Blog Archive

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Modern Employment

We have around 21% unemployment in America today.

This doesn't even take into account students, children, retirees, housewives, prisoners, and so on. Perhaps if we added it all up, we'd have over 50% of the population not actually employed. Since employment and the wages and healthcare benefits derived thereof are the foundation of our society, what does it mean when the majority of people no longer even fit into this foundation?

It means that the majority of people in our society are made into marginal, disrespected pariahs, who feel intensely guilty, ashamed, or resentful because they cannot fit into a society that increasingly has no interest in or accomodation for their existence. (and, we can imagine, just wishes they would go die in a hole somewhere and stop bothering us.)

It isn't just America facing this problem, the whole world is in a crisis, or will soon be in a crisis, of redundant population. I believe the world is overpopulated, but really that's not the issue. It is still possible to feed, clothe, and provide shelter for everyone alive on earth, even if that is not environmentally sustainable forever. The real issue is population redundancy. It's when people exist, and there are still resources to provide for them, but there is no place for them in society. They can't enter the workforce. No one loves them. No one respects them. They have no role to play and no connection to the outside world. How high is the population redundancy rate? Terrifying.

As you can see, 40.5% of the labor force is occupied in agriculture. And yet, in a modern technological society, say the USA, only .6% of the population is engaged in farming, foresting, and fishing combined. .6%! The USA was built out of farmers and is some of the richest farmland on earth. Dozens of states are best known for their massive farmlands, from Iowa to Montana, from Texas to North Carolina, even California has a giant agricultural industry. And yet, for all that, it only occupies .6% of the labor force. We can imagine then that this .6% number is not because the USA neglects farming, but because it has no use in employing any additional numbers. Machines can produce more crops per acre, cheaper, than any additional manpower. Let's say the people in America employed in farming alone is .5% and ignore our lumberjacks and fishermen. This is a useful number, because, lo and behold, this means 40% of the world's population is in fact redundant. They continue to till their fields with their hoes, and shovels, and clear rocks from the ground, pound in posts with mallets, feed their pigs and chickens by hand, milk their cows by hand, and so on. They think they are productive. People still think they are 'good' people, the salt of the earth, and they can still probably find wives and have children. But if modern technology ever caught up to them, they would suddenly realize it was much more efficient for 40% of the workforce to be lined up and mowed down by a machine gun, and the remaining .5% to consolidate all the farmland into giant machine-tended fields.

Lining them all up and gunning them down with a machine gun is perhaps the more merciful tactic. Suppose instead we simply bankrupt them through capitalist competition and then buy out their land to set up our commercial machine run farms on. These people will then be wandering around homeless, perhaps taken in by relatives, or flooding already overpopulated cities in search of work where there is none to be had. They will likely be single, spat upon, despised, mocked, and abused. The women can always turn to prostitution or somesuch, where they will gradually sicken and die of AIDS, but is that really better than the machine-gun line either?

The truth is, a billion+ people are living in a time warp. They are farming, but they are losing money every day they farm. They are working, but their work is worse than useless. They are simply taking up valuable land that could be exploited much better if they would just get off it and hand it over to the machines and overseers that currently rule the USA's agribusiness. These people have no economic worth. It looks like they're employed, but their employment is no different than say, being employed to move a sheet of glass back and forth across a road. Or to dig a hole and then fill it back in with dirt, over and over. If they currently receive respect and love from their community, it is only because their community is as equally backwards as they are, living in the same time warp, and unaware, like Brazilian tribesmen in the rainforest, at just how comical and futile all their activity is to the outside world.

A billion people who will sooner or later through globalization be economically displaced is bad enough. (Even worse would be if they were never displaced, because then they would go on their dirty manual stone age lives forever, until the sun blew up, scratching a meager existence out of the earth when everyone else has moved on to higher productivity and thus great riches and comforts.) But who is to say it will stop there? I don't think farming is the only sector modern machinery has made redundant, it's just the most obvious.

Manufacturing can largely be done by machines now. The involvement of humans is declining per product made. The same is true of resource extraction. Mining in China may still be a matter of men with shovels chiseling through rocks, but in the modern world it's usually just a guy on the surface staring at his computer terminal. Transportation is another job that is being, or could be, completely automated. Mailmen could be replaced by email. Truckers could be replaced by automatic trains (why not? Japan has them already.) Or if that isn't good enough, DARPA has already succeeded in making cars that drive themselves. If the cars can't navigate human traffic conditions yet, we could just build a lane for them alone, so that computer driven trucks would always be seen going endlessly back and forth like red blood cells throughout the nation, never sleeping, day or night, and thus far more efficient than any human could attempt.

Shopping markets don't actually need clerks, you can simply check yourself out at the computer. The same is true of gas stations, where you simply fill your tank up, swipe your credit card through, and drive off. There may need to be one or two humans overlooking the whole enterprise, but again, machines have replaced most of the labor force.

Anything involving muscle power is gone. The military is also simply ornamental these days. The power of nuclear missles is sufficient to destroy any army of any number of humans, or the country they come from, such that humans can no longer really serve a purpose on the battlefield. All current wars fought by human beings are not wars of self defense, where nuclear weapons would be sufficient, they are wars of choice, fought out of pure luxury. If most of the military were fired like they should be, it would become even more apparent how utterly useless men, in particular, were for any job anymore.

I'm afraid most employment these days is not real. It is entirely illusionary, just like the subsistence farmers who spend all day every day collecting chicken eggs by hand, hoeing their fields by hand, planting seeds by hand, and so on, living hand to mouth and a drought away from ruin. These people aren't really employed, they're simply ossified fossils trapped in amber. You could call them zoos of neolithic mankind. Everyone else has moved on, they serve no real purpose to the rest of us, and are just a eminent domain away from being eradicated. (like the brazilian rainforest tribes). The population of the Earth that has been or could be replaced by machine labor is not just one billion, it's billions. Every year this number will grow, not shrink, as computers become ever faster and more able.

But what of re-education and job training? Isn't the capitalist system about firing people so that they can develop new skills and create new jobs and make us all wealthier?

Well yes, that's the concept. But it completely ignores IQ. For one thing, most subsistence farmers are dead as door nails dumb. They live in India or Africa, with IQ's of 70-80. They could never be trained to operate machinery, start their own business, or do anything else of use that the 'vibrant capitalist free market' could wish of them. Maybe there is a high demand for time travel tourism, and in a perfect world, all the people unemployed by machines could just turn into time travel tour guides. But the fact is, people who are unemployed are not capable of just switching to some other job specialty. They never got a decent education in the first place, there's no infrastructure available to give them a decent education now, and even if there were, they'd be too dumb to take advantage of it. So if they can't be turned into 20th dimensional quantum pill inventors, like the capitalist model says they should be doing, what are we going to do with our redundant population?

The modern answer has been atrocious. Through heavy taxation, governments have managed to hire practically 1/2 the workforce into government jobs. What do these people do? Nothing, really. They push paper around. They stamp forms. They issue licenses. They inspect homes. They manage other government workers. They basically pick up glass and move it back and forth across roads. This is incredibly expensive, but it's also demoralizing. When people are working, they want to see something good come out of their work. A happy customer. A beautiful finished good. A hearty field of grain. A bridge or a road people can use. Work like that is fulfilling, it's good for the soul, it makes people feel like they're making a difference. When people simply stare into computer consoles or fill in files all day, how can they deceive themselves that they're doing anything but collecting welfare? And how can the outside world view them as anything but obnoxious, interfering parasites constantly taxing and regulating the genuine working world? Bossing around their betters because they were too inferior to actually achieve anything?

The other answer has been equally vile. There are people who have found niches in the modern economy, not by out-achieving their machine-equivalents, but by using their intelligence and understanding of the human psyche, to prey off the rest of us. This is called 'customer service,' 'sales,' 'marketing,' 'advertising,' 'lawyers,' 'brokers,' another 25% of the entire labor force. Not to mention anyone who owns a retail store is just one giant walking advertisement. All manufactured goods could be kept in concrete warehouses without any windows or any people looking after them. If someone wanted a product, they could order it online, and then it could be shipped directly from the warehouse to the buyer in a few days. The advantage of the retail outlet isn't that 'all-important 3 days faster,' because that's completely offset by the extra expense needed to have small stores with people dotted all around the country offering these goods. The real advantage is the prospect of placing the products in such an appealing fashion, that people will spontaneously choose to buy something they didn't need and hadn't even thought of getting. With that in mind, we can place all retail sales as just another segment of the advertising economy.

Why does advertising exist? In the age of the internet, if people want something -- a job, a house, a car, a book, a washing machine -- they can simply type it into a search engine and find exactly the product they need. This is the exact opposite of advertising, which seeks to intrude on people's time or senses and convince them to spontaneously buy something they didn't actually want before. The entire modern economy is about getting people to buy stuff they didn't actually want, through subliminal messages and careful psychological manipulations, like placing attractive women next to the products, or showing really cool people using the product that you could be like, and so on. People, by watching these ads, are generally trying to buy status, women, friends, power, or some other ineffable product. Instead all they ever get is plastic junk, which breaks or is eventually stowed away in the garage/attic, never to be seen again. They never learn though. How could they? The people being conned have a lower IQ than the conmen. And no matter how hard they try to learn not to buy stuff, they are competing with people who spend their entire lives learning how to MAKE them buy stuff. The sales departments, the marketing departments, spent 8 years in college learning how to trick you into buying their product, then spent the next 40 years of their working lives continuously improving on and innovating from that knowledge. What's a low IQ person who, after all, has to spend at least some time thinking about HIS job to do in defense against this all out blitz? It's the same with lawyers and brokers, insurance agents and all the rest -- people who spend their lives advertising to people about how much they're needed, how great it would be to buy their services, when in fact all of these people should be avoided like the plague. They are the vampire elite, they get rich off of the lifeblood of others -- their quarrels, their fears, their greed, any vice you have, there is a group of people eager to coax you into living by it to their gain.

In a properly run society, we would simply ban vampirism. People should not be allowed to profit off of, or encourage, the mistakes and vices of others. If anything, people should be employed to minimize other people's mistakes and vices, not inflate them all while skimming a salary from it off the top. In that case, all of these jobs would also become redundant.

What jobs aren't redundant, from an objective point of view?

The military should be reduced to near nothing.
The bureaucracy should be reduced to near nothing.
Transportation, Farming, and Resource Extraction should be automated.
Advertising, Marketing and Sales should be replaced by internet search engines.
Retail stores should be replaced by warehouses and online stores.
Vampiric practices like usury, divorce courts, health insurance, should all be banned.
Clerks should just be computer checkout stations.
Manufacturing can be nearly automated.

Okay, so who is actually employed? Who isn't redundant? Maybe now you can grasp why the majority of America's people are already redundant, because we are furthest along the internal logic of a technological society? Can you also see why none of these jobs are coming back? That the unemployed, are going to stay unemployed, and only grow, as time goes by? Can you also see that it's no better to employ redundant populations in parasitic makework than to not employ them at all?

What we're left with is the tiny sector of the economy that's still valuable. Construction, Repairmen, Doctors + Nurses, Teachers, Police, Firemen, Scientists, Engineers, Artists, Entertainers, Architects, Managers.

Add to these groups, the tiny fraction necessary for all the other fields, like for instance the .5% of Americans who are still farmers and are essential, the manufacturers who can't be automated, and so on.

Most of the positions our economy still needs to fill require a high IQ. Therefore we can ignore them as a possibility in employing our redundant populations. This narrows it down to nurses who tend to our elderly, teachers and day care centers that provide for our kids, construction workers, repairmen, and firemen who tend to our buildings, and police who protect us from each other. Let's look at this a little more closely to see just how distorted the modern economy is:

Couldn't we remove and nurses for the elderly by just having children take care of their own parents in their own homes, or just letting them die if they're so far gone no one can treat them? Furthermore, couldn't we remove teachers and day care centers, by having parents raise their own kids instead of out source it to other women? Out of the truly productive jobs, most of them were dealt with in the past by stay-at-home moms. Housewives. The remainder -- construction workers, repairmen, police and firemen, are all traditional masculine roles. They could be filled by those good ol' 9-5 jobs where men left their wives with a kiss and came back to a steaming hot dinner. As for the high IQ jobs of management, art, science, engineering, etc, that has always been a place almost solely reserved for men. Restricting women from employment does not actually hurt the economy -- because the true economic function of women has never BEEN in the economy.

The most productive task imaginable in humanity is bearing children. The second most productive task imaginable, is rearing children. Women already do the two most important jobs in life, and no one else can do them. They are built to do them, and they are excellent at the task, far surpassing men. That IS their contribution to the economy. The economy, in fact, exists solely to keep them, and the children, provided for while the women go about doing this all-important work. Men are not the center of life, we are at the bare fringe, the edge. We are the icing on the cake. They can do without us, and it looks like they intend to do without us for the most part, from here on. If we wish to continue existing on this planet as a non-redundant, non-despised, non-exiled population, it will take a reevaluation of values. Are people valuable because they can get a job? Because they can make money? Because they fulfill some vital task in the economy? Or is it because of something else?

My viewpoint is 'something else.' People are valuable insofar as they experience, and create the experience of, love, beauty, and truth. A person who believes the Truth is valuable, whether he ever picks up a shovel in his life. A person who gazes adoringly at Nature, or Women, or a math equation, is valuable, whether he ever harvests a crop or not. A person who loves his wife, his children, his friends, or even his dog, is valuable, whether he hammers a nail or not.

Even more valuable than the above, though predicated upon the value of the above, (as there would be no use in creating love, beauty, or truth, if no one enjoyed possessing it.) are the scientists, philosophers, artists, architects, etc, who create new wealth and value to the universe, the ex nihilo cornucopias that grace us with masterpieces in every field. The economy may have no use for them, the economy may never reward them (just look at poor Nietzsche, Tchaikovsky, or Socrates), but Nature is the grander for their existence, and the people who drunk of their fruit.

Through this prism, there is no redundant population. People are valuable not insofar as their material productivity (which is largely zero for the majority of mankind), but instead for their emotional productivity. The most emotionally productive people on earth are white people. They have all the genius artists and scientists. They are the most eager to embrace the Truth, wherever it leads them, and upset old traditional Errors and Customs that get in the way. They are the most loving people on earth -- towards each other, towards outsiders, towards their wife and children, even towards animals. Whites are the most beautiful people on earth. Therefore, through this new criterion of value, not economic, it becomes clear that

A) the redundant population is those people who cannot enjoy love, beauty, or truth. Or cause more harm to it than they add benefit to it. (So, basically, blacks and jews? :). In truth this cuts through all races, though disproportionately.)

B) Though many non-white people are valuable, in a world of finite resources, the greatest allocation of value would be to promote the welfare of the most valuable people. In this case, we should at all costs preserve our most precious sample of mankind, the white race. And secondarily, where there is a necessary conflict of interests, we should support the whites, not their enemies, regardless of how good they might be.

Armed with this new tool of insight, what should modern employment look like? Let's keep the necessary jobs, by all means. But let's cut all the other jobs. The redundant jobs. Instead of people working for prestige and wages, even though all their work is parasitic, or makework, and could easily be replaced by machines or simply not done anymore, let's give them prestige and wages for free, and let them go home already.

Free wages = The Citizen's Dividend. Our recognition as a people that many of us cannot be measured by our economic productivity, and that the value of our existence is not a simple matter of what job we can hold. That so long as we have the money, we will show that we do value people's existence, whether they work or not, and we think it's worth our effort and resources, that they go on living. We value parents. We value siblings. We value spouses. We value grandparents. We value nature-lovers. We value people who watch TV or read books or play video games. We value people who excel at their sport or hobby, dancing, music, painting, gardening, whatever. We value good friends. We value everyone who has a positive attitude on life, and helps to spread that joy to their community.

Free Prestige = Mandatory Marriage and Children. The purpose of status is to acquire more women and thus more reproductive opportunity. The 'currency' of status is sex. The only way to freely and equally distribute status through a community, is to uphold nuclear, monogamous, unending marriage for everyone. This way from the highest executive to the lowest dog-catcher, there is still someone who loves you and has eyes only for you. If they don't love you, oh well, they'll learn to get by making love to you, because there's no better option allowed. And your children will love you, because they, at least, can't help but look up to their mother or father. You will have a place, a role, in society. You will be someone's spouse, someone's parent, someone's sibling, someone's SOMETHING, your whole life. This is freely distributed status, this is prestige in the ultimate sense -- you are no longer on the outside of life looking in. You're in the very middle of it, the very core of its expression, in the cycle of death and rebirth. You will be the most important person in the world to someone. You'll have the power to change someone's life. So make it for the better. ;).

Why should everyone capable of truth, beauty, and love, be given these communist distributions of wealth and status? Because they earned it. Under my system, they earned it, just like everyone else did. They earned it by being who they were, and having some part of the absolute Good, the Goddess-seeds, of Love, Beauty, and Truth in their souls. They didn't earn as much wealth as the best of us, they only earned the living wage pittance of the citizen's dividend. They didn't earn the most attractive wife/husband, they only earned whoever settled for them before they hit 20. There is still a huge field for competition, for self-enrichment, for distinguishment. That's not the issue. The issue is, we can either have some basic floor for our community, where we do not let people fall off the edge of the world because they have no purpose in life whatsoever, and no value whatsoever to the rest of the living (and mind you, increasingly, the segment of the population that qualifies for this designation is over 50%), or whether we let the world go to the wolves, and it becomes a place suited only to the super-rich, the alpha males, and the women who father bastards off of them and toil away at all the shit jobs underneath. A worldwide harem, complete with beta male eunechs and slaves everywhere outside, looking enviously in, and wishing they had never been born.

The logic of the technological system will, sooner or later, complete its transformation of the world into super wealth concentrations (10% of the population owning 70% of the wealth), alpha male reproducers who impregnate all the women, self-employed women raising their children alone, and endless droves of bachelors and whores who exist on the margins of life, or are simply snuffed out entirely. This logic only continues so long as we continue to live as homo economicus.

The logic of my value system gives everyone a seat at the table, while also distinguishing better from worse. It does not reward evil, or equate evil to good, but instead vigorously defends itself against it -- whether they be poor like blacks, or rich like Jews. A system that is better at protecting the white race from replacement, than any economic system, which practically guarantees our demise. A system that more accurately captures the whole of human experience, and explains what exactly it means to be human, and what it means to be a good human, rather than just a piss-poor machine that has to sleep 1/3 of the time.

And if the rich and powerful won't go along with it, because they don't see why it would be worth the effort if they can't get all the money and all the women to themselves, well let them hire us as their servants then. We could be governesses, nannies, butlers, maids, cooks, whatever. They could leave the kids in our hands and go out wining and dining every day. Just stop making us work at truly worthless jobs, at least give us the same level of self-respect, as the poor used to have in the 1800's. Lifelong employment in a kind of 'second home', your customers being the same family you've helped raise generation after generation, is not so bad. Those jobs may be largely vanity jobs, but they could relieve some time and energy off the hands of our betters. It is some service to them, however little. And we want to live. We want to have a family. Is that so much to ask?

A citizen's dividend and mandatory monogamous marriage is enough to give everyone a meaningful, productive, and happy life. Productive because the most productive activity possible is to bear and raise children, no matter what else you manage in life. Happy because you were given the means to do so and recognized the inherent value in doing it. Meaningful because opening our souls to Truth Beauty and Love, are the only meaningful acts in life. They're what the animals, and the rocks, and the machines, cannot do. They are our keys to divinity. To the sacred. To man qua man.

As a bonus, it's the only objective, universal belief system that requires whites as a race are preserved, until we ourselves agree that we are redundant and no longer needed. It is internally and externally consistent. It does not play favorites. It simply sets forth a principle, and then holds onto it like a badger. That is the kind of thinking people can respect.


Theo said...

You should read the following --->

Anonymous said...

You're neglecting the need for redundancy. Complex systems break down. When they do, having some backup systems available is a very good idea.

I don't NEED to have a vegetable garden in my backyard, but after an Argentina-style collapse, i'll be glad I do.