I'm wondering if humanity has fragmented into two sub-species. There appear to be two distinct subsets. There are the productive workers and the parasites. Productive workers tend to breed with other productive workers, and parasites tend to breed with other parasites.
There are some questionable cases, such as a doctor who sincerely wants to help his patients. A doctor has a State-granted monopoly/oligopoly, and is thus parasitic. Some doctors are there just for the lucrative paycheck, and are purely parasitic. However, some doctors sincerely are doing the best to help their patients, given the constraint of a corrupt medical system. A public school teacher is parasitic, because their salary is funded via taxation/theft. Some teachers are just there for a paycheck. Some teachers sincerely do their best to help their students, given the constraint of a corrupt educational system.
Most doctors don't have the intellectual capacity to say "The medical care system is completely broken." Similarly, most teachers don't have the intellectual capacity to say "The education system is completely broken." They almost always won't risk their cushy jobs to challenge conventional wisdom. If they do what is right instead of following the rules, then they will lose their license/oligopoly/job. It's impossible to accomplish meaningful reform while doing your slave job.
Most productive workers will be disgusted by parasites, and instinctively stay away from them. Most parasites will be disgusted by productive workers, and instinctively stay away from them, except in situations where they can exploit them.
The parasites have maximized their ability to exploit others, whereas productive workers have maximized their ability to do work. Lacking the ability to leech, productive workers develop the skill to work in self-defense. Will the parasites be able to adapt under a fair economic and political system? Some will adapt, and some won't.
When I see agorism discussed, some people just don't get it. Some people seem to understand very well, and some are stubborn or clueless. Will the clueless people be able to adapt, or will they die off?
I wonder if humanity has actually split into two sub-species. The alien overseers suggest this may be true. Is it time for the productive sub-species to let the parasitic sub-species die off? The productive workers can't ever be completely eliminated, because work needs to be done. Parasites are unnecessary.
If the parasites' exploitation skills are genetic, and they don't have any other skills, then they will die under a fair economic system. If they are merely adapting to circumstances, then they will change their behavior. The alien overseers suggest the former is true, that the ability to exploit the State for your personal benefit is a genetic trait. Such skill will be useless once the State is eliminated.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Has Humanity Split Into Two Sub-Species?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Albert Jay Nock addresses this in "Are all Men Human?"
http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~ckank/FultonsLair/013/nock/human.html
I agree with your general premise that you could broadly look at people in two sets of net productive and net consumptive, but reject your conclusions re teachers and doctors. I am neither, so have no axe to grind, but do not think you support your theory. Many doctors and teachers campaign effectively to change the systems and more importantly collective concept of the system towards one that favours support, development and assistance for people, away from one which is dominated by broader political direction.
the basic assertion that people paid via tax are parasites is incorrect, as you confuse the nature of the person with the context they operate in. For example, there are many private teachers who make a fine living from not working in state schools, whilst believing they are not contributing to society as they feel they ought to, nor being as effective as they could be at raising the net level of education (as the marginal gain for richer children is less than for poorer ones).
Public service jobs which do not have a notable 'push' demand from service consumers, such as Library Safety Operatives or Sanitation Worker Politeness Coordinators could be seen as essentially parasitic and a manifestation of corrupt taxation. However, where a demand exists for a service which produces net social benefit to ALL citizens, however it is funded, its practitioners can hardly be seen as parasitic by virtue of the fiscal context alone.
Apologise in advance, but how come it looks to me too resembling the Proletarion/Borgoius dichotomy?
Post a Comment