Comments by "Michael Mappin" (@michaelmappin1830) on "ReasonTV"
channel.
-
7
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thebourg , freedom is having economic democracy. Freedom is owning the product of your labour. that's why socialism and communism Is so popular. Community owned and work worker-owned companies and factories benefit communities and workers. Capitalist companies benefit capitalist at the expense of workers and communities.
For example, in the United States there is a socially own bread factory where the assembly line workers make $70,000 a year. That's because they own the product of their labour. But if you're an employee and you make $70,000 worth of product, most of that money will go to someone else.
Capitalism is dependant upon poor desperate workers that don't have any choice other than to rent themselves out in order to survive. That's why capitalism didn't exist prior to the enclosure movement. People had to be driven into extreme states a dependency with Force. That's why the conversion to capitalism was extremely violent and bloody. When workers can own their own factories and companies, then they could be independent. You no longer have to be depended upon billionaire corporations or government when it comes to jobs and consumer goods. And that is more conducive to a free market and thrive in the economy. Capitalism destroys markets and economies. if most of the wealth goes to shareholders rather than the actual workers, then the workers are not going to have enough purchasing power to buy the goods and services they are producing. That's why there's so much debt under capitalism.
"As long as he owns your tools (the capitalist) he owns your job, and if he owns your job he is the master of your fate. You are in no sense a free man. You are subject to his interest and to his will. He decides whether you shall work or not. Therefore, he decides whether you shall live or die. And in that humiliating position any one who tries to persuade you that you are a free man is guilty of insulting your intelligence."
~ Eugene Victor Debs
What is the difference between a wage slave and a chattel slave?
The chattel slave is sold once and for all; the wage slave must sell himself daily and hourly.
"The chattel slave is the property of one master, and is assured an existence, however miserable it may be, because of the master’s interest. The individual wage slave, property as it were of the entire capitalist class which buys his labor only when someone has need of it, has no secure existence. This existence is assured only to the class as a whole.
The chattel slave is outside competition; the wage slave is in it and experiences all its vagaries."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mortson978 , for example, do you actually believe the information being disseminated by the reason foundation? Do you bother to cross reference information? You check to find out where organizations get their funding? Does the reason Foundation get most of its funding?
a few sources of funding:
1. Exxon Mobil , the world's largest oil company.
2. The David H. Koch Charitable Foundation
3. Earhart Foundation = >>> the Rockefeller Brothers Trust, Exxon, J.C. Penney, Chase Manhattan Bank, the American Enterprise Institute, which became a prominent source of ideas and people for the Reagan administration.
4. The Castle Rock Foundation, funding radically conservative organizations.
5. Altria Group, formerly Philip Morris, the world's largest tobacco company. In the U.S. it controls about half of the tobacco market. It has 7 of the top 20 global cigarette brands. companies/ products include: Kraft Foods, Jell-O, Kool-Aid, Maxwell House, etc.
6. The John M. Olin Foundation, The foundation closed after more than two decades of setting the stage for the NeoCon wave of the Reagan era. The Foundation gave $21 million to fund various right-wing think tanks including: Project for the New American Century (PNAC)!!! , Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), The Independent Women's Forum, which is an anti-feminist organization predominantly funded by right-wing foundations, including the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and the Koch brothers' Claude R. Lambe Foundation. On its website, it describes its mission as being "to rebuild civil society by advancing economic liberty, personal responsibility, and political freedom. IWF builds support for a greater respect for limited government, equality under the law, property rights, free markets, strong families, and a powerful and effective national defense and foreign policy."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@coolbeans6148 , capitalism is not the best thing that ever happened to humanity. I don't even know how you can possibly say such a thing. Under capitalism 80% of the world's population subsists on $10 a day or less. One child dies every 15 seconds from starvation even though we throw away 1.2 billion tons of food annually in order to artificially maintained prices in the capitalist Market.
Industry can't even run anywhere close to 100% capacity. That's because we have been able to produce far more than we're capable of consuming for a long time now. Probably since 1929. Every person on the planet could have a very high standard living and not even need to work 40 hours a week. I think the capitalism, most of the wealth gets concentrated into the hands of the few. Just like what you see in the Monopoly board game. The more Capital you have, the faster your wealth grows in relation to everyone else. Monopoly is inevitable. not only is an inevitable, it is the actual goal of capitalism. why do you think the board game is called Monopoly? the game was invented to simulate capitalism. capitalism is about to maximization of capital accumulation for the purpose of extracting wealth from labour. It is economic feudalism. Socialism is economic democracy.
that's why the two richest people now have more wealth in the poorest half of the American population. that's why the eight richest people now have more wealth of the poorest half of the Earth's population.
okay, just for fun let's look at a socially owned bread factory in the United States. the assembly line workers make between 65 and $70,000 per year. can an assembly line worker make that much money at a capitalist company? of course not. that's because when you work at a capitalist company everything you produce belongs to the owner of the company. and because most of the resources and capital quickly get bought by the highest bidder, the richest 1% end up owning most of the shares. the richest 1% own something like 83% of world stocks. The richest 3% own something like 99%. that means that most of the wealth produced by labour goes to those owners. that means that most of the things made by labour actually belong to someone else.
but at the social Beyond bread factory the assembly line workers can make $70,000 a year because the bread they make actually belongs to the workers! if the workers make a million dollars worth of product, that money goes to them. But at a capitals company if the workers produce a million dollars worth of product, most of that money goes to idle shareholders, many of whom might not even be in the same country.
you can't have a free market in that kind of a situation. it's not possible. workers have to be able to afford the goods and services that they produce. if the workers produce $1,000 worth of product but most of that money goes to some rich shareholder, then obviously the workers are not going to be able to afford all the goods and services in circulation.
and then what happens if labor-saving technology is introduced? let's say a machine replaces 500 workers. At a capitals company it was 500 workers will end up on the unemployment line where they will have to compete with the other unemployed people. That competition drives the value of Labor down.
however, at a worker cooperative, if 500 workers are replaced with a machine, there are now five hundred workers to share the remaining workload. working hours can be decreased while income Remains the Same.
you see, most people under capitalism have to work 40 hours a week in order to survive. not only that, now it usually takes two people working 40 hours a week to support a family where before it only required one person. That's because all increases in productivity go to the owners of capital. just like if you were to give a cow bovine growth hormone in order to double milk production, the cow doesn't get to work half as many hours. All of that milk belongs to the farmer. that's why we still have a 40 Hour Work Week.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BingChilingEnjoyer , well I don't see why it can't be applicable on a larger scale. look at Mondragon. Over a hundred and twenty thousand workers that own their own Bank, University, Hospital, means of production, high-tech Research Laboratories, Etc.
almost 60% of the United States gets its electricity from these types of democratic, worker-owned cooperatives.
Study number 1:
Virginie Perotin's research** which looked at two decades worth of international data, shows that worker cooperatives are more productive than conventional businesses.
"The idea that employees can run their own firms might sound unrealistic to some. This study looks at international data on worker-owned and run businesses in Europe, the US and Latin America and compares them with conventional businesses. It also reviews international statistical studies on the firms’ productivity, survival, investment and responsiveness.
It finds that worker co-operatives represent a serious business alternative and bring significant benefits to their employees and to the economy. There are thousands of worker-run businesses in Europe, employing several hundred thousand people in a broad range of industries, from traditional manufacturing to the creative and high-tech industries.
Because worker co-operatives are owned and run by them, employees in worker-owned co-operatives have far more say in the business, from day-to-day concerns through to major strategic issues.
The largest study comparing the productivity of worker co-operatives with that of conventional businesses finds that in several industries, conventional companies would produce more with their current levels of employment and capital if they behaved like employee-owned firms.
When market conditions change worker cooperatives review wages first and keep employment more stable. In a downturn worker co-operatives drop wages rather than reducing their workforce. When business picks up they are ready to
respond and can make up for lost pay because employees enjoy a share of profit."
The main findings from the analysis and review are:
• Worker co-operatives are larger than conventional businesses and not necessarily less capital intensive.
• Worker co-operatives survive at least as long as other businesses and have more stable employment.
• Worker cooperatives are more productive than conventional businesses, with staff working “better and smarter” and production organised more efficiently.
• Worker co-operatives retain a larger share of their profits than other business models.
• Executive and non-executive pay differentials are much narrower in worker co-operatives than other firms.
** "Virginie Pérotin is Professor of Economics at Leeds University Business School and specialises in the effects of firm ownership and governance on performance, worker co-operatives, employee ownership and profit sharing. Previous academic and research roles include positions at the International Labour Office, the London School of Economics and the Centre d’Etude des Revenus et des Coûts (CERC) in the French Prime Minister’s Office in Paris. Professor Pérotin has also acted as a consultant to the European Commission, World Bank and OECD on issues of profit-sharing, employee ownership and employee involvement schemes."
Here is a link to the research data https://www.uk.coop/sites/default/files/uploads/attachments/worker_co-op_report.pdf
Study number 2:
This study by The Democracy Collaborative found that in the US, worker cooperatives can increase worker incomes by 70-80%, and that they can grow 2% faster a year than other businesses. This data also showed that worker coops have 9-19% greater levels of productivity, 45% lower turnover rates, and are 30% less likely to fail in the first few years of operation!
https://democracycollaborative.org/content/worker-cooperatives-pathways-scale
Study number 3:
This study of worker cooperatives in Italy, the UK, and France found “positive” relationships with productivity. It also found that worker cooperatives do not become less productive as they get larger. One 1995 study of worker cooperatives in the timber industry in Washington, USA found that “co-ops are more efficient than the principal conventional firms by between 6 and 14 percent”.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/1995/01/1995_bpeamicro_craig.pdf
Study number 4:
An in-depth study of the Mondragon Corporation released today (5 April 2017) reveals how a large global business thrives because it’s owned by its workers, caps the gap between the highest and lowest paid, and has built an ecosystem around itself.
https://www.uk.coop/newsroom/new-report-highlights-lessons-worlds-largest-worker-co-op
Now you compare that with capitalist Enterprises where where the pay disparity between the top and the bottom is as high as 312 times!
CEOs and shareholders do not Work 312 times harder then the actual workers themselves. These disparities only exist in dictatorial capitalist companies where workers have no control. And that's why in Flint Michigan the workers at the Ford Motor Company plant we're forced to poison their own water supply. It's why they had no choice when production was moved offshore. Those kind of problems do not exist or happen in workplace democracies. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/16/ceo-versus-worker-wage-american-companies-pay-gap-study-2018
▪︎ Worldwide, cooperatives represent well over $3 trillion in turnover, 12.6 million in employment, and over a billion people in total membership.
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/2014/coopsegm/grace.pdf
▪︎ In the United States the cooperative sector represents over $500 billion in revenues and employs about two million people
http://reic.uwcc.wisc.edu/sites/all/REIC_FINAL.pdf
1. For example, these assembly line workers make $65,000 a year for putting bread into a bag! https://youtu.be/-VdbFzwe8fQ
2. People feel United and actually look forward to going to work! That makes them more creative and productive. https://youtu.be/oH81zuMf_Co
3. Worker cooperatives are more productive than normal companies https://www.thenation.com/article/worker-cooperatives-are-more-productive-than-normal-companies/
4. More resilience, productivity, and equality. https://lindsayadvocate.ca/worker-cooperatives-a-path-to-equality/
5. Democratic workplaces are far superior to capitalist corporations!
https://cooperativesfirst.com/blog/2017/09/11/2017911how-co-operatives-are-better-than-corporations/
6. People have more money, people are happier, people are more productive and more creative, and they feel more connected to their communities and environment. https://youtu.be/em9YQzDTReo
7. The Italian Region Where Co-ops Produce a Third of Its GDP https://www.yesmagazine.org/economy/2016/07/05/the-italian-place-where-co-ops-drive-the-economy-and-most-people-are-members/
8. pandemic crash shows worker cooperatives are more resilient than traditional businesses. Worker co-ops are a more sustainable form of business, sharing benefits in the good times and burdens in the hard times.
https://truthout.org/articles/pandemic-crash-shows-worker-co-ops-are-more-resilient-than-traditional-business/
9. Cooperatives power almost 60% of the United States land mass https://www.electric.coop/electric-cooperative-fact-sheet/
10. "The 29,284 cooperative firms operating in the US generate over 2 million jobs and create more than $74 billion in wages annually according to a study conducted by the University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives, with support from the United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development. They represent 1% of USA Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and account for more than $654 billion in revenue. These cooperative businesses contribute with $133.5 billion in income and $3 trillion in assets, and provide products and services across the country in every sector of the economy."
"US cooperatives’ contribution to the national and local economies can be measured in both financial and non financial ways. They keep profits local, pay local taxes to help support community services, take part in community improvement programs and provide services for a large numbrer of people in the country regardless of their income levels or geographic location."
Key points to highlight about American cooperatives:
• There are 120 million cooperative members.
• 92 million U.S. consumers are member owners of, and receive all or part of their financial services from the nation’s nearly 8,200 credit unions.
• More than 900 electric cooperatives deliver electricity in the United States to 42 million people in 47 states. That equates to 12 percent of the nation’s population.
• In the United States, more than 1.2 million families of all income levels live in homes owned and operated through cooperative associations.
• Farmer co-ops provide over 250,000 jobs, with a total payroll in excess of $8 billion.
• More than 50 million Americans are served by insurance companies owned by or closely affiliated with cooperatives.
• More than 20 cooperatives have annual sales in excess of $1 billion, including well known names like Land O’ Lakes, Inc., Cabot Creamery, Ocean Spray and ACE Hardware.
US data on Cooperatives
• 29,284 cooperative firms
•654 billion plus in revenue.
• $133.5 billion in income.
• $3 trillion in assets.
• 2 million plus jobs.
• 120 million members.
https://www.aciamericas.coop/Economic-impact-of-the-United
1
-
@BingChilingEnjoyer , well, first off, it's not my idea. This is what certain types of Communists and socialists are trying to achieve. the idea goes back to the time of the Enlightenment. The idea that since the workers actually build the machines, the factories, come up with the technological ideas, Etc, they should actually be the owners.
You see, under capitalism most of the capital is owned by the richest members of society. Therefore they get most of the money produced by labour and they get to make all the decisions.
however, if the workers or communities own the capital, then they can keep all the money that the companies produce and they can make all the decisions collectively, democratically. Communism comes from the word community. For example, almost 60% of the United States gets its electricity from community-owned Electrical cooperative. https://youtu.be/wBJADlN2Bic
https://www.electric.coop/electric-cooperative-fact-sheet/
Cooperatives can become quite huge. the Mondragon cooperative was started by a Catholic priest with five guys. The first company was called Talleres Ulgor, an acronym derived from the surnames of Usatorre, Larrañaga, Gorroñogoitia, Ormaechea, and Ortubay, known today as "Fagor Electrodomésticos".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fagor
they went from 5 workers to a hundred and twenty thousand. and now they have their own bank, University, Hospital, Etc.
when new people get hired they have to buy their way in. a portion of your income will go toward buying the share. One worker gets one share. One share equals one vote. when you retire, you get your money back.
keep in mind there are different types of cooperatives. Some might function differently than others.
There are many institutional forms of public and social ownership. For example,
Part 1
Forms of social production:
• State-owned Enterprises (SOEs)
corporations are owned directly by a government (National or sub-national), and operate according to a mandate that may include social criteria.
In advanced capitalist countries many SOEs have been privatized under neoliberalism. But many still operate successfully (in diverse Industries including manufacturing, Communications, Transportation, utilities, and resources), accounting for up to 5% of total GDP in some OCED countries. Examples of successful wholly or partially -owned SOEs include Volkswagen (Germany), State Oil (Norway), EDF group (France), and Metsahalltus (Finland). In many developing and former communist countries (including China, Brazil, Russia and Vietnam) SOEs are much more important.
• producer cooperatives.
A producer Co-operative is owned collectively and equally by the people who work in it, and is usually governed according to "one person, one vote."
Cooperatives are one of the most common forms of nonprofit Enterprises. There are hundreds of thousands of cooperatives in the world; the United Nations estimates that half the world's population are members or customers of a Cooperative. Examples of successful producer cooperatives include Fonterra (New Zealand's largest Dairy producer), the ReWe Group (a major tourism company in Germany), Huawei (a giant Chinese electronics manufacturer, 99% owned by its workers), and Japan's Farm sector where over 90% of the Farmers belong to cooperatives). Strong networks of producer cooperatives are the dominant economic structure in Spain's Mondragon region and Italy's Emilia-Romagna region.
• Consumer Cooperatives.
A consumer Cooperative is owned collectively and equally by the people who buy its products, and is usually governed according to "one person, one vote."
Many retail cooperatives are formed to help consumers obtain lower prices and challenge the market power of private retailers. In Denmark over one-third of all retail sales are conducted through cooperatives. The E.Leclerc Cooperative operates over 500 supermarkets in France. Canada's Mountain Equipment Co-op runs the country's largest retail Network for outdoor recreation products.
• Recovered companies.
Workers in a bankrupt company effectively expropriate the Enterprise and attempt to keep it in business.
In the years after the 2001 financial crisis in Argentina, over 200 bankrupt factories were taken over by their workers, who continue to operate them (with some government support for refinancing). 2013 law in Bolivia gives workers the explicit legal authority to take over filled firms.
• Community Trusts.
A Community Trust is a non-profit Corporation, usually exempt from normal business taxes, created to purchase and development land, housing, and other Community Asset.
There are over 250 Community Land Trust operating in the US, with the explicit mission to undertake affordable housing develop, Environmental Conservation, and local job creation on lands that they own. Governance is based on a shared model that includes lessees and elected local representatives.
• Benefit corporations.
A benefit Corporation is owned by private shareholders, but obliged by its Charter to pursue social and environmental goals in addition to profit.
"B Lab" is an association which publishes an annual Global ranking of successful benefit corporations. Recent recognized firms include Echele! a tu casa (a benefit corporation based in Mexico City which develops low-cost housing for residents of poor neighborhoods), and Give Something Back (a major office supply company in California with a Community Development mandate).
• Community and nonprofit Enterprises.
Jobs in especially hard-hit regions and communities can be created by nonprofit Community Development agencies, drawing on local resources including training, housing and alternative Finance.
Community Economic Development (CED) is an "up by the bootstraps" effort to mobilize local resources that would otherwise idle, providing local Services, developing infrastructure, and providing unemployed people with job experience and training. Decentralized CED initiatives can be important in many developing economies, and in poor or remote regions of developed countries. Some entire communities have been founded and sustained on Cooperative principles in many countries.
1
-
@BingChilingEnjoyer , Part 2
Forms of socialized Finance:
• public banks.
Public banks are owned by national or sub-national levels of government; they take deposits, issue loans ( create credit), and facilitate financial transactions.
Public banking is widespread in many parts of the world. Countries in which publicly- owned banks play a major role include Japan (the JapanPost Bank is the largest Savings Bank in the world), Germany (with two parallel networks of public Banks: Sparkassen and Landesbanken), and China ( where are the state-owned banking system helped China completely avoid the 2008 - 09 World recession).
• Credit unions and Cooperative Banks.
Credit unions and other Cooperative banks are owned by their members, and govern according to "one person, one vote."
there are at least 60,000 credit unions and Cooperative banks in the world, with trillions of dollars in Combined assets; they are the most developed and Powerful form of cooperative enterprise. Large credit unions are important Financial players in many countries, including: Netherlands (the huge Rabobank has 60,000 employees and 750 billion in assets), and France (three major cooperative bank federations account for almost half of all consumer banking), Sweden (the JAK Bank makes loans without charging interest at all), and Canada (the Desjardins credit union movement is the largest financial institution in Quebec).
• Investment and development Banks.
Publicly-owned investment Banks specialize in targeted lending and investing in key companies (including private companies)with strategic economic importance.
State-owned investment or development Banks play an important role in sector development policy and many countries, including France, the Nordic countries, Japan, and Brazil. Singapore's Temasek Holdings was established to foster broad economic and industrial development there; it partially owns over 50 companies, and is consistently profitable.
• Social investment funds and Foundations.
These Financial funds are mandated to make investments in various firms or social Enterprises, in accordance with a broader social man, while still learning and adequate or Target rate of return.
The solidarity fund is a 10 billion investment fund established by the Quebec Federation of Labor in Canada to invest in businesses which contribute to Quebec's economic and social development. RSF social Finance is a non-profit financial institution , (founded in 1936) focus on lending to nonprofit and social Enterprises in the US. Oxfam UK has started an Enterprise Development Program to channel financial investments to social enterprises in 20 developing countries. Alaska Native Corporations are collectively owned entities founded with Native resource revenues, to invest in a range of businesses and development projects; their collective revenues exceed 10 billion per year.
• Sovereign wealth.
These funds are owned by a national government, funded with state revenues (often from resource production); they invest in strategic businesses and / or generate future investment income to fund public pensions and other public programs.
Sovereign wealth has grown rapidly in recent years, and now totals over US$ 5 trillion in Investments. Petroleum producing countries have been most aggressive in creating these funds (to save nonrenewable wealth for future uses), but some non-petroleum countries have established Sovereign funds as well (such as Korea, China and Singapore). The largest fund is Norway's government pension fund, with assets approaching US$ 1 trillion; it single-handedly owns about 2% of All European corporate shares.
• Microcredit.
Microlending is undertaken on a nonprofit or cost-recovery basis, with a focus on small loans to households and small producers (usually in developing countries or poor neighborhoods).
The most famous microcredit institution is the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, owned cooperatively by its Borrowers; it extends small low interest loans (mostly to women) through a participatory loan management system ( in which groups of borrowers collectively determine who receives new loans, and collectively ensure the loans are repaid). Similar systems have been introduced in other poor countries, and in some regions or neighborhoods of rich countries.
1
-
1
-
Capitalism is dependant upon consumption. When consumption slows, unemployment expands and the market contracts. One persons expenditure is another person's paycheck. It's a consumption-based system. Corporations spend billions of dollars on Advertising every year in order to get people to buy crap that they don't need. They have people believing that they're imperfect, inadequate, Etc. They've invested billions to develop high-tech propaganda to maximize invidious consumption, conspicuous consumption, planned obsolescence, perceived obsolescence, Etc. The list goes on and on. Capitalism is one of the most wasteful and destructive systems ever devised.
"It is reliably estimated that species extinctions now proceed at 1000 times their normal rate, and that up to 99% of the materials used in the US production process end up as waste within 6 weeks. For every ton of garbage, in turn, there are 5 tons of materials to produce it, and 25 tons extracted from nature to yield these materials.
But these facts are not connected across the fields of expertise which track them. As the earth is thus stripped and polluted by ever more unfettered global market operations, the market paradigm of value that leads governments does
not factor into its calculus the countless life forms, habitats and systems which are thus extinguished and poisoned. When objections are raised, the followers of the paradigm that rules sternly warn that all is necessary ‘to keep the economy going’. Peoples increasingly observe that their life-ground is being devastated, but no ‘new discovery’ reports that every step
of decision behind this process of life-destruction is taken to enact the global market programme."
Digby J. McLaren, ‘Reply to Colin Rowat’, Delta Newsletter of the Global Change Programme (Royal Society of Canada) Vol. 7: No. 3 (1996), 3; and Ernst Weizzsacker, Factor Four. London: Earthscan Books, 1997.
~ https://scienceforpeace.ca/action-and-understanding
~ http://www.jaunimieciai.lt/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/the-cancer-stage-of-capitalism.pdf
~ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/03058298980270020228
"The essence of capitalism, its raison d'être, is not to build democracy, or help working people, or save the environment, or build homes for the homeless. Its goal is to convert nature into commodities and commodities into capital, to invest and accumulate, transmuting every part of the world into its own image for its own realization. The modern capitalist imperative is simply to create more money for idle investors by any means possible. This growth is often enabled by predation on the publicly-held resources that represents real value, thereby diminishing the community's ability to sustain itself in the long run. Forests are clear-cut; public utilities are privatized; social programs are gutted; and so on. The net result is that the quality of life for the vast majority of the world's citizens has declined." ~ Michael Parenti
At this stage of the global market system’s reproduction of transnational money sequences to unheard-of volumes and velocities of transaction and growth, a systematic and irreversible destruction of planetary life-organization emerges for the first time in history. If we consider the defining principles of carcinogenic invasion and eventual destruction of a life-host, and do not avoid or deny the symptom profile in evidence, we discern a carcinogenic pattern increasingly penetrating and spreading across civil and environmental life-organization.
There are seven defining properties of a cancer invasion which medical diagnosis recognizes at the level of the individual organism. These seven properties can now be recognized for the first time at the level of global life-organization as well. And this is the pathological core of our current disease condition.
That is, there is:
(1) an uncontrolled and unregulated reproduction and multiplication of an agent in a host body; that
(2) is not committed to any life function of its life-host; that
(3) aggressively and opportunistically appropriates nutriments and resources from its social and natural hosts in uninhibited growth and reproduction; that
(4) is not effectively recognized or responded to by the immune system of its hosts; that
(5) possesses the ability to transfer or to metastasize its growth and uncontrolled reproduction to sites across the host body; that
(6) progressively infiltrates and invades contiguous and distant sites of its life- hosts until it obstructs, damages and/or destroys successive organs of their life-systems; and that
(7) without effective immune-system recognition and response eventually destroys the host bodies it has invaded.
John McMurtry
Part 1 https://youtu.be/b4JsCEYpIUA
part 2 https://youtu.be/DvbhzMFWLk0
1
-
1
-
1
-
1