The Death of Freedom

[Gelatinous Cube]

I just read a wonderful little book from the '50s called "Napoleon and the Battle of Waterloo". Not too detailed, but it captures the life of Napoleon pretty well. It got me thinking how often we see Freedom and Happiness be crushed by Greed and Oppression, or just plain bad chance. Classic examples are the fall of the Athenian Empire, the just plain evil destruction of Carthage (which was, by most accounts, at least as happy and free as the city of Rome), the way Lenin betrayed the Russian Revolution, and turned it into a Police State by creating the predecessors to the KGB, and of course, the death of Napoleon's dream of a United States of Europe (if you will) by the old Monarchies. I can even pinpoint America's worst disaster in the area of "Freedom", a man called J. Edgar Hoover.

Ah, woe is me. *shakes a fist*

[MaximiIian]

Also: the fall of the Carolingian Empire by the greedy and shortsighted grandsons of Charlemagne, who divided what Charles had united...
Damn shame...

[Hakkapeliitta]

Also: the fall of the Carolingian Empire by the greedy and shortsighted grandsons of Charlemagne, who divided what Charles had united...
Damn shame...

wasn't it Charlemagne himself who divided the empire between his sons? But if I remember correctly the empire remained united under one of his sons for some reason, but then the emperor who succeeded Charlemagne also divided the empire between his three sons. They signed treaty of Verdun or something like that.

Edit: Oh sorry I just noticed you said grandsons. I should read more carefully..

[KingOfTheIsles]

The Franks, like many Germanic people, used a system of gavelkind (I believe it is called) for inheritance, which divided the lands between heirs, so it wasn't uncommon at the time.

[jsteph]

It really was not Lenins fault. The fault is the system. A large centrally controlled system is gonna have problems. In Lenin's case it was people wanting to remain free and do what their ancestors had done forever. So he starved them to death. In Mao's case, it was teachers and educated people, so he had them killed as well. And then he had the farmers who wanted to keep their own land killed. Hell the Soviets and Chinese were the worst killers of the 20th century. They have Hitler beat my a long shot. Lenin and Stalin killed over 30 million people. There were times when families would swap children so they would not feel as guilty about eating them. But at least then the elders and other children of each family could live. NK is going through the same stuff now.

The system that has brought people the most, both in terms of Freedom, Land and Prosperity. Capitalism, why, because a huge decentralized organization can more readily adapt to changing conditions. When Communists plan poorly, people die. When a company in a Capitalist society plan poorly they go out of business, or a competitor steps in and raises the price a little. Is it perfect, well no, but it is much better than anything else out there.

Oh and that glorious Russian Revolution was just a well planned Coup. The majority of Russians were not up for a Revolution. And like I say, communism will fail unless people have no free will. So once we are all Borg like Communism will work like a charm. "We are the Borg, resistance is futile. Drop your shields and prepare to join the collective."

So if you want Freedom, communism is the last system you want to see put in place.

[SonofSparta]

Some Nice Points jsteph ,but im wondering about capitalism ,Since it's become blatantly obvious that the Current Capitalist System we use is not sustainable and is exploitative of poorer third world countries ,how long do you think it can last?...and where is our next revolutionary with a new system?(rethorical)..are we apparoching a point in our history (with our ability to create massive surplus) where we have the capacity to create a society that does not focus so much on competition? ,but co-operation ,as our natural resources dwindle rapidly...

[Iaius Statius Laurentius]

SonofSparta, what in the name of Jove are you talking about?

How is capitalism not sustainable, and how does that make any sort of sense. Capitalism is, very simply, the investment of resources in order to gain wealth--or capital. As long as a method of investment and transactions exists, captalism cannot fail.

Cooperation? Surplus? What precisely are we talking about, globalization or the economic idea of capitalism?

As for competition, there will be no improvement without it. Competition forces others to improve, and as resources do fall, newer methods of production must be created to account for this. Unless there is incentive, of course, this will fail.

As it happens, the best theory for dealing with limited resources is a revival of bullionism and mercantilism.

[Gelatinous Cube]

Capitalism is sustainable. Absolutely, it is. Even the current "Globalized" exploitative form is sustainable, to an extent.

That said, I think the current trend of Globalization is proving to be rather fatal for the bottom 99% of America's population.

[Iaius Statius Laurentius]

Not necessarily. Globalization does not equate to outsourcing. Rather, it means that a single nation or ideal is lifted to the role of the global ideal and strived towards in a sort of universalized form.

Outsourcing and free trade treaties do hurt domestic workers, but there are benefits to them as well--it's similar to the arguments against trade restrictions. The unfortunate reality of this is that it's far too expensive to hire American workers for job, what with minimum wage laws and all, than it is to hire others. In a sense, minimum wage is the weakness of the working class: they're too expensive for companies to employ. The fear is that removing a statutory minimum wage would cause abuse by corporations.