself. Thus, the cancer scientist will only work to find a cure for a cancer to the extent that he is paid to do so; limiting the finding of treatments and cures for a disease which he himself is as likely as anyone else to get! And so with the pharmaceutical company providing the laboratories and associated resources! And so we limit all human endeavour, all science and progress. This is the Irony of Selfish Greed—see the "Greed: Selfish, Irony of" entry for a concise definition. We puzzle over dilemmas of our own making, such as how to pay nurses and doctors more while simultaneously increasing spending on the building of new hospitals. Meanwhile, the more able and thus wealthiest in society tell everyone we can't afford things and to tighten our belts.
If only we would see sense. There's plenty for everyone on this planet but that would pale into insignificance if progress was unshackled from the drag chain that is the economy. There'd only be the sum of human intelligence to limit us. Imagine where we'd be and where we could go absent a lacking of money and the sheer speed of travel; we could have been—and could be rapidly engineering the visiting and exploiting of the resources of other worlds. Conquering mortality, assuming that's possible at all, of course.
Sadly, for the moment, we'd would rather be selfishly greedy, each aiming for having it all for oneself, which does no-one any good—see the "Greed: Selfish, Irony of" entry for a concise definition.
Prejudice is the feeling that someone deserves more or less favour than oneself. Essential to this is the ability to perceive differences between oneself and others. Organisms identify how closely related they are on any particular level (familial; community; etc) according to perception. Visual perception is immediate and very important. Thus, for example, someone's skin colour will suggest the degree of genetic relatedness to oneself, as intrinsic skin colour is genetic. This degree of relatedness informs the proportional extent to which one feels the other is entitled to one's affinity and the possible sharing with the other of one's resources. With human beings, one particular indicator of relatedness, not necessarily genetic, is auditory: the language, dialect and accent spoken by another. In prehistory, we have consciously set ourselves together and apart with such schemes as the use of body paint or other ornamentation—tattoos are today commonplace. Clothing can also be used to distinguish oneself and one's in-grouping.
Prejudice is natural; there can't exist selfish greed without it, as selfish greed requires the ability to tell oneself and others apart in some or other way. Note that just because something is natural does not mean it is morally or ethically good, and vice versa, nor is it that just because something is unnatural does it mean that it is morally or ethically good, and vice versa.
Prejudice is essential to selfishness and is behaviourally manifested as discrimination.
Beliefs and actions that support the satiation of selfish greed. Associated terms include "illiberalism" and "unprogressivism"—the former not to be confused with "illibertarianism". Politically conservative. Example beliefs include:
Watch out for:
Selfishness is the desire, satisfied or not, for resources for oneself6 exclusive of others. Selfishness is not morally or ethically wrong per se: even in order to merely survive, satisfying only one's6 immediate needs, one must achieve and maintain exclusive possession of those resources; you're hungry and need to eat that apple? In necessarily taking and eating it, you deny possession and use of it to anyone else.
6(and, in order of decreasing extent, its partner's, offspring's, relative's, community's, society's, country's, where these exist—see the "Discrimination" entry)
The absolutely essential foundation of modern economies is socialism. It's the bedrock of even the US economy, essentially underpinning capitalism. For example, what any modern society needs is an educated workforce. Without it, progress, if any, is at a snail's pace. Everyone must be educated to a reasonable degree. And the only way that can be done is by state-funded schooling, which is what the vast majority of US Americans rely on. You also need a healthy population. The US falls behind here, not having universal healthcare provision, although there are state-funded programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Roads are best provided and maintained by the state. National security is provided by the state. Education, health, roads, the police and military—all big, essential things, amongst others. And let us not forget that the state is the lender of last resort, bailing out private enterprises, if not shoring up the entire economic system, to the tune of billions, even trillions.
By the way, socialism is not communism.
Many organisms are territorial. An organism's territory is any area it has at least some, so not necessarily exclusive, authority over. Humans mark their territories in various ways; one example is the graffitiing in public spaces with one's name or one's nickname ('tagging' with one's 'tag'), the human equivalent of a non-human animal, such as a cat, urinating around an area to mark out its own territory.
Have you worked it out yet?