This addendum is being
included to the first part, titled "death within capitalism", because
I feel certain things need to be clarified, specifically within the realm of
vernacular and nomenclature.
Within the article, I
use the phrase "capitalism" as the catchall phrase and descriptor for
the US economy, and most first world countries economies as a whole. Using the
term in such a manner actually takes away and diminishes the value and reason
for this articles creation. The correct way I should have described capitalism,
and all its inherent parts within the article should be as such:
(I will try to keep the
descriptive as simple and short as possible to as not to confuse current and
future readers with this addendum.)
In the article, at the
beginning I compared a capitalist economy to a monarchy long past its prime. To
clarify this statement, I would like to iterate that the capitalist economy I
was speaking of is in direct reference to the state of the American economy as
it has been through the current recession, the banking bubble, and the near
implosion of several large scale, long-standing corporations in America. This
version of the capitalist economy is what I like to call "Past the Thrones
Prime" capitalism. (This is why I made the right comparison to the head of
a monarchy, which has slipped past their prime in the throne, and refuses to
abdicate and let their successor take their rightful place.)
One of the major
problems in defining capitalism as a economic structure and the basis, is that
just saying capitalism or using it as the definition of the economic system in
use, is entirely too broad. In using the textbook definition in and of itself
still falls to the same fate as the mistake I made earlier. To put it in very
simplistic understanding and definition, capitalism has many different
"flavors", or better yet, "personalities". With each flavor
or personality being created from similar ingredients, but each having its own
tastes or traits that make it just a bit different from the next version of
"capitalism". This actually brings up a point I was amiss to include
in the original writing of this article. Is that with the many different
personalities of capitalism as a whole, and the belief that "a capitalist
economy" should be allowed to run with minimal to no oversight, it turns
those of many personalities into one entity that basically has multiple
personal identity disorder, and the world's worst cases of bipolar disorder
decided Napoleon or Caesar.
And it is this
"disorder" within capitalism that creates not just the modern
problems we have currently dealing with the economy, but also the recurring
(and often not seen) cycles of rise and fall, birth and destruction of
large-scale societies, or super societies, that have existed since the time of
Rome and the Caesar's.
An author by the name of
Peter Turchin, can better describe the rise and fall in cycles of destruction
than I could ever give any justice to. Here is the link to a paper he penned on
said subject:
www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-20/blame-rich-overeducated-elites-as-our-society-frays.html?cmpid=hpbv.
The only part where I would deviate from his standpoint is his description and
implication of how the deep problems inherent in the system affect people. My
understanding of the reading is more so his standpoint is on a sociological
depth, where my study and observation, and subsequent being thrown in the deep
end of it, understanding and point of view, drive deeply and directly to the
human psyche in ways which, I will make clearer in the second part of this
paper.
I hope this clears up
some of the miscommunications that I might have caused in the first article of
this paper. I hope you'll stick around and read the second and any other
subsequent additions to my work.
Well, on to part two.
No comments:
Post a Comment