Economics 1966 LRH There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes which cause about 20% of a race to oppose violently any betterment activity or group. Such people are known to have anti-social tendencies. When the legal or political structure of a country becomes such as to favor such personalities in positions of trust, then all the civilizing organizations of the country become surpressed and a barbarism of criminality and economic duress ensues. One of the primary barriers in this society is economics. Supressives (anti-social personalities) have been weaving a web of economic entanglement for societies for some time using economic mis-interpretations or ignorance to involve those societies which only reciently struck off their chains of actual slavery. Today, the chains are made of economic restrictions and, to be blunt, economic lies.
An understanding of economics is a bold step forward toward total freedom in society. Aberrations tend to blow rapidly when their lies are exposed. Therefore I have written this short essey on the actuual laws of economics, as they may help you. Today, almost any person has a present time problem, growing more pressing as time goes by and as our society evolves. It is the simple question: How can I live? The answer to this quuestion in a broad general way can be found by attaining an understanding of the subject called “Economics.” Economic Theories Economics are as simple as they are not obscured and as confusing as they are made to serve a selfish purpose. Any child can understand (and practice) the basic principles of economics.
But grown men, huge with the stature of government or Chain Banks, find it very useful to obscuure the beyond all comprehension. The things that are done in the name of “economic necessity” would shame Satan himself. For they are done by the selfish few to deny the many. Thus economics easily evolves into the science of making most people miserable. Nine-tenths of life are economic. The remaining one-tenth is social-political.
If there is a fruitful source of supression loose upon the world and if it makes people unhappy, then it is a legitimate field for comment, as it must form a large “misunderstood” in our daily lives Let us see how involved it can be made. The most virulent philosophy of the 19th Century was not that of Dewey or Schopenhauer. It was that of a fellow named Karl Marx, a Germam. In his book, Das Kapitas, he sets out to destroy the world of capitalism, by introducing the philosophy of Communism, borrowed in some part eviidently from Lycurgus, of the ancient Greek State of Sparta. Marx has succeeded to date (though himself dead and buried in England) in extending his philosophy over perhaps two-thirds of the world’s population and upsettiing the remainder most thoroughly. Capitalism, under attack, surviving only in the West in a faint form, has borrowed so heavily from Marx in it’s modern “Socialism” that it cannot long survive. Capitalism had little to recommend it to the worker.
He had no hope of ever getting enough cash together to loan it at interest and so retire. By definition that was all that Capitalism was, a system of living on interest by loaning money to more industrious people. As it implies “All take and no active participation” it, of course, is a rather easily destroyed system. It had no vitality. It could only foreclose mortgages and seize property.
It could not and did not operatee cleverly. The trick was, and is, to loan an industrious person half of what he needed to make a go of his business and then when he failed, to take over the business and the invested money loaned as well. Governments and chain banks in the West are still at it today. They are assisted by Income Tax. The profits of a business are taxed each year so that it has no money to renew its machinery or to expand.
To keep going it has to borrow money from the chain banks of the State. One slip and it is taken over entirely by the chain bank or the state, mismanaged and then knocked out. Thus the world gets poorer under Capitalism. Communism in revolt, throws out all middlemen, simply takes the final step of Capitalism and seizes everything. It fights Capitalism by becoming the Super Capitalist. It is not an idle comment that George Washington in the American Revolution, the Marquis de Lafayette in the French Revolution, and Fidel Castro in the last Cuban revolution were each the richest man in the country at the time.
Communism, far different from the hopes of Marx, is a tool of the rich and powerful to seize everything in sight, and pay no wages. It is the final answer to Capitalism not its opponent. Socialisms in different costumes all tend to the same end product of capitalism, total ownership. So we can conclude about economics that: 1) There may be a subject called economics, and 2) There is certainly a large use of economic confusion to bring about total ownership. What you are observing apparently, in our modern world, is an obscuring of actual economics to the somewhat ignoble (without hounor; discraceful) end of taking everything away from everyone but the State.
The State can then be a chosen few who own all. Capitalism, Communism, and Socialism all wind up with Man in the same situation – owned body and soul by the state. So if you are confused by “economic statements” by the chosen few mouthpeices of the intended few who will be the State, then realize it is not the subject itself but the intentional misuse of the subject which is causing the trouble. Sence all roads – Capitalism, Socialism, Communism – lead to the same total ownership, none of them is in actual fact in conflict. Only those several groups who each want to own everything are in conflict, and none of them is worthy of any support.
There is an answer to all this. If these “isms” all tend to a total State then the obvious rebuttal is a No-state. This alone would be an opposition to the total State. As this is instinctive in Man – to oppose his enslavement – people manifest their personal revolt in various ways. They cannot simply overwhelm a well-armed government. So their revolt takes the form of inaction and inefficiency. Russia and Cuba, for two, are going on the rocks of individual inefficiency and inaction.
They do not see it as a revolt as it hasn’t any peaks. The grain and cain just don’t come up, the trains somehow don’t run and the bread doesn’t get baked. America and England driven still by some faint remaining spark of “free enterprise” muddle along. But the economic squeeze is too great for this long to continue. Income Tax, bank and state loans, all the evils are there waiting. Sensing the coming total ownership of all, the worker even in the U.S. and England begins to put on the breaks.
A good day’s work today was an hour’s work a century ago. Strikes now enthusiastically paralyze anything they can. Inefficiency and inaction are the order of the day. Not clever, the Capitaliist, the Commissar (a Soviet Party Official), the Great Socialist do not believe anyone has penetrated their actual intent and so continue to twist economics about in the hope of convincing the people. They strike, won’t realy work and get more inefficient.
The Societies of Earth, whether East or West, are all approaching wiith rapidity the same end – dissolution by a personal people’s revolt. The revolt has no name, no leader, no banner, no glory. It only has a common end in view – the end of all states and all economic systems. The Science of Economics Any group of children will soon work out a practical economic system. Reciently children in a park in Russia became the subject of government horror by developing a barter system, exchanging toys for toys, an act which was duly chastised as “Capitalistic.” The Russian word values are shakey, for to be truly Capitalistic, they would have to have had to develope an interest system of recompense for the loan of the toys, not the barter system.
So long as there is a supply and as long as a demand can be generated, some form of goods exchange system will develope. There are innumberable combinations of supply and demand actions. There is the reluctant supply and the demand by force, a system commonly followed by troops or feudal barons, or simply robbers. There is the eager supply action added by creating a demand with advertising, a system we know as business and at which Madison Avenue s so adept. Man finds this system the most pleasent of the systems, but it has a limitation in that it demands in return money, and causes people to pay in order to buy the advertised goods. (joke) Then there is a system based on creating want. Governments almost uniformly believe in this system and use it.
They repress supply by the taxation of …