Synthesis of Death and Meaning

.
.

JUNGLE LAW:  Is the superior law of which all change is derivative the law of the jungle?  Is cooperation only a subset  form of competition?  Are the values of the Ubermensch superior to the "slave" values of the Judeo-Christian tradition?  Does "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" invariably lead to decline in passion, energy, initiative, and creativity?  Are the longer-standing, hunter-based mores of capitalism superior to the agricultural-based mores of socialism?  I don't think so.  To me, such thinking flits between false linear poles.  This propensity for false flitting deludes many to believe everything can be progressively reduced to the objectively, particularly measurable.  However, our reality abides not just with inter-functioning of measurable parts, but also with qualitatively immeasurable, random, cunning, smudged out, inexplicable, and often sublime relations with fields and wholes.  Ultimately, there is no objectively material, external standard by which to measure reality-in-itself.  The only way "to apprehend" the ultimate aspect of reality is not with objectively measurable substance, but with subjectively qualitative and appreciative consciousness.  For seeking meaning and fulfillment, consciousness is superior to matter.  For every aspect and quality of consciousness, there is but one clear, true pole.  It is the perpetually receding pole that guides all partial perspectives of consciousness in what, for them, constitute meaningful seeking of fulfillment.  Periodically, one may survey:  How am I doing, Higher Reality (aka, "God")?  One resolves, a little more strength, Higher Reality.  In intuitive empathy for Higher Reality, one resolves:  Guide me as I-participate-in-reshaping-the-matter-that-shapes-my-ecosystem-that-shapes-my-opportunities-to-evolve.  How best may I cooperate as an eco-holism, in order to pursue the best among alternatively competing visions for ecosystems?  Insofar as human evolution entails parenting, I fail to see how any sane parent could want to raise a child on a moral diet that consisted exclusively of the values Nietzsche would attribute to an ubermensch.

.
ECONOMICS:  As to the economics of reality, I don't think there is clear, dichotomous choice between free enterprise and socialism.  Rather, I think the clear, overarching choice is between availing decent middle-class civilization versus being sucked into a new system of serfdom.  As society becomes wealthier and machines take over more and more of our work, the day to day stuff will of course be availed to nearly everyone.  Soon, society will want every citizen to have an Ipad.  In that way, Socialism will spread.  However, the cutting edge should still be largely open to unfettered experimentation and enterprise.  As the cutting edge sinks back into the routine, more and more functions will be socialized.  And so on.  So I think Will and Ariel Durant had it right about Hegel:  Thesis, antithesis, synthesis does not mean that either capitalism or socialism is right.  It means they describe the ongoing, fluxing perimeters of a synthesizing process.  The same may be said about cooperation versus competition.

.

BUSYBODY AGENDAS:  The main reason I loathe the agenda of Obama (and commies) is not because he's a socialist, but because he's plainly a one world socialist who has little respect for the desire of ordinary, competent Americans to be free of know-it-all regulators like himself.  I don't think of life's game as being mainly about linear, material acquisition and progress.  I think of life as being mainly about seeking immaterial, conscious fulfillment.  Since I don't believe in materially objective "progress," I don't believe ordinary, competent people should subjugate their wills to know it all materialist technocrats.  However, I can see how a technocrat would want underlings to believe the choice between ideologies is a matter of black versus white, in favor of whatever school best serves his/her interest.
.

SUSTAINING LIBERTY AT THE CUTTING EDGE:  As humanity becomes more successful in stockpiling expressions of its intentionality, society will accumulate more wealth and infrastructure, more to distribute, and more need to distribute in order that people can participate, communicate, remain in touch, and preserve decent influence.  Liberty stands on top of the accumulation, at the cutting, innovative edge.  So, a people's law needs to live in order to spread accumulating wealth.  Especially in respect of inter connectivity that makes nearly everything more interdependent, no one can be said to be entirely self reliant.  Instead, everyone's wealth comes more and more to depend on social cooperation with everyone else.  Thus, it is false to pose the main economic challenge as entailing a choice between socialism and capitalism.  Rather, the main challenge pertains to how best to guide their blending. The accumulation of technological know how will keep the blend accelerating.  More social wealth will cause more to be socialized.  There is no mathematically quantitative answer.  However, there are qualitative factors and signposts.  Factors and concerns relate to the following:  How to keep sloth and genetic drag at manageable levels. How to keep numerically superior sloths from bringing the table down. How to keep elites from blowing the table up.  How to keep tech within limits of humanity's capacity not to destroy itself.  How to preserve incentives, especially among the most innovative and energetic.  How to preserve meaningful society against a world of loons.
.