Macro-economic drifts toward transnational oligharchy

Are we certain that a pure capitalism and free market applies in practice? Von Mises speculated that even if capitalism consolidated into one global corporation it would break up and become competitive I think. Competition is the nature of business some believe but is the consolidation of market elements by globalists in effect purchasing the global economy with accumulated capital advantage not a process of more than theory at work but instead a vicious historical phase of elimination of competition and movement toward global oligarchy and authoritarianism? Corporatist collectivism is an actual possible way of structuring a non-individual work base mass social business structure where promotion is upon attributes regarded as exploitable by others rather than through promotion of one-self by oneself for -oneself through work and initiative. A mass attribute based social structure is a less than optimal social development and instead created as phased array repressive society crushing intelligence and individual rights without concern as the market axiology is based on the value structures of individualism and individual civil rights.

Some of the terminology of macro-economic models that of macro-physics conventionally and needlessly perhaps, for one scientific lexicon of what comprises analogies may be as good as another. 'Force' is a prevalent term from physics used to account for essential observable causative or associated phenonemalities empirically. If force is a concept used in physics it must be good for economics explanations too then? Consumers have imperfect knowledge of course of material needs except for those most pressingly in need of relief such as a glass of pure, cool water, a warm blanket, freedom from tyranny and so forth-the destruction or mal-wearization of environmental abuse agents of biospheric corruption may also supply the material remedies to extreme individual material privations in some instances and 'market forces' might be better applied to 'political forces' to bring social compliance from targeted groups. Can it be fairly said alternatively that if some social environments provide consumers equivalently situated as to be like flowers awaiting pollination that they are being 'forced' by the market, or that they are 'marketing' at all? Individual actualization in a society would need a political economy that meets individual needs and leaves the remainder of time for individual constructions of projects and inventions as well as family interests-a macro-economic structure that is totalitarian would deny the political shaping of the economic production and allocation technology to such a direction that would liberate the individual to pursue free enterprise in the most optimal ways and instead subjugate 'consumers' to a cycle of work, debt and servitude for the benefit of oppressor classes of 'force'. It might also be said that the macro-economic flow models are of an anational basis such as one in biology might observe the dissemination of a virus globally without preference for individual interests. That implicit economic betrayal is a fundamental corruption of Adam Smith's cognition about economics serving a polity rather than a polity inducted into a detached, existential economic control by powerful, mysterious 'forces' known best by macro-economic astrologers.

Market forces in a totalitarian global environment are not free but are co-opted into selections of products that must be made as one has not got the option of moving to the frontier and leaving the economic territory when the frontier exists only with the total control of trans-national corporations and communes controlling local governments. Market forces are dictated in effect by the established owning class that decrees the inertial continuity of its own class interests in owning everything-one would find an even worse actualization of that phenomena in the communist party 'ownership' of the factories and government in the former Soviet Union. Unfortunately the cold war generated a stagnation in the development of western economic theory such that corporations were elevated to an undeserved theoretical prominence and held as the sole alternative to communist collectivism; thus corporations developed in the global communications era into a corporate collectivism that hasn't run its course yet with the board members as the communist elite and the workers as the proletariat supporting an ad hoc non-commissioned officer shareholder class.

There is still a lot of contingent free market enterprise in the world today but the inertia of established infrastructure prevents mass social changes or sales of products that would change mass systemic structures in America for example. An effective electric vehicle platform for 100 dollars with solar panels and thin film quick recharge batteries would put millions out of work and undermine profits of corporations. Not even Wal-mart will sell low cost wind power generators or solar panels for home use because the corporate trick is to keep everyone dependent on oil and global power supply as long as possible. Electric no-water use toilets would conserve water but undermine municipal waste structures and treatment investments.

Capitalism is supposed to function on a positive basis by creating product development investments, but in a totalitarian geographical social environment capital may be gained by the corrupt too much repressing individual enterprise, privacy and depressing the quality of life in order to prevent competition. In a totalitarian political territory the ideals of free competition in a capitalist economic structure do not have a matching political structure. Business takes over politics. In America a Mitt Romney with his Harvard MBA may follow President Bush with his to enrich a different group of globalist investors while national interests comparatively decline. Adam Smith believed that capitalism should augment a democracy not replace it yet corporatists are too willing to do that today unaware that democracy must be protected for-itself as well as a nation and quality of life for citizens.

Historically the issues aren't new. Isolation isn't the remedy but a M.I.T.I. like analysis of how to invent new businesses that will reduce trade deficits and liberate the people from personal debt is a way to move government. I will provide some philosophical background on the most general analysis of state structures by considering Socrates and Plato.

Socrates was given the hemlock to drink and put to death by the Athenian State-not Plato. Plato is said by some to be the greatest philosopher ever, yet he isn't known to have written anything about himself at all...he wrote the Republic, The Meno and all the other books with Socrates as the philosopher credited with saying all the philosophically leading content. It was Plato that established the Academy that instructed in philosophy (alethia) and carried on the tradition.

Socrates believed in God and Plato did as well by inference. The God they believed in was the One that the neo Platonist Plotinus wrote about six or seven hundred years later. Plato developed the complex idea of the realm of forms, and other people writing that I have read have pointed out that Parmenides is credited with starting the thought paradigms that Plato later developed as the metaphysical aspects of the realm of forms that was again more fully developed by Plotinus. Parmenides was a pre-Socratic philosopher worth checking out with a google search.

Socrates was accused of corrupting youth by instructing them in philosophical method and critical thinking about politics and everything else regarding opinion, or theory of knowledge (epistemology). He had the option to leave Athens and live in exile but choose not to but instead to perish saying that the state had nurtured him and he would accept their judgment. The Athenian state compared to the modern state in America was a very simple democracy. There had been an oligarchy that did not trust the demos or populus. Today in the U.S.A. tran-national corporate interests and over influence nationally by a globally owned broadcast media have corrupted and obfuscated the democracy in the United States and brought it close to the corporate collectivism envisioned by Mussolini, helped in by Henry Ford and Adolph Hitler, admired as a fulfillment of Marxist worldly economic dialects and an ephemeral, stagnating uncreative entity that morphs too easily into decline and fall, war, chaos and autocratic rule even by a special central committee.

Plato and Socrates had it easy comparatively in contemplating the ideal state. Today Americans must decide for themselves if a nation is worth having, if capitalism is pure or corrupted by mob control, if capitalism is the highest possible progress in economic actualization for individual interests or if new economic systems supported by federal policy could be invented and so forth. The founders were for national interests before transnational interests, and even Plato wrote about the Republic as one state-the Romans did well with that until they became a trans-national empire too diverse for coherence as subverted by a plethora of problems and pleasures.