Tuesday, 6 May 2014

Capital in the Twenty-First Century - The book from T. Piketty

Thomas Piketty has been mentioned by Fareed Zakaria on GPS and I agree. It's just to take this in straight!

Corruption and other crime is in all aspects so vastly present that to combat crime needs to take priority! However, one does not need to declare oneself a Socialist for this reason. The (blue, lighter or stronger) VICTORY over Marx is in every way fundamental and with Piketty's solution, as he writes, Leadership and Intelligence are either way ensured! We only become more lightly BLUE!

The way forward is to secure a BETTER World, ecologically and with less CRIME too!

Other than Marx, there are these other traditional values of family, monarchy, human rights, privacy, democracy etc. All of these have been successfully defended by Capitalism. The way from 10 000 BC and upto today, 2014, has been the development of natural morals, the ETHICS, from clan wars and barbarism to a civilised society of today!

The word from Piketty's book: Regulation!

A url link to Gurdian report on his book: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/02/thomas-piketty-capital-in-the-twenty-first-century-french-economist .
Thomas Piketty: the French economist bringing capitalism to book

Another url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx

The different story of unfolded Capitalism in history:
The Triangle Trade - Europe - Africa - USA (as account of the Human Being from this time)

The political map of this time, The Triangle Trade

The monarchies and the others

Industrial revolution

Establishment of the Workers' Movement

Establishment of the negotiating parties of working life

The fight for workers' rights!

Universal voting rights, men first and then women

1. World War

The New Deal

2. World War


Further development of laws and regulations

Established mass education by law (time span)

Here and now!

The head of K. Marx (with NSDAP, Stalin and Mao) hangs by this as well as the accusations from the (Joseph) McCarthyism time:
"Gravestone for Communism (until Utopia)"

I find that capitalism is better at controlling corruption than communism. That is, capitalism is more fault tolerant. While communism almost demands that people are like angels, capitalism can deal with a relatively large amount of not so good people.

Besides, in capitalism people can settle with less and be pleased with it while those who want it can work themselves to death and enjoy their fortune from it. This is almost impossible in communism, I think.

I want to mention:

- communism focuses on work of people and this can be way harder to make a just issue of in that system

- capitalism focuses on money and money can be made to adjust for all kind of relationships, from capitalisation of ideas to the amount of stress from work

Who is supposed to kick the hardest work in communism without having advantages for doing it? If workload is supposed to be equal, should one make elaborate psychologies of work to make sure nobody stresses, carry more workload, than others? Communism seems to me to be more complex to incorporate.

Soviet Union has been marked by two very bad ideas: Communism and Atheism!

China is not any communist country anymore, mind you. It has officially described itself as socialist some years ago and even then their communism may just be a kind of "communism" through which their need for control in overcoming severe problems and a vast population may have called for it.
It's true that China has only one party, but they do elect electives to the "party congress" and I also happen to believe that there's more than 1 possible candidate in most or all of these elections to the "party congress" beside having the possibility to vote blank or not to vote at all, going into some kind of system opposition, trying to change the political machinery, at least!

The elections? You will have to check, but I think the last has been reported within a year or two. Thanks for asking the question, Wootah. One thing is for certain, China does not fulfill the the communist ideal of everyone being equally rich or poor, quite the opposite. There are quite large economic differences in China. It's true though that they have only one party and that this is typical for a communist country, perhaps even for a social one as they describe themselves as.

The type of democracy (in case it really is) is one that goes along a line of culture and a certain scope of politics and it is of this kind, I think a one-party democracy can be effective. That you want progress and control over this fast and steady and thus the political system is set up as it is. Remember that the Chinese political system is handling 1,2 Billion people and a good deal of these are quite poor! So what should one do? I think the Chinese have chosen a fine middle way, preserving own culture and emphasising the important aims beside of this.

You can look up yourselves the democracies of USA with its 310 million people and downwards...
As well (the above text has been edited from the source, Issues from the Internet, on this blog:
"I've earlier written these on [forum] where you can find the original writings. I find them to be so striking that I post them here as well:

[Dead for all foreseeable future?]


  1. The above shortlist for economic development in history is complete for all that I bother.

  2. There is a fundamental problem in Communism and ("pure enough) Socialism because the ideologies can't accept Human Rights (UDHR), Kantian ethics and (Secular) Humanism (if any humanism).

    Conclusion: Gravestone for Communism further!