Cooperation vs Competition
Posted by NickSousa 9 years, 7 months ago to The Gulch: General
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/16...
“Francisco was right in AS1. This IS a war and we have to take sides. The problem is that I think its too late to prevent the apocalypse of socialism in the USA. The great mass of people who dont think will only abandon socialism when its failure is right there in front of them (which means the apocalypse). Look at Venezuela- its nearly collapsed and there isnt a revolution yet !!”
I suppose it all depends on what you value. If you are a child, then collecting play money in order to buy lots of toys to play with would be the pinnacle of your existence. Competing against others, collecting accolades and trophies, striving to win and “be better” than others – these are all products of people’s isolated consciousness, where they view other people as a commodity or something to go to war against.
If you are an adult, then there is nothing on this planet that you value higher than ensuring people’s safety, providing people the basics in life so that they can have dignity while on this planet, and ensuring that people’s lives are treated equally despite any ability or lack thereof on the part of everyone within the community.
Ayn Rand’s ideas are childish, because she places value on creating division instead of unity. We can see the result of this divisiveness all around us – corporations hoarding trillions of dollars and not paying taxes, people systematically being kept poor, individuals competing against everyone else, etc. Instead of cooperating with one another, people want to feed their own vanity and selfishness by competing against the entire world. This causes untold amounts of suffering and strife.
You may think that socialism/communism would be the end of the world as you know it, but in reality the ideals of unity and cooperation are the cornerstone of any advanced civilization. People strive to “be better” and “have more” than others in order to bolster their own sense of self worth – these types of children don’t realize their own inner beauty and magnificence, so they try to stymy any feelings of worthlessness by drowning their own insecurities with a pile of useless toys.
Let’s all put the toys down and contribute to society not because we have to, but because we want to advance our society. Instead of contributing for the sake of buying toys to play with, let’s all come together and make our society better because it is the right thing to do.
“Francisco was right in AS1. This IS a war and we have to take sides. The problem is that I think its too late to prevent the apocalypse of socialism in the USA. The great mass of people who dont think will only abandon socialism when its failure is right there in front of them (which means the apocalypse). Look at Venezuela- its nearly collapsed and there isnt a revolution yet !!”
I suppose it all depends on what you value. If you are a child, then collecting play money in order to buy lots of toys to play with would be the pinnacle of your existence. Competing against others, collecting accolades and trophies, striving to win and “be better” than others – these are all products of people’s isolated consciousness, where they view other people as a commodity or something to go to war against.
If you are an adult, then there is nothing on this planet that you value higher than ensuring people’s safety, providing people the basics in life so that they can have dignity while on this planet, and ensuring that people’s lives are treated equally despite any ability or lack thereof on the part of everyone within the community.
Ayn Rand’s ideas are childish, because she places value on creating division instead of unity. We can see the result of this divisiveness all around us – corporations hoarding trillions of dollars and not paying taxes, people systematically being kept poor, individuals competing against everyone else, etc. Instead of cooperating with one another, people want to feed their own vanity and selfishness by competing against the entire world. This causes untold amounts of suffering and strife.
You may think that socialism/communism would be the end of the world as you know it, but in reality the ideals of unity and cooperation are the cornerstone of any advanced civilization. People strive to “be better” and “have more” than others in order to bolster their own sense of self worth – these types of children don’t realize their own inner beauty and magnificence, so they try to stymy any feelings of worthlessness by drowning their own insecurities with a pile of useless toys.
Let’s all put the toys down and contribute to society not because we have to, but because we want to advance our society. Instead of contributing for the sake of buying toys to play with, let’s all come together and make our society better because it is the right thing to do.
cg, do you mean politicians or other people? Objectivism does not reject politics. Politics makes up the fourth foundation of Rand 's philosophy. Aristotle, the most influential philosopher to Rand, wrote an entire book on politics. If your point is conservatives can "adopt" AS as their own, some do and others villify it. Liberals definitely villify it and frankly act scared to death of it. I read a statement that was great the other day regarding Sarah Palin which I think is great when thinking about all the time liberals spend bashing Rand and AS. Basically it was something like look at all those heads Rand lives in rent free.
for the ends, and neglecting the means....... the
ONLY source of wealth, for both rich and poor, is
the creativity and self-interested activity of people.......
for example, I spent a life creating and working hard
to build a good future for my tiny family..... as a direct
result, I have money, now, to sustain others. this
sustenance benefits Navajo families in New Mexico,
Appalachian families in Kentucky and Tennessee,
the homeless and veterans and hundreds of others
around my town and the world. and I am not even
a millionaire!
cause begets effect. you must have the cause, else
there will be none of the desired effect. -- j
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/NickSous...
What does that tell us? About you?
What are we missing or you not telling us?
... 28b, in particular, Nick, regarding your basic premise and argument...
"Competing against others, collecting accolades and trophies, striving to win and “be better” than others – these are all products of people’s isolated consciousness, where they view other people as a commodity or something to go to war against."
"I am saying that people's inherent need to compete against others and collect toys is based on their divisive thought, rooted in feelings of worthlessness. "
Ayn Rand brings out some of those points and shows you what a sad dead end it is for the people you describe. She brings out the villains who manipulate them. I'm almost certain you would like these parts.
You might like AS too. AS is all about some of your points of people manipulating markets to take what they didn't earn.
If you hate them, though, it's still good to have all the details of what the enemy or the supposed out-of-control children are thinking. If you have a commute, you could listen to the MP3s a little at a time one it.
Do not believe what people say about it. Critics are out to demonize it. Many supporters are trying to shoehorn it into being about their own political agenda; I see a key theme of the books being rejecting politics altogether.
Nowhere in these healthy and fruitful processes does it call for mutual destruction, exploitation, predatory hostilities, conquest, force, redistribution, enslavement, a phony sense of superiority by having more than someone else. These latter are aberrations, misdirected energies, malignant growths.
Don't try to claim these dysfunctional practices are "human nature". That's like claiming that sickness is normal and health the exception. The human brain has evolved cognitive functions to choose rational values and rational relationships. Mankind is finding itself in a warfare of ideas (call them memes). Our superb brain and its software can be infected by destructive ideas, and as long as unquestioning acceptance is our default setting, those ideas will grow until they kill the host.
And because our superb brains are quite capable of rationalizing to justify any destructive act, and getting support from the rest of the collective by emotional manipulation--fear, envy, revenge, hate, greed (ooh, reads like a list of mortal sins, doesn't it?)--it becomes exceedingly difficult to get reason and persuasion to reverse the course. Once violence is institutionalized as the only response, societies succumb, in effect, to an autoimmune disease.
Social harmony must begin with the individual--the singularity--and the individual's absolute right to self-ownership, from which grows the entire structure of peaceful collaboration and universal welfare. We had that philosophy in America; its seeds are still here. Don't let it go.
You claim that cooperation is the solution but neglect to state clearly how that cooperation is to come about. How do you envision moving humanity in the direction you advocate?
JLC, Circuit-Guy, and others have pointed out that they are perfectly happy to have you pursue your "cooperative ends" just so long as you do not force or attempt to force them to do so. It is fruitless to continue to attempt to browbeat them as being "children" simply because they disagree with you. To me you seem childish and immature -- unable to mount any real argument beyond repeating what you "feel". From all that you have said I seriously doubt that you even know what the word "cooperation" means.
The main difference between the Objectivist and the Communist approaches is the most basic of human rights that exist. Under Objectivism you and your friends are free to pursue whatever modes of production and compensation you like, so long as they do not infringe on my choices for the same. Under Communism, I am not given that choice. I would be enslaved under the mantra of "From each according to his ability."
Giving up this most basic of our human rights is not how to "advance society" and I will have no part in it. I am John Galt.
Jan
If you are born handicapped, or you are a child who gets diagnosed with cancer, what options are there for you? Should you suffer and die in poverty because you are not able to compete against other people? At what point will people realize that sharing with others is the solution?
People shouldn’t have to “fend for themselves” – I am not a savage, and I value the lives of people simply because they exist on this planet. They are not a statistic or a commodity, and I choose to share my play money because I care about other people and want them to be safe.
If you want to use the market to prey on others in order to collect as much play money as possible, then you are a child. You claim that people are being provided a service and are being given what they want – in a sense you are correct, because the vast majority of people want to get rich and have other people labor on their behalf. Mutual greed doesn’t help those that are unable to fend for themselves though, and maybe one day you will realize that there is more to life than grabbing as much useless junk as you can get your hands on.
**Ayn Rand’s ideas are childish, because she places value on creating division instead of unity.** ...Really, really...
So you prefer socialism: "each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution. with an emphasis on profit being distributed among the society or workforce to complement individual wages/salaries" or communism: "each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. With free-access to the articles of consumption is made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance" over Capitalism where a free market produces the best economic outcome for society. Really, really...
If this is your thought process......well all I can say is MOVE OUT OF THE USA! PLEASE!!!!! I think Cuba is calling your name and I will even come help you pack!
Thank you.
Without a market (hordes of people buying and selling), how do you know what to contribute? Suppose you're making horse-and-buggy parts. Slowly the technology is making motorcars more viable. They will become viable as people find ways to make better and cheaper parts. A good business person wants to serve his customers, but he needs feedback from the market to know what to sell.
The same person is making a trade off with time with family and friends. If there's a great opportunity, he might work more and use the money to slack off with family and friends later. The market constantly gives us feedback.
** Why do you need to be treated like a child who will only play nice in order to receive their weekly allowance from their parents? **
This is the opposite of what we call for. You can go out, solve someone's problem for money, and take that money an invest it, or use it to slack off. You choose when to go serve someone and make more money and when to hang out with friends and family. You choose whether to spend your money on something you like, invest it in someone else's business, or give it away.
**If play money and toys are what motivated me, then I am stating to the world that I don’t really care about other people within my community, and I am only interested in “what I get” out of the arrangement. How humiliating. **
You can help people in your community and in the world by finding a problem they have and solving it or somehow making their lives easier. If you do it well, they should be glad to give you money. Maybe you find most people don't use half the features on Quickbooks, so you make a scaled down version for a fraction of the price. People are happy to pay you b/c you give them just what they want. You decide where to spend your profits. There's a grocery store that's found a way to sell packaged food amazingly cheap. There's another one that provides personalized service. There are options in between. You decide which one is worth your money, which one you're happy to pay for at that price point because they're giving you exactly what you want.
All of this is exactly the opposite of a child following an allowance plan. It's hordes of people willing and eager to help one another in fair trades.
The bizarre outcome of this, is everything's becoming nearly free. The value is more in more in creative problem solving. The price of a bolt or even an MP3 player is nothing. The market is realizing your dream of people working together to create a cornucopia.
Socialism does not work. Not in the Soviet Union; not in China. Communism - the forceful application of socialism - is (as I have mentioned before) nothing more than applying tribalism to a sophisticated society: minimal 'egalitarian' subsistence for the masses with overt accumulation of profit by the elite.
As I said before: No one here will complain if you decide to work your whole life 'for your fellow man'. My philosophy certainly allows you to do this if you want to...but your philosophy apparently does not allow me to 'not do this' if I wish to live differently. The reason for this is because I am a producer of worth. You therefore use force to separate me from the profits I earn so that you can distribute them as _you_ see fit.
I do not agree to this 'deal'. The people around me prosper because I have produced and innovated and worked for myself. I revel in their attendant prosperity; they have _earned_ it.
Jan
Load more comments...