Friday, February 20, 2009

What is freedom?

If I were to say that freedom needs to be for all people, otherwise it’s not really freedom. Wouldn’t you agree? I know from experience that pretty much anyone you put this statement in front of will agree with it. But still it’s so damn hard for people to grasp and really understand what this means.

Pretty much every political party that has ever existed has spoken about freedom. Even the Nazis and the communists. Everyone from social democrats to libertarians speak of freedom. So you know they can’t mean the same thing.

If freedom really is when everyone is free, no matter whom they are, this must include things like gender, age, job, income or social status. Many people will agree also with this, much fewer then the above statement, but still a significant part of people will concur.

But if you stress the money part and maybe ask a follow up question if the billionaire having the same right to his single dollar in his pocket as the poor person whom only own one dollar in total, things start to go downhill. Suddenly, if you say this, it’s no longer applicable, must people do not agree with this. Why? Because some people might own more cars or have nicer jobs or have a higher social status than others. This inequality gets people jealous and start wondering why someone should have billions when others have nothing. So suddenly freedom doesn’t apply for rich people, which in turn means that things like what job you have or your social status does not give you the same rights or freedoms as the rest.

And then when we dissect the age thing and start asking questions, suddenly there is lines that need to be drawn. Things like; legal age for drinking, legal age for sex, for voting and so on becomes relevant. Some people don’t think old people can´t/shouldn’t drive cars. And when you really come down to it, people should go to certain schools or have certain old folks homes. Different contributions or restrictions are piled up the further you go and the more questions you ask. So apparently, age isn’t something that can be connected to freedom either.

Gender is the next topic for discussion. I don’t agree with much of what feminists often argue, but to some extent they have some points. Men have been the rulers throughout history; men still have some social advantages that women don’t, at least in many countries around the world. So there might be some things to be done about it. But when you start asking these follow up questions to the freedom concept, the same thing as with age comes up. Women should cut in line to certain jobs; some families (but not others) need extra help and support. There should be free breast cancer examinations and so on. And when you get into it, men also are a wronged group for some reason. Some men cannot stay home with their children, because the loss of income is to great, is one example of this.

In other words, people might concede the concept of freedom, but not what the word really implies. So when people, politicians or pretty much anyone around you are talking about freedom, it’s not really freedom they are talking about, its freedom for some, but not for others. Depending on their political views, gender, age or social status their interpretation of freedom will vary. Isn’t that interesting?

As long as people don’t grasp the significance of freedom and what it truly means when all people are free, we will keep having idiocies like death camps and racism. The meaning of a single word and the people of this world knowing this meaning could save billions of lives. But are you and the rest of this world ready to admit that the billionaire has the same right to his single dollar in the pocket as the poor person whom only own one dollar in total? If you don’t, you are against freedom. It is that simple.

9y old boy pleaded guilty to murder

As reported in some US papers today a 9y old boy in Arizona that shot his father and another man have now pleaded guilty to murder of the last one, but apparently not to the death of his father. Riveting reading and I’m a bit surprised Swedish newspapers haven’t picked this story up as an example of those bloodthirsty Americans Swedish journalists like to write about. It will probably pop up during the day…

Swedish women are clueless - according to RFSU

RFSU in Sweden suggest that birth control pills should be “free” up to the age of 25. This dim-witted proposal is put forward with the “argument”: women have the right not to get pregnant against their will. Really? How about not having sex? And why the age of 25y? Isn’t that a bit discriminating against older people? And why aren’t they telling us that these women in fact are the ones that also pays for these “free” pills? Or do a deluded RFSU believe that pills are a gift from Santa? There are no secret were babies comes from. If you don’t want babies, do the operation, don’t have sex or use birth control. If this isn’t clear to the Swedish female then she is inept beyond belief. The whole thing is very simple, but RFSU wants the tax payers to buy “free” things to give to themselves. Only a very bizarre organization with brainless spokespersons can propose such an idiocy.

Apocalypse soonish

The end is so near I can smell it.

There are such big similarities between what’s going on the world today and what happen during the 1920’s that I need to pick up that tread. There are really only two main differences I can see. First of all, we still haven’t had any massive increases in protectionism. Some, but not as much as back then. And second we do not have the gold standard today, which they nearly didn’t have back then either, it was on the way out. But otherwise is almost spooky. Kind of like a theater piece being played once more. And this is the first act, nearly completed:

On one side of the Atlantic we have the Americans who, through fictive loans courtesy of the government, have bought houses they really can’t afford and been living over their actual income, back in the 20’s it was stocks and bonds that people bought for the same reason and just as today, they lived on money that didn’t really exist. We have just had one president who neglected the economy and increased the public debt followed by another one that will surpass this by far. Just as back then.

On the other side of the Atlantic, in Europe, we have governments piling up national debts like it’s no tomorrow with a couple of the main actors of the world market leading the way. Just like back then. Throughout Europe the economies are going, but hardly more. Because of the European Union and the monetary union, the different countries have different problems but cannot do anything about it because they are tied to the Euro. But the main problem is, as before, UK were the national debt is frightening high and the governments solution is to put out more money on the market and borrow to spend even more.

All over the world people, even though still not aware of the coming comedy, are still having an incline what’s about to happen and are starting to save their money in gold. Investments are going down all across the globe and even if protectionism has started to grow here and there, it has not really taken off yet. Businesses are going down and several big corporations’ issues warnings about their profit margins pretty much every day.

Ladies and gentlemen, the stage is set.

Back then it was the hyperinflation together with protectionism and, above all, the US Federal reserve idiotic attempt to support Great Britain that really got things going in the end. This scenario is not very likely today though. So we have a slight change of the plot here I would say. Protectionism will increase, no doubt about that, so one main ingredient are still there. The British governments plan to put in more money in the market will increase inflation, but if it will be as bad as back then is hard to say. But instead of those problems, today we have EU and some other major players like China. And if I had to guess, China is the most likely candidate to push this pile of crap over.

So we are a couple of years from the main event. Several countries have started spending sprees in attempts to jumpstart and keep their economies going, this of course with either borrowed money or newly printed money, some, as Britain, have used both. And this will be the ending of the second act.

The third act is the most entertaining one. When some (or several; according to me, the most likely ones are China and some member states in EU) will run into really big problems. And then it will take off. Businesses going bankrupt all over, unemployment skyrockets and all the people who are used to be taken care of by their governments will suddenly lose their income, which will lead to civil unrest, possible even civil wars (which is very likely in China). And it’s all downhill for several years. And then it’s time for the final act:

The final act will start when a hysterical people with hysterical problems look towards those easy solutions and start to listen to that hysterical man (well, probably several men and maybe even a woman this time) with politics that seem to be the salvation. And then comes despotism. And with many of these countries now being nuclear powers or having that capability, there will not take long until someone presses the button. Fun fun fun.

Remember where you read about this comedy first people. I will not be there to tell you: “I told you so”, because I will probably be dead and communication will probably not be as good when there are big holes in this planet. But I must admit, this is going to be great. I really am looking forward to this finalization of life as we know it on this planet. There will be some pockets of human survivors, ironic enough, Africa will probably be the only place left were we can still live. Back to basics you might say. Oh, I can’t wait, just a few years left…