When it comes to politics, people are "slaughtering" for false problems, issues facade surface. Who will doggedly for or against such a thing or this character, who bears such a current and so on.
But the problems of today's society do not depend on Tom or Dick or Harry, but it is a matter of system. What a system? Diamond definition:
In science, any subject of study which, although composed of different elements mutually interconnected and interacting with each other or with the external environment, it reacts or evolves as a whole, with its own laws General.
The society we live in today is a fully capitalist society, which is based on capitalist production system that has its own specific laws.
Humans, individually or collectively, acting on the basis of a will, more or less conscious and aware and are motivated by self-determination.
In microcosm this leads to actions and consequences that are more or less direct result of what they wanted, giving results at times in line with their will and sometimes not.
But in the macrocosm, that instruction in general, any individual will vanish almost completely, so it is as if humans do not act guided by their own will, but according to mere laws of the system. Which means that, within the overall company, you can make abstraction of the human conscience in that it has little or no influence on changes in the economic system (and political) General.
Humans, individually or collectively, acting on the basis of a will, more or less conscious and aware and are motivated by self-determination.
In microcosm this leads to actions and consequences that are more or less direct result of what they wanted, giving results at times in line with their will and sometimes not.
But in the macrocosm, that instruction in general, any individual will vanish almost completely, so it is as if humans do not act guided by their own will, but according to mere laws of the system. Which means that, within the overall company, you can make abstraction of the human conscience in that it has little or no influence on changes in the economic system (and political) General.
Apart hour from the general laws of the capitalist system, described by a large team of economists of various schools of thought and economic, we see that our eyes are occurring more and more recurrent economic crises and disastrous. There are those who blame speculators, multinational companies who, who the political classes in different countries and so on, who a Tizio o Caio, chi a presunti complotti e via dicendo. Ma siamo certi che si tratti di vere e proprie colpe e non di un fatto strutturale dell'economia moderna?
Preciso che quanto dico non vuole essere una valutazione etico-politica ma solo economica-fattuale. La politica è fatta per due tipologie di uomini: gli idealisti e i furboni. Io non sono né l'uno né l'altro. Sono solo uno scettico fesso e quindi non sono tagliato per la politica.
L'economia moderna presenta due tendenze fondamentali:
1. L'aumento della produttività col ricorso di mezzi tecnici sempre più perfezionati che a parità di lavoro consentono maggiori volumi di produzione.
2. La saturazione markets due to the fact that they are flooded with goods that once in common use have become a growing demand for increasingly slow.
These two trends are connected to two consequences:
A. rising unemployment, inactivity, low employment and pre-created and reduction in employment due to a trend decline in labor demand in the long run.
B. Fall in profitability of capital. If the first 100 to win but to invest 10 hours must invest to earn 10,000 100. Increase profits but decreases the real rate of return of capital resulting in diversion to areas that do not produce financial and speculative nothing if not real paper.
Now this evolutionary trend of the modern economy tends to strengthen the competitive environment among the various economic groups that often fall within nations or groups of nations that are competing markets, energy, raw materials etc.
This involves the confluence of economic competition in the political and military and, last but not least, the war.
War can be seen as a kind of restructuring in a big way for the economy. Because these include: a.
in preparing the use of inputs (personnel and equipment) unemployed in civilian areas in order to produce and use the means of destruction.
b. combat phase in the destruction of productive assets in excess products from the system.
War is a "breather" of the economic system that allows a selection "Darwinian" powers best suited to the times during which they divided the zones of influence, you invest and then inaugurate a new cycle of reconstruction-crisis the war. Cycle of ever more far-reaching because of the progress of technical means. This
both locally and globally.
To escape this infernal cycle theories have been put forward proposals and policies. The two main groups of these theories that I want to expose are:
1. Revolutionary theory or reformist in style offering a total reformulation of the system and its replacement by a system of direct popular management of economic factors (communism, anarchism, etc.)..
These theories suggest mainly an economic system run by people's committees organized in a scale for the management of social and economic life. Today it would be possible even then the help of computers.
2. Theories that propose a reformulation of monetary policy seen as leverage for a new economic policy. This would be mostly to issue currency decumulation (Gesell) through tax money to replace other taxes (money tax) and enables the distribution of a share of wealth to all members of the community (citizen's income).
The real problem is in the system and the system needs to be solved or at least addressed, not with the usual harmless and useless diatribes from political gossip.
GIUBIZZA www.giubizza.tk 
