Has Society rights over the wealth that is produced, AND HOW MANY?

Has Society rights

over the wealth that is produced,

AND HOW MANY?

The inequality in today's society has reached absurd heights, and the process of accumulation of wealth continues accelerating. In 2017 8 people held as much wealth holds the poorest half of the population of the earth (3,6 billion people). 82% of the wealth created in 2017 at a global level, ended up in the hands of the 1% of richest people on the planet, while the poorest have not seen any increase in income. The real incomes of the poorest inhabitants of the planet have grown by just $ 3 a year for the last 25 years.

In the U.S., 2017 the 3 richest hold wealth equivalent to the poorest half of the population. In 2014, the richest 1% held 39% of the national wealth, compared with the 22% it accounted for in 1980.

In Germany, 10% of the population controls 40% of the wealth.

In Europe, with elements of 2016, 10% of the population owns 37% of the total income.

5.3 trillion dollars held by the 500 richest in the world (2017), is equivalent to the sum of the debts 120 countries of the earth.

In Africa there are huge reserves of oil, there is 98% of the world production of diamonds, and 77% of the world's gold production. Africa but (but...) plagued by hunger, poverty and utter misery.

Joseph Stiglitz, economist, Nobel prize of Economy: " Inequality and poverty among children is a moral trivialization. The right claim that poverty is the result of laziness and the wrong choices. But the kids don't choose their parents".

In America 1 in 4 children lives in poverty. In Greece, 1 in 6.

This monstrous and obscene inequality which oppresses the lives of the people, in order to be accepted, accompanied by an equally incredible propaganda of its justification, where extremely important role plays the concept of the framework of the perspective (framing). The investigation showed that the perceptions and judgments of us are influenced to a huge extent by the context in which is placed the analysis. The inequality is framed so that it seems fair or at least acceptable, or is left to be understood that the price of the restriction of the inequality, it would be heavy.

Along with the monstrous and constantly accelerated increase in the concentration of wealth, we have and a huge increase in the social (or relative) impoverishment of the people, namely the mismatch between the level of life and at the level of social needs, which increase in parallel with the gigantic increase of the productivity of labour and left unsatisfied, and that creates a huge and unaffordable problems the people of (this regardless of the utter misery, which can be reduced). We are not only talking about increasing needs in education, in housing, in health, in the ordinary sense. We have an epidemic of mental disease (in England 1 in 4 adults has been diagnosed with a mental illness - and is not the only country). The mental illness is fixed with deprivation, low income, unemployment, low education, worse physical health. Cancer patients are suffering from a disease that 90% of the harmful factors that cause, is environmental (ie. industrial, more correctly, capitalist).

The voices against this absurdity, shame, and degradation of mankind, they sound like a whisper in the river of "information" and requests who contain reach to the "Tobin tax", a "fairer" redistribution of wealth, or accept with gratitude the charity of the rich.

Has Society rights over the produced wealth and how much?

"The technology works with science and science with the technology to move forward, so it's intertwined. For a technological breakthrough is necessary theoretical knowledge from different sciences. For the scientific discovery, it is necessary technological equipment" [School textbook for Technology].

Each i.e. the inventor and the innovator, to create innovation, has been based on the huge volume of knowledge and progress that has been achieved humanity. Isaac Newton put it right and proportionate: "If I was able to sight far away from all, it is because I stood on shoulders of giants".

People i.e. like Bill Gates, for example, reached outstanding achievements, only and only because they were supported by a high level of education, scientific infrastructure, and collective institutions, which allowed them to acquire the necessary knowledge and experiment.

However, apart from these visible and traceable procedures, upon which the progress of humanity it is based, there are other, more fundamental, complex, lengthy and non-visible, for which an idea gives us Friedrich Engels:

"The concept of number is an "invention" of someone wise, only if you see it cut off from the society and its development. But it would be wise to measure, had a capacity of abstraction from all other properties of things, and retaining only the quantitative element.

This ability of the abstraction acquired humanity in a long line of thousands of years of action and reaction to nature, experience. If you look at it this way, then the concept of number appears as assimilation and abstraction of the logic of nature, by the act of man".

So when the innovators are claiming the tribute, the prices and the reward of the society, we should be thinking and that they ought TO BE SECURELY GRATEFUL THESE to the society, which gave them the possibility, by clicking on the toil and the knowledge accumulated by humanity, to express their creativity and to confirm their personality. Or let's innovate outside of society...

The narrative i.e. of the elite and those "they should be grateful mankind", is limited within the walls of a factory or a business. But mankind, in its entire extent and historicity, even to the utmost limits, always invent and create/produced and continues to invent and to create/produce. Not of course in the sense of "scientists" "economists", but in a broad sense of the contribution in the evolution of mankind. The concept of production/creation embraces every human activity and every resource of humanity, even the most extreme limits. Because, what is the evolution of the "illegitimate of the bride of Christ", born in a cave and evolved into a revolutionary leader of 1821, Georgios Karaiskakis. Or Steven Hawking, the totally paralyzed leading scientist? You can think of countless other such extreme examples. Does this type of creators, and such activities have less impact on productivity? Contribute less to the "GDP"? Let's say if they want...

Facing things with such a perspective, we can understand that the language (which is the result of cooperation, of communication, of work and of the fights of each society and never a result of the inspiration of some of the innovative or individuals) and the literate and educated people, the  carriers of the language (total, i.e. the members of the society), are the fundamental tool (or factory), on which steps and creates each inventor/innovator of the inspiration, or the private the production and his  property. These are not the "framework" for to rob and to oppress the elite people, but it is inheritance, property, and rights of mankind, that no generation may concede to individuals. On this, rests everything that is created or "produced" in society. On this is found the right of society to everything compose the wealth of mankind.

Besides, if anything has become obvious now (remember what "scientific" way they used to reduce our wages), is that the economic practice, it is not a science like physics or chemistry, but is imbued to the core of the policy. This describes and explains great, George Karabelias ("The new era of global capitalism"):

"To understand today's stock market phenomenon and the entrance in the era of the "virtual economy", we need to introduce the notion of the "social factory" and even on a planetary scale.

Large companies don't post just goodwill from specified workers, but from the entire planet, through a fabulous transfer of resources that allows the stock market and the incessant movements of capital. This posting of goodwill is not carried out through the direct employment relationship, but through the inclusion of the whole of the planet in the hegemony of capital, and indeed of the west.

We are in front a new system of posting goodwill at a national and supranational level, a system for the immediate change of society into an object of exploitation, where the financial flows, the monopoly of knowledge-information and the military power changed in a direct factor utilization of capital. The utilization of capital alters, almost directly, into a political element".

If people cease to accept as reasonable the current situation and realize their rights, the system will collapse. Because over 9/10 the sovereignty of the elite is based on propaganda and corruption, and only in the 1/10, to the power and the guns. If the propaganda collapse, will be nullified and the effectiveness of violence.

The great battle so must be given about these hidden beliefs and ideas, that no one discusses today. People need to be aware of their rights.

They'll probably blame us for "populists". Uh, yeah! We're populists. TO THE NTH DEGREE! Because we are concerned for all peoples, all over the planet. I mean, we're HUMANITARIANS! Let's blame us...

15 October 2018

George Papanikolaou