Sunday, May 1, 2011

34. Power, money, moral sentiments, and society.

Of course peace of mind , planetary prosperity  and happiness comes also when we feel that we accomplish gradually our true goals. And there minor and major goals in life. We might say that our existence has no other goal than to exist. Or that we may have many different goals, according to the scale of relevance in our existence. But one of the most beautiful and meaningful goals in life is to develop more of our soul consciousness. So all other minor goals like social success, money, fame, knowledge , creativity etc are to serve this major goal of developing more of our soul consciousness

There are at least 13 definitions of what is money, according to the scale in society.

Here are some forms that money interplay  is experienced in our life

Money experienced as

1) As share in the goods of the planet
2) As means of transactions
3) As a  totalitarianism in the human feelings, where everything is compared with everything and measured with the total order of money.
4) As measure of human working activity
5) As raw material to organize business and group activity, or operational power (capital)
6) As constraint of debt in activities, or friction in production activities.
7) Conversely when in abundance, as measure of freedom in personal activities
8) As technology of exercising  power of a minority of humans over the majority of humans
9) As a technique to create inequalities in the living standards and social power. 
10) As means of persuasion
11) As macroscopic "temperature" of social activities
12) As means to regulate fair agreements, deals, etc
13) As embodied value of precious metals in the coins.
14) As difference of prices of same goods between different nations with different currencies.
15) As only the liquid part of the economic value of fixed assets, like real estate etc In other words in a society, money is only the smaller part of the total economic value or wealth, both for the individual or the public sector. 
16) As a measure of how much a social entity (an individual or group of individuals) contribute to the civilizations versus how much the civilization contributes to the entity.
17)  Lack of money is deprivation of freedom from the need and a high monetary wealth in society from an individual or group of individuals can be an indirect way of deprivation of the freedom from the need of other people that do not have this wealth , and cannot   access  goods and services of  the civilization.


18) As a privilege to issue and own it, by a minority who then controls the majority by lending it to them (current banking model of money).

19) Money creates a monarchy in the world of subjective emotional values of experiences, as it forces the comparison of any two valued experiences. On the contrary  in pure subjective emotional evaluations not any two experiences are comparable. 

At each organizational scale a) Individual or Household b) Enterprise c) Domestic Economy d) Global Economy, the experience and implications of money are different.

But probably the most enlightening definition of money is that money is  a technology of exercising of power from human beings to human beings and objects.

 The economic structure is essentially a power structure from human to humans rather than from humans to the physical reality. 


People used to believe that economic transactions and actions exist in the realm of win-lose or lose-win. The more they are educated, we realize the truth that economic transactions and actions are to exist, mainly microscopically in the realm of win-lose, lose-win, and mainly macroscopic-ally in the realm of lose-lose, win-win.

Therefore the morality related to money is almost identical to the morality related to the exercise of power from human beings to human beings. 

And of course a good question is "What is the role of money and its power in society?"

The next thoughts seem to be the answer


 1)   In a distant future development of individuals and society, there would be no need of power structures, besides the individual and the society as a whole. Neither it would be necessary to utilize money at all. But this is not applicable in a current state of evolution, where many individuals have strong desire and will to apply power over other people (or have other people apply power to them). If in the current state of evolution an economic system would allow only the power of the individual and the public state, without any intermediate private sector, it would occur, totalitarian and tyrannical phenomena  similar to those in the communistic Soviet Union and China.
2)     It is therefore almost unavoidable that intermediate power structures (“private sector”) must keep the balance to avoid tyranny. The organization units of this intermediate structure are shaped because of a) the individuals strong desire of power over other people b) through the “free market” game of “private property” and c) after the social law of universal attraction, that leads to a Pareto distribution of  volumes of power.
3)     In the current system to regulate this “private sector” power structure can be done through two tools a) money b) voting. (Both are "technologies of transfer and propagation of rights of power from humans over other humans and objects", which create power structures. But the voting tool is a bit more advanced, it is used mainly by the public sector, as it involves principles, expression, etc versus mainly only action that money involves).
4)     In a future more advanced evolution the regulation and creation of "private sector" power structures, can be done entirely through the tool of voting, while money may have been entirely eliminated.
5)     A “private sector” with intense power (economic) inequalities creates unhappiness, crimes, and violence. Any improvement from the current state to more evolved would involve lessening the power (or economic) inequalities.

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MORAL POLARIZATION BETWEEN THE OLIGARCHY THAT DOMINATES AND THE MAJORITY THAT IS DOMINATED

When someone comes in contact with the elite oligarchy that dominates (overtly or implicitly) he notes that according to them  the problem of the civilization is that the good, virtuous and worthy people are few  and are those that  dominate and have, while the bad , immoral and unworthy are the many,  who are dominated and have not. So the issue is how to defend the good and few, and will fight the bad and many.

On the other hand when someone comes in contact with the majority that is  dominated (overtly or implicitly) he notes that according to them  the problem of the civilization is that the  many are sufficiently good, virtuous and worthy, and are those that are dominated and do not have, while the few that dominate and have, are the bad, immoral, and unworthy to stand up to the planet circumstances. So the issue is how to defend the many and good, and fight the few and bad.



To my perception, it is quite certain, that the extreme inequalities between those that dominate and have against those who are dominated and do not have, are themselves the source of delays in the evolution of the civilization.