New World Order (NWO), sometimes called the Great Reset

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Dilip:

I consider your Post # 299 as an Opposition Challenge to Proposed Statement # 3. So I have gone back and edited the earlier post to add this "Supplementary Challenge".

Bob A (As Group Secretary)

Dilip why bother engaging with someone who behaves like a pompous officious bureaucrat? Life is too short.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Human Self-Government

[Part II of 3; see Part I above]

Statement # 8 (Proposed)

Good education enlightens the mind. Today's rote data learning only challenges the memory. Without the former, society will have neither a wise electorate, nor a wise government.

[Note: This Statement has already been adopted by the Fb Group, Democratic Marxist Global Forum]

Supporting Reasons

The purpose of education is to promote the student's creativity and capacity for societal criticism. It is not just about "facts" (data learning). We want students to develop good and discerning "judgment". A wise citizenry will lead to a wise self-government.

Processing

There will be one week for a Challenge to proposed Statement # 8; deadline: Monday, Sept. 4 @ 11:59 PM EDT.

B. Processing Periods

1. If there are no challenges, then the Statement is “generally accepted” after one week.

2. The deadline for discussion of a Challenge will normally be one week after there is the first Defense of the Challenge.

Appendix A

Statements Generally Accepted by Libertarians in a tournament chess players group on the Canadian national chess discussion board (Non-Chess Forum), ChessTalk. The CT'ers are discussing Human Self-Government and the New World Order/Great Reset problem. They represent the partisan political spectrum and the issue spectrum.



Statement # 1

Governments at all levels pass too many laws. Many are more restrictive than necessary, and some are just unnecessary. This unduly restrains the freedom of the individual, which is the paramount concern of society.

Statement in Opposition to Libertarian positions in Statements # 1 - # 6

Part 1:
There is no such thing as universal common-sense. Since a common-sense interpretation of the Natural Law ("do no harm to others, except in fair competition") is always subject to personal bias as to what exactly common-sense IS, there can be no consistent and irrefutable, indisputable interpretation of the Natural Law. Consequently, any attempt at one-size-fits-all Libertarianism will lead to alienation / protests / violence / overthrow of the system. Even the vaunted Judges and Police will be at each other's throats, because they have differing views of common-sense. This is the nature of humanity as evidenced throughout human history."

Part 2:
"There is no such thing as a universal definition of "fair competition". Therefore even where common-sense is not in dispute (if that could ever be the case, which Part 1 disputes), still disputes will inevitably arise over what constitutes exceptions under the Fair Competition clause. Lawyers will endlessly argue about possible exceptions, which current [B]legal systems try to encapsulate under the living, evolving system of laws and sub-laws, which Natural Law counter-intuitively sets out to abolish.


Bob A (Anti-NWO)

Bob, if the straight-forward concepts of common-sense and fair competition sound complicated & unworkable to you and to PP, please accept my sympathies. You are headed for the misery of Democratic Marxism, where you get drowned in a myriad nonsensical 'laws' devoid of all common-sense, and fair competition is replaced with 'unfair grabbing' from a very limited common-pie all are forced to share... Are you forgetting the dark side of human beings (which you repeatedly mention), when it comes to forceful sharing with strangers (outside of the their family which they have created, and hence feel responsible for)?

[Bob Armstrong]

Statements re Human Self-Governance (NWO/GR)
(Generally accepted by a tournament chess players group on the Canadian national chess discussion board, ChessTalk (Non-Chess Forum). The CT'ers are discussing Human Self-Government and the New World Order/Great Reset problem.They represent the partisan political spectrum and the issue spectrum.)

Statement # 8

Good education enlightens the mind. Today's rote data learning only challenges the memory. Without the former, society will have neither a wise electorate, nor a wise government.

[Note: This Statement has already been adopted by the Fb Group, Democratic Marxist Global Forum]

Supporting Reasons

The purpose of education is to promote the student's creativity and capacity for societal criticism. It is not just about "facts" (data learning). We want students to develop good and discerning "judgment". A wise citizenry will lead to a wise self-government.

Processing
After one week no CT'er has come forward to Challenge the proposed Statement # 8.

Conclusion

Statement # 8 is generally accepted. It joins the list of other Statements.

Bob A (As Group Secretary)

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Dilip:

Yes, family first.

But all Religions teach "Help the Stranger" (Sometimes stated as the "Golden Rule"). I know you agree with this.

To paraphrase retired Canadian Judge Rosalie Abella (Wikipedia: Appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004; became the first Jewish woman and refugee to sit on the Canadian Supreme Court bench): A society is measured by the way it treats its most vulnerable". I know you agree with this.

Altruism should, often, over-ride self interest - as a society of equals, all workers must share the economic pie (And those incapable of working; and those who unemployed seeking work). I believe you agree with this.

So your issue seems to be that the members of society should be free, in fair competition, to gain as much as they can of the society pie, so long as their is no harm directly to others or society.

Problem: Such unbridled greed (legal), seen by Libertarians as "moral", will cause a very disparate division of the pie, because clearly some individuals are greatly talented entrepreneurs (Jeff Besos, Bill Gates, George Soros, Elon Musk, Richard Branson, Jack Ma, Mark Zuckerberg, etc.). What will be left for the ordinary worker? And yet it is the worker (along with Capital) that CREATES the pie. Capital alone can only gain interest, dividends, etc..........it needs the labour of the worker for society to function economically. Is there not something wrong with this picture?

Solution: Progressive Taxation - give the workers a more fair piece of the pie, by taking some pieces from those who can't eat all they have anyways, to distributing it fairly to those with less, according to law.

Bob A (Democratic Marxist/As Participant)

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dilip:

Yes, family first.

But all Religions teach "Help the Stranger" (Sometimes stated as the "Golden Rule"). I know you agree with this.

To paraphrase retired Canadian Judge Rosalie Abella (Wikipedia: Appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004; became the first Jewish woman and refugee to sit on the Canadian Supreme Court bench): A society is measured by the way it treats its most vulnerable". I know you agree with this.

Altruism should, often, over-ride self interest - as a society of equals, all workers must share the economic pie (And those incapable of working; and those who unemployed seeking work). I believe you agree with this.

So your issue seems to be that the members of society should be free, in fair competition, to gain as much as they can of the society pie, so long as their is no harm directly to others or society.

Problem: Such unbridled greed (legal), seen by Libertarians as "moral", will cause a very disparate division of the pie, because clearly some individuals are greatly talented entrepreneurs (Jeff Besos, Bill Gates, George Soros, Elon Musk, Richard Branson, Jack Ma, Mark Zuckerberg, etc.). What will be left for the ordinary worker? And yet it is the worker (along with Capital) that CREATES the pie. Capital alone can only gain interest, dividends, etc..........it needs the labour of the worker for society to function economically. Is there not something wrong with this picture?

Solution: Progressive Taxation - give the workers a more fair piece of the pie, by taking some pieces from those who can't eat all they have anyways, to distributing it fairly to those with less, according to law.

Bob A (Democratic Marxist/As Participant)

So now you are labeling legal theft as 'forced altruism'. You seem to be endorsing what is happening (and being condoned) in USA: "You need something you have not earned enough for? Go steal it from a mall! The next time you need a good chess clock to improve your on-board skills, and don't have one and can't buy one, steal it at your next tournament!!"

[Dilip Panjwani]

Dilip why bother engaging with someone who behaves like a pompous officious bureaucrat? Life is too short.

Well, when I am convinced he is 'a wolf in sheep's clothing'...' a fascist under the cover of a couple of votes'...

[Bob Armstrong]

I congratulate our CT Group on Human Self-Government.

We have had "free-form" discussion and all have learned from another.

Whereas free-form discussion is beneficial, it produces little that is concrete.

Our group, using TCFP, has created three sets of good, layperson's, succinct, concrete Statements! They are now presented in a form here that can easily become a Hard Copy. It can now be shared digitally or manually by hard copy:

Human Self-Government Generally - 9 Statements
Libertarianism - 8 Statements
Democratic Marxism - 3 Statements

We are, in a small way, making available education materials on important human issues, for those interested. Whether anyone other than us sees our material is pretty much up to us.

Bob A (As Group Secretary/No wolf.....)

[Sid Belzberg]

BobA you might find the history of the kibbutz movement in Israel interesting.

The kibbutz movement started in the early 20th century as an experiment in collective living and agricultural production. In traditional, or "classic," kibbutzim, private property was primarily discouraged, and most assets were communally owned. Members worked for the collective and received services like housing, healthcare, and education from the kibbutz rather than a salary. In these more traditional settings, an individual with a large family inheritance would typically have been expected to contribute it to the communal enterprise.

However, many kibbutzim have undergone significant changes in recent decades. Many have moved away from strict collectivism to embrace various forms of privatization, often referred to as the "renewed" or "new" kibbutzim. In these communities, members may receive salaries, own private property, and even run private businesses. The specifics can vary widely from one kibbutz to another.

So, whether an individual in a kibbutz can own private property like a large family inheritance would depend on the rules of that particular kibbutz. In more traditional kibbutzim, there may be social or formal expectations for the inheritance to be shared or contributed in some way to the community. In more privatized kibbutzim, private ownership of such an inheritance is more likely to be accepted.

So, what is interesting is that a small community with its own rules can operate with or without the concept of private property. The idea of tiny villages like Kibbutz does not entail having to have a Marxist philosophy of abolition of private property.

You seem to operate under the assumption that small communities must equal Marxist abolition of private property. We have a working model in Israel where you could go either way. The reality is the Elites that control the WEF and their UN partners, including the WHO, and in turn are controlled by the CCP, have brainwashed you with the altruistic notion of fighting climate change, fighting sarscov2 virus and the slow-kill bioweapon injections that have caused massive infertility among women worldwide is all part of the CCP's agenda to wipe out Western civilization as we know it and make them the masters of a depopulated slave state.

[Dilip Panjwani]

the slow-kill bioweapon injections have caused massive infertility among women worldwide.

Hi Sid, Is there any date supporting this? The following link shows that the fertility decline has not accelerated 2020 till now at least:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...fertility-rate

(You may postulate that 'working' from home should have increased fertility, which did not happen...)

[Bob Armstrong]

Democratic Marxism



1. Private Property

Sid - Post # 308 - 23/9/5 - "[Democratic Marxism/Bob A] seem to operate under the assumption that small communities must equal Marxist abolition of private property."

DM - DM will abolish "Bourgeois Capitol". It allows for small, " personal property" of various types........the exact format of this will likely be determined on the ground, by the local residents. This position has already been clearly stated in other prior posts questioning the role of private property, if any, under Democratic Marxism.

2. Local Political Unit (LPU)

DM seeks the abolition of nation-states. In its place will exist an Earth that is a "collection of villages". The Commune and the Kibbutz are favoured models. As well, the business structure of the "Cooperative" is favoured. The general goal in all is small & communal. For example, it is the policy of the Democratic Marxist Party of Ontario (As yet unregistered) that the province will devolve all powers possible to the LPU's, except those necessary for the Province to change function to being the Administrative Secretary for the Ontario LPU's. It will continue to receive federal transfer payments, and then share them between the LPU's and itself, so the Province is totally functional in a new way.

3. Local Adaption

Sid - Post # 308 - 23/9/5 - "So, what is interesting is that a small community with its own rules can operate with or without the concept of private property."

DM - DM agrees with Sid. The overarching DM principles for society will not be rigid. They will be flexible. They will honour local decision-making. So, as with the evolution of the kibbutz, local governments will have a fair space in which to establish a customized DM LPU. Of course, if the society blows apart trying to establish majority position re LPU structure and law, an election will be held, and the majority, if of a mind, can throw the rascals out.........we would hope not in favour of some unbridled Capitalist Party (sigh).

I will revisit these when I form more proposed Statements for Democratic Marxism for our CT'er group to chomp on.

Bob A (As Participant; DM'er)

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Sid, Is there any date supporting this? The following link shows that the fertility decline has not accelerated 2020 till now at least:


.

Hi Dilip,


Covid injections linked to increase in miscarriages and decline in birth rates

Compared to the flu vaccine, covid injections are associated with a significant increase in adverse events among women of reproductive age. Data revealed a 27-fold higher risk of miscarriage and a more than twofold increased risk of adverse foetal outcomes across six different categories following covid injections.

Covid injection contents are biodistributed into the bloodstream within hours and cross “all physiologic barriers including the maternal-placental-foetal barrier and the blood-brain barriers in both the mother and the foetus.”

Birth rates in multiple European countries fell significantly at the end of 2021, months after covid injections became widely utilised.

Researchers have called for the immediate suspension of covid vaccination for all persons of childbearing and reproductive age.

---

By Dr. Joseph Mercola

While a typical vaccine must undergo 10 to 12 years of trials before it’s released, during the pandemic, covid injections were made available to the public just 10 months after development, courtesy of an Emergency Use Authorisation.¹ Even pregnant women were subjected to the injections, and in many cases were mandated to receive them.

“The pushing of these experimental covid vaccines globally is the greatest violation of medical ethics in the history of medicine, maybe humanity,” Dr. James Thorp, a maternal-foetal medicine expert, told Tucker Carlson.² Thorp and colleagues published a preprint study that found striking risks to pregnant women who received the injections, along with their unborn babies.³

The outcomes were so dire that the researchers concluded pregnant women should not receive covid injections until further research is completed. “A worldwide moratorium on the use of covid vaccines in pregnancy is advised until randomised prospective trials document safety in pregnancy and long-term follow-up in offspring,” they explained.⁴
Texas Lindsay: Dr. James Thorp, OBGYN on Tucker Carlson: Harms of the Covid Vaccine for Pregnant Women (3 mins)
The above video is an interview with Tucker Carlson on 23 February 2023.
Covid Injections Linked to 27-Fold Higher Risk of Miscarriage


Thorp and colleagues used data from the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (“VAERS”) to assess adverse events experienced by women of reproductive age following receipt of a covid injection, compared to receipt of a flu vaccine. Compared to the flu vaccine, covid injections were associated with a significant increase in adverse events (“AE”), including:⁵

Menstrual abnormality	Miscarriage
Foetal chromosomal abnormalities	Foetal malformation
Foetal cystic hygroma	Foetal cardiac disorders
Foetal arrhythmia	Foetal cardiac arrest
Foetal vascular malperfusion	Foetal growth abnormalities
Foetal abnormal surveillance	Foetal placental thrombosis
Low amniotic fluid	Foetal death/stillbirth

“When normalised by time-available, doses-given, or persons-received, all covid vaccine AE far exceed the safety signal on all recognised thresholds … Pregnancy and menstrual abnormalities are significantly more frequent following covid vaccinations than that of Influenza vaccinations,” the researchers noted.⁶

Specifically, the data revealed a 27-fold higher risk of miscarriage and a more than twofold increased risk of adverse foetal outcomes across six different categories, according to board-certified internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough.⁷
Were Nurses Issued Gag Order Against Speaking Out?


Problems began to appear shortly after covid injections were rolled out, such that a leaked email from a large California hospital was sent out in warning to 200 nurses. The email, from September 2022, contained the subject line, “Demise Handling,” referring to an increase in stillbirths and foetal deaths. A The Conservative Woman report by journalist Sally Beck shared the email’s content, which read:⁸

It seems as though the increase of demise patients [babies] that we are seeing is going to continue. There were 22 demises [stillbirths and foetal deaths] in August [2022], which ties [equals] the record number of demises in July 2021, and so far in September [2022] there have been 7 and it’s only the 8th day of the month.

Beck reports that one nurse, Michelle Gershman, who works in the neonatal ward had her bonus withheld because she spoke out about the rise in foetal deaths. “We used to have one foetal demise per month. That rose to one or two per week,” Gershman said. Beck reported:

Her experience, and the experience of doctors working with pregnant women, is contrary to official “safe and effective” observation and advice, but no one was free to speak out because of a gagging order imposed in September 2021⁹ by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ACOG).

… At the beginning of the rollout, in December 2020, pregnant women who were healthcare workers or deemed to be at risk from Covid began receiving the shots. By May 2021, the vaccine was being recommended to all pregnant American women.

This is despite the fact that none of the vaccine manufacturers had completed reproductive toxicology reports in animals, and none had started clinical trials in pregnant women. Two months later, hospitals noticed a huge increase in miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm births, pregnancy complications and menstrual abnormalities.

Covid Injections Should Be Category X


The mRNA from covid injections circulates in the body for 28 days or more, and the spike protein may trigger clotting, bleeding and tissue damage, according to Dr. McCullough.

Because of this and other concerns, he states that, conservatively, covid injections should be given the Category X designation during pregnancy,¹⁰ which means, “The risk of use of the drug in pregnant women clearly outweighs any possible benefit. The drug is contraindicated in women who are or may become pregnant.”¹¹

Unfortunately, health officials in the US continue to affirm its safety, even for vulnerable populations such as this, as they have from the very beginning. “Shockingly, in the very first week of mass vaccination in December of 2020,” McCullough wrote, “newsreels depicted well-intentioned pregnant mothers getting injected with synthetic lipid nanoparticles laced with long-lasting mRNA coding for the Wuhan Institute of Virology Spike protein.”¹²

Thorp’s study also reported that Pfizer’s data showed covid injection contents are biodistributed into the bloodstream within hours and cross “all physiologic barriers including the maternal-placental-foetal barrier and the blood-brain barriers in both the mother and the foetus.”¹³

A separate study is, in fact, looking at using ionisable lipid nanoparticles (“LPNs”) like those used as mRNA delivery platforms in covid injections, as tools to deliver drugs to the placenta, because they’re so effective at reaching it.

“LNPs enhance mRNA stability, circulation time, cellular uptake and preferential delivery to specific tissues compared to mRNA with no carrier platform,” the researchers wrote.¹⁴ But the study contains some concerning data, which was shared on Twitter:^15,16

User Jikkyleaks tweeted, “This could be one of the biggest scandals in medicine … Can you see that there are fewer foetuses in all the treatment groups compared to saline? It’s not dramatic, because the authors published that figure instead of the number of foetal losses.”¹⁷

[Sid Belzberg]

Health officials made the recommendation that covid injections are safe and effective for pregnant women based on a 42-day study from Pfizer involving 44 rats.¹⁸ What’s more, the Pfizer-BioNTech rat study revealed the injection more than doubled the incidence of preimplantation loss and also led to a low incidence of mouth/jaw malformations, gastroschisis (a birth defect of the abdominal wall) and abnormalities in the right-sided aortic arch and cervical vertebrae in the foetuses.¹⁹

“In that study the foetal loss rate DOUBLED (4.2% to 9.8%) but had little impact on the overall number of foetuses,” Jikkyleaks tweeted, sharing the chart above. “This is how this information is hidden. That single slide should have been enough to prompt much more investigation, because it showed fewer foetuses in EVERY GROUP.”^20,21
Shocking Decline in Birth Rates Post-Covid Injections


Birth rates in multiple European countries fell significantly in the end of 2021, months after covid injections became widely utilised. The data,²² compiled by a team of European researchers, found declines in birth rates in all the countries they studied, including:²³

Germany	Austria	Switzerland
France	Belgium	Netherlands
Denmark	Estonia	Finland
Latvia	Lithuania	Sweden
Portugal	Spain	Czech Republic
Hungary	Poland	Romania
Slovenia	Iceland	Northern Ireland
Montenegro	Serbia

The team explained:²⁴
In advance it should be noted that every single examined European country shows a monthly decline in birth rates of up to more than 10% compared to the last three years. It can be shown that this very alarming signal cannot be explained by infections with covid-19.

However, one can establish a clear temporal correlation to covid vaccinations incidence in the age group of men and women between 18 and 49 years. Therefore, in-depth statistical and medical analyses have to be demanded.

The declines in birth rates ranged from a low of 1.3% in France to a high of 19% in Romania. Seven countries had a decline in birth rate of more than 10%, while 15 countries had declines of greater than 4%. Switzerland’s drop was said to have exceeded the drop that occurred from World War I, World War II, the Great Depression and the release of oral contraceptives.²⁵

No connection was found between the declines in birth rates and covid infections or hospitalisations, with the team noting:²⁶
Adverse reactions related to the female reproductive organs and study findings related to male fertility point to a causal interpretation of the association of birth declines and the covid-19 vaccinations.
Covid Injections Affect Menstrual Cycles


It remains unknown how covid injections affect reproductive health in men and women. For instance, as The Vaccine Reaction reported: “To date, the manufacturer’s insert for FDA-approved covid shots explicitly states that it has not been tested for the potential to impair male fertility.” However, data on US infertility after the rollout of covid injections aren’t available.²⁷

Meanwhile, women around the globe have reported changes in their menstrual cycles following covid injections, and health officials largely brushed off the reports or labelled them anecdotal.

But a study published in Obstetrics & Gynaecology – and funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (“NICHD”) and the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) Office of Research on Women’s Health – confirms an association between menstrual cycle length and covid injections.²⁸

Clinical trials for covid injections did not collect data about menstrual cycles following injection, and VAERS does not actively collect menstrual cycle information either, making it difficult to initially determine whether the injections were having an effect. Anecdotal reports on social media, however, are numerous and, according to the study, “suggest menstrual disturbances are much more common …”²⁹

The Obstetrics & Gynaecology study involved 3,959 individuals between the ages of 18 and 45 years. Those who had not received a covid injection noted no significant changes in cycle 4 during the study compared to their first three cycles.

Those who received covid injections, however, had longer menstrual cycles, typically by less than one day, when they received the injections. The longer cycles were noted for both doses of the injection, with a 0.71-day increase after the first dose and 0.91-day increase after the second dose.³⁰
Cycle Changes of Eight Days or More Noted


The overall declines were described as not clinically significant. However, some women, particularly those who received two shots in the same menstrual cycle, experienced significant changes, including a two-day increase in cycle length and, in some cases, changes in cycle length of eight days or more. Considering a regular menstrual cycle is “an overt sign of health and fertility,”³¹ any changes could have major ramifications.

Further, the team noted: “Questions remain about other possible changes in menstrual cycles, such as menstrual symptoms, unscheduled bleeding, and changes in the quality and quantity of menstrual bleeding.”³²

Taken together, the links to miscarriage, reproductive changes and declining birth rates raise major red flags about the safety of covid injections for people of reproductive age. As such, the European research team echoed Thorp in calling for a moratorium on covid injections for pregnant women, and took it a step further, suggesting a suspension for everyone of reproductive age:³³
Given the considerable individual and social relevance of the link between vaccination campaigns and declining birth rates, the immediate suspension of covid-19 vaccination for all persons of childbearing and reproductive age should be called for.
Sources and References

• ^1,3,13Preprints 2022, 2022090430. doi: 10.20944/preprints202209.0430.v1 (PDF download)
• ²Rumble February 27, 2023, 1:00
• ^4,5,6Preprints 2022, 2022090430. doi: 10.20944/preprints202209.0430.v1
• ^7,10,12Substack, Courageous Discourse March 2, 2023
• ⁸TCW March 20, 2023
• ⁹The Gazette of Medical Sciences March 1, 2022
• ¹¹America Out Loud November 28, 2022
• ¹⁴bioRxiv December 22, 2022
• ^15,17,20Twitter, Jikkyleaks, March 18, 2023
• ¹⁶bioRxiv December 22, 2022, Figure 5
• ¹⁸WND May 4, 2022
• ¹⁹Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law Volume 4:130-143 November 2021
• ²¹Substack, Arkmedic’s blog February 28, 2023
• ^22,24Decline of Live Births in Europe August 25, 2022
• ^23,25,27The Vaccine Reaction March 15, 2023
• ^26,33Decline of Live Births in Europe August 25, 2022, Page 88
• ^28,29Obstetrics & Gynecology: January 5, 2022 – Volume – Issue – 10.1097
• ³⁰Obstetrics & Gynecology: January 5, 2022 – Volume – Issue – 10.1097, Results
• ^31,32Obstetrics & Gynecology: January 5, 2022 – Volume – Issue – 10.1097, Conclusion

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Sid, Is there any date supporting this? The following link shows that the fertility decline has not accelerated 2020 till now at least:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...fertility-rate

(You may postulate that 'working' from home should have increased fertility, which did not happen...)

Hi Dilip, I have posted this video here several times. I can't emphasize enough how important this evidence is that also supports the above,

https://rumble.com/v2hpryu-naomi-wol...documents.html

[Bob Armstrong]

Capitalist Progressive Taxation

Dilip Panjwani - Post # 305 - Sept. 5, 2023

"So now you [Bob A/DM] are labeling legal theft as 'forced altruism'. You seem to be endorsing what is happening (and being condoned) in USA: "You need something you have not earned enough for? Go steal it from a mall! The next time you need a good chess clock to improve your on-board skills, and don't have one and can't buy one, steal it at your next tournament!!"

DM Response

Dilip, you play with words too loosely. Let's define a few things.

Theft/Steal - where a material possession (And sometimes mental possessions e.g. copyright) of one person is "Illegally" removed from them permanently, and there are no excusing extenuating circumstances.

Progressive Taxation - The Canadian Encyclopedia - "Taxes are mandatory payments by individuals and corporations to government. They are levied to finance government services, redistribute income, and influence the behaviour of consumers and investors. The Constitution Act, 1867 gave Parliament unlimited taxing powers and restricted those of the provinces to mainly direct taxation (taxes on income and property, rather than on activities such as trade). Personal income tax and corporate taxes were introduced in 1917 to help finance the First World War (see Income Tax in Canada)."

So taxing the citizen/corporation is NOT "Theft". This transfer of wealth to the state from the private sector is a societal obligation to fund the operations and structure of national society. Society votes on whatever system and level of taxation it wants.....citizens have made changes, through Parliament, and Legislatures, to try to make the taxation systems of the past, more fair in the present. It is legal transfer of property under laws passed by the society itself.

If Libertarianism have a taxation system that is the best ever developed, then why is it not accepted by society as large.......Libertarian taxation policies are NOT "generally accepted" by the majority of voters in either Canada nor USA.

The Rationale in Capitalism

The taxpayer funds a societal/economic system. In this system, it acknowledges that there is not a level playing field. The starting blocks in advance are those of the elite; the starting blocks of the poor and vulnerable are way back. One can "say" there is equality of opportunity, as one can say about a race between a 4 legged horse and a 3-legged horse. But we all know who will increase their wealth with the winner's prize. So to compensate for being one of the advantaged in the system, and thus gaining the most personal wealth from the system, the tax laws say that fairness to society entails that those gaining the most from the system should bear the most cost of carrying the system. It is an equitable redistribution of wealth within the system, so those further behind can be allowed to catch up a bit. The economic system is paid for by all workers, rich or poor. The winners in the system, the wealthy should contribute more to this system, out of which they have generated such wealth.

So yes, you accurately describe the taxation system, in a sense, as "forced altruism by the citizen to run their own society".

Note: Otherwise the inevitable wage gap required by Capitalism to be successful, would be many times wider than it already is.

Coming Down the Capitalist Pipe

The next new legal taxation law (There's that word again) is going to be the "Wealth Tax". I'm sure Capitalist Libertarians are ready to do battle with all other Capitalists on this one!

Is it necessary for government to be funded at all?

After all, at one time in Canada, there were not personal nor corporate tax laws!

I know of no Libertarian policy to do away totally with laws that deal with societal taxation......this is one set of laws that will co-exist with the Natural Law. Surely Libertarian policy is not that government will run on citizen "DONATION"???

Bob A (Democratic Marxist; as Participant)

[Dilip Panjwani]

Capitalist Progressive Taxation

Dilip Panjwani - Post # 305 - Sept. 5, 2023

"So now you [Bob A/DM] are labeling legal theft as 'forced altruism'. You seem to be endorsing what is happening (and being condoned) in USA: "You need something you have not earned enough for? Go steal it from a mall! The next time you need a good chess clock to improve your on-board skills, and don't have one and can't buy one, steal it at your next tournament!!"

DM Response

Dilip, you play with words too loosely. Let's define a few things.

Theft/Steal - where a material possession (And sometimes mental possessions e.g. copyright) of one person is "Illegally" removed from them permanently, and there are no excusing extenuating circumstances.

Progressive Taxation - The Canadian Encyclopedia - "Taxes are mandatory payments by individuals and corporations to government. They are levied to finance government services, redistribute income, and influence the behaviour of consumers and investors. The Constitution Act, 1867 gave Parliament unlimited taxing powers and restricted those of the provinces to mainly direct taxation (taxes on income and property, rather than on activities such as trade). Personal income tax and corporate taxes were introduced in 1917 to help finance the First World War (see Income Tax in Canada)."

So taxing the citizen/corporation is NOT "Theft". This transfer of wealth to the state from the private sector is a societal obligation to fund the operations and structure of national society. Society votes on whatever system and level of taxation it wants.....citizens have made changes, through Parliament, and Legislatures, to try to make the taxation systems of the past, more fair in the present. It is legal transfer of property under laws passed by the society itself.

If Libertarianism have a taxation system that is the best ever developed, then why is it not accepted by society as large.......Libertarian taxation policies are NOT "generally accepted" by the majority of voters in either Canada nor USA.

The Rationale in Capitalism

The taxpayer funds a societal/economic system. In this system, it acknowledges that there is not a level playing field. The starting blocks in advance are those of the elite; the starting blocks of the poor and vulnerable are way back. One can "say" there is equality of opportunity, as one can say about a race between a 4 legged horse and a 3-legged horse. But we all know who will increase their wealth with the winner's prize. So to compensate for being one of the advantaged in the system, and thus gaining the most personal wealth from the system, the tax laws say that fairness to society entails that those gaining the most from the system should bear the most cost of carrying the system. It is an equitable redistribution of wealth within the system, so those further behind can be allowed to catch up a bit. The economic system is paid for by all workers, rich or poor. The winners in the system, the wealthy should contribute more to this system, out of which they have generated such wealth.

So yes, you accurately describe the taxation system, in a sense, as "forced altruism by the citizen to run their own society".

Note: Otherwise the inevitable wage gap required by Capitalism to be successful, would be many times wider than it already is.

Coming Down the Capitalist Pipe

The next new legal taxation law (There's that word again) is going to be the "Wealth Tax". I'm sure Capitalist Libertarians are ready to do battle with all other Capitalists on this one!

Is it necessary for government to be funded at all?

After all, at one time in Canada, there were not personal nor corporate tax laws!

I know of no Libertarian policy to do away totally with laws that deal with societal taxation......this is one set of laws that will co-exist with the Natural Law. Surely Libertarian policy is not that government will run on citizen "DONATION"???

Bob A (Democratic Marxist; as Participant)

Bob,
I agree with you that Capitalism has major drawbacks as a viable system, and hence 'progressive' taxation has been used as a counterpunch, to steal back from the rich what capitalism has enabled them to steal from the poor. But doing a wrong thing to counter something wrong is not what society should clamor for; two wrongs do not make a right. In Libertarianism, lack of capital does not make you a three-legged horse, to use your phrase. It is by far laziness and lack of discipline and ability that make you so, and those who are hard and smart-working in a disciplined way DO NOT owe anything to lazy, dumb-witted bums, do you get it? When someone next steals a chess clock at a tournament, they are just using your forced altruism on the owner of that clock who has owned it for so long that you consider him a four-legged horse. And by yourself stealing from the mall, you are simply removing the middle-man (your government), and enforcing forced altruism yourself. The word salad of Marxism which you have used does not hide the fact that most taxation (besides that for the judicial functions of a lean government where your government 'servant' does not use tax money to spend 20,000 pounds to have fun in the hotel singing songs and spend tax-paid time to unnecessarily prolong his/her stay at someone's funeral, instead of returning back by the overnight flight), is nothing but stealing from someone who has the discipline to learn to earn, simply to win a lot of votes by bribing a lot of people who would rather spend time at the local bar or watching soap opera, instead of being disciplined enough to improve their earning ability...