2.2.2            Capitalism  

Multiparty Form of Democracy  

Taking power by force is not convenient, as it requires a high degree of destructiveness. In addition, the new power is for the reasons of organizing, implementing and ensuring a social upheaval autocratic as a general rule and, accordingly, expands alienation in the society with all inconvenient phenomena.  

A society at a higher level of knowledge, aware of the destructiveness that the autocratic form of power brings along, forms peacefully the changes in social relations, by concessions mutually made by both the authorities and the followers. In such a society, the autocratic power accepts to provide major freedoms and major rights to subordinate members. In turn, the autocratic power gets compensatory concessions in some other forms of conveniences that are proportional to the benefits of ruling.  

The monarchies in Europe that renounced their absolute power in favour of parliamentary democracy have retained their privileged status, titles, holdings, and often exert an impact on the creation of state policies. The monarchs who have not voluntarily renounced the power have lost their privileges, holdings and, frequently, even their lives.  

Aware of the inconveniences of the autocratic social order, the society develops an opposition to the power and forms a multiparty system. The freely organized individuals in the parties form the programmes of social relations and proclaim them to the society, by explaining all aspects and advantages of such programmes. The voters in elections elect the programme that offers them the largest benefits. The party that gets the largest number of votes in the elections takes over the power in the society.  

The power in a multiparty system tries to set and carry out the rules for social activity in the manner that they suit the society to the largest extent possible. The management that fails to meet the needs of the society loses its confidence and, consequently, the power in the next elections. The multiparty form of power mostly ensures a peaceful change of the authorities, without destructive phenomena in the society, which is a great advantage of the system.  

The great deficiency of the multiparty system lies in the fact that successful parties mainly follow in practice the interests of the powerful rich people. In the developed world, big donors finance all influential parties and thus influence the decision-making within the parties. Politicians leading the political parties are transitory and are, therefore, highly inclined to corruption. It is not necessarily the money that is in question; they may be corrupted by an attractive work post, career, earning or by friendship only. In an immoral society the corruption can take the form of recognition and in such circumstances there is almost nobody that is able to oppose it. In this way, powerful rich people cunningly impose their interests also on traditionally leftist workers parties. As a result, there is currently almost no influential party that would support interests of the poor workers deprived of their rights.  

If some politician tries to oppose the interests of the rich, he encounters obstacles everywhere. All influenced allegedly free mass media are in the developed world owned by very well organized rich people and thus advocate their interests. Such mass media will accuse the disobedient politician that he is not doing his job well, will find some sort of his vice, web an intrigue. A politician who tries to oppose the rich has simply to give up, or his career will come to end. Regardless of the public interest involved in the programmes of influential parties, they will in the end pursue the policy in favour of the rich.  

Rich donors have created, with the help of political parties, a political system where they have control over the society. They try to bring under their control all influential factors in the society, making their best efforts not to leave things to any chance. The system is glorified through education, work, culture, mass media, social entertainment, sport. Since the "society that does not know" is suggestible, it accepts the suggestive alienated determinations of such system.  

In such a system the man as individual does not have other choice than to accept the alienated rules that determine his activity and opinion. Under influence of enormous subtle propaganda he even accepts what is in the society good, funny, nice, tasty. He becomes what the society expects from him to be, and not what he by his nature needs to be. Beside, he often does not have other choices because the alienated society rejects each member who does not accept the adopted forms of thinking and acting. The man practically pass through a studious brain washing throughout their lifetime and, in the end, he does not suspect the correctness of such system. Such man elects, as a general rule, the parties that support the programmes of the rich donors and the circle of the democratic farce thus closes.      

By taking control of the political system, the rich create the economic policy they wish. They take decisions on providing credit finance to their states, and then provide themselves such credit financing. The United States of America, the richest country in the world, has become by their intervention the most indebted country in the world, because its national debt per capita is more than $ 20,000.00. For more specific data please see: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm. The owners of the principal of that debt are the richest people of the world, probably only a few of them.  

The richest people of the world are owners of the US Federal Reserves. They really make money; they are also privileged with the right to order the print of USA dollars. Not to many persons know that American Reserves are in private ownership and when the US government wants to use them, it repays them under the terms and conditions determined by capital owners. There is no safer investment than investment in the state. There is no greater power than this is. There is no safer exploitation of the society than this is, either. 

If one tries to find the names of such people, he will come across indefinite obstacles, because they do not wish to be known how rich they are. Such men hide their ownership behind secretly registered companies around the world including in the State of Delaware, US. Also they hide their ownership behind the names of corporations holding other corporations. However we may assume that the Rothschild family is probably the leading one among them because it has been dominating the world finance for centuries. It is hard to tell how many really powerful families exist because they are cunningly completely unexposed. However, my estimate assumes that a few families have acquired the financial power that allows them to rule the world. Following activities of states in the world it seems that they have a dominant control over the USA and Great Britain, and from there they make pressure on the whole world. This power is secret and therefore irreplaceable. The exposed families, like the Rockefellers, are in my view less influential although they often impose their objectives on US leaders. I wonder whether they publicly represent the interests of such a group. The new rich like Bill Gates, who are publicly presented as the wealthiest people of the world are far poorer than the world leaders and have no influence on the world politics.  

In order to stimulate the working activity of citizens from which they undoubtedly draw out benefits, capitalists have suppressed the principles of cooperation among the people and imposed a system of competition. They are propagating the system of liberal capitalism as a system that offers an equal opportunity to everybody. This is, naturally, not true since the rich hold a markedly privileged position in any respect. Privileges are based on the control of information and on enormous capital that helps them push the competition away. The system is ruthless towards the losers, which is clearly seen in the example of the United States of America.  

USA is the richest country of the world; however, people suffer famine in it. This state has hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of homeless people. In this country an average inhabitant lives modestly. He gets the basic education that allows him to perform only the simplest works, being the task of such education to make him an obedient consumer. He works very hard for a low wage, and lives moreover in a permanent fear from losing his job. As a general rule, he does not have satisfactory health insurance because it is costly (About 20% of the citizens of the US do not have any health insurance). He saves for his own pension while working, thus stinting himself. In 1993, a worker with minimum income in the USA, being a very large number of them, earned the personal income 60,000 times smaller than the President and the CEO of Walt Disney Corporation. Yes, you have just read the correct figure.   

The enormous social differences develop criminal in the United States. Its inhabitants generally do not leave their homes after it gets dark because they do not feel safe. Almost 1% of the USA population is in prisons, and the same percentage is under criminal proceedings. Although the system is markedly repressive, it does not show any trend in the fall of the criminality rate. Quite to the contrary, more than 1,600 US citizens get arrested then released from prisons on a weekly basis. It is the matter of almost 5 million people and, therefore, one cannot speak of the criminal, but of the political problem of the unhealthy system. The United States of America is the only country in the world where alienated children kill children in schools.  

An average American is a modern slave of the rich, and the propaganda has persuaded him that he is free. He is so much indoctrinated by the propaganda, that he even does not know that the situation can be better. The USA is probably the most alienated country of the world, full of stress, patients with psychical diseases, the country with the highest rate of alcoholism, drug addiction and criminal in the world, the country of broken marriages, loners, eccentric persons. Annually one of ten thousand inhabitants of the USA commits suicide. USA is a sad country. For more details about this topic, please see: http://www.michaelparenti.org/HiddenHolocaust.html. Here is presented the most developed country in the world. 

No other stronger proof than the above is necessary to show that the present day multiparty system is also undemocratic as it essentially represents a disguised dictatorship. Thus, in the multiparty system the real decision-making is alienated from the population, and contributes to alienation of the society. The man has no influence on the forming of the rules for joint movement. The man remains impotent.  

Capitalist Economy 

The principle inherent in the commodity market is that consumers freely purchase the goods that suit them best, while producers make efforts in producing the goods more suitable to consumers. Free producers are waging a competition struggle by the quantity and quality of products, which helps the society to generally achieve major conveniences.

Capital owners are forced to responsibly direct the production, because they are responsible to cover with their capital any failure in the production. Workers are forced to work responsibly as otherwise they lose their jobs. The capitalistic form of production creates a systemic coercion that usually brings a high productivity but also an inconvenient work.  

The great technological discoveries in the history of the mankind, such as the wheel, steam machine, electric power or, the present-day information technology, always bring along an enormous rise of productivity in the economy, which increases the consumption substantially.  

Higher productivity brings higher profits and thereby a higher purchasing power to the consumer and the process renovates progressively. The economy then experiences an expansion in the production. When the expansion of the production is in place, a strong demand for skilled labour force emerges as well. If the demand for labour force exceeds its supply, the workers may then choose the work posts that bring them more conveniences, and may demand adequate wage. The society prospers generally in economic terms.  

As each growth has its end, a large production of the market economy may saturate the market and reduce the demand for the products of work. Reduced demand brings problems to the economy. The market economy is for this reason forced to develop the consumption-oriented mentality of the society. If the economy fails to find out the new demand flows, it must reduce the productivity in order to avoid losses. The economy then experiences recession. The recession of the production in a market-based form of doing business results in reduced cash profit of companies, which makes smaller the profits of the owners and personal earnings of workers. The smaller personal earnings of workers reduce the purchasing power of the society, and the demand for the products of work drops, thus leading to renovation of the inconvenient processes in the production.  

In the circumstances of a major recession, companies are forced to lay off the workers and to finally suspend the production. In the recession that occurs in the production of a market economy, the differences appearing in the distribution of the conveniences in the society are much larger than those that the society aspiring for its own prosperity needs to allow. On one side there are people without basic human rights and on another side are rich powerful people that decide about destiny of all. It is certainly not a good basis for a better future. 

The market economy does not have a satisfactory control over the transition between the states of expansion and recession in the production. It cannot ensure a steady employment of workers, a stable production and distribution. Such a state of affairs forces the capitalistic companies to pool the labour and the means of production in order to increase their power and thus to more easily overcome the oscillations in business trends and defeat the competition. Company owners pooling the capital become co-owners of a joint company or corporation proportionately to the invested capital determined by shares. They gain the right to decision-making in companies and earn the profit proportionate to the number of shares they hold.  

Free market enables the best producers to become winners and all others are doomed to be losers. If society does not give to losers the right for normal life neither winners would have it. Today, owners of corporations relieve themselves from their government harnesses and produce the goods in the places where the labour force is the cheapest. They thus push back the competition and make enormous profits. Naturally, capitalists have no possibility or need to take care of the losers. The problem is especially big at the world level where no social programs exist that would protect the workers from loosing jobs in this really cruel competition. Market has usually solved such problems with lots of pain but it cannot do it any more. Today the losers are not only individuals but also the whole regions and countries are facing extraordinary difficult situations. The process is known as Globalization, which is sharply opposed by those who long for justice and stability in the world. 

The merging will by its nature without matter of some today’s administrative obstruction develop up to the formation of monopolistic producers at world levels. Such production will most likely be the future of the economy because with such an economy in place it would be easier to plan and achieve a stable production. However, such a production will have to incorporate a big reform in the process of work distribution and in the distribution of operation results in order to ensure stability and productive orientation of society. This is a big problem because today does not exist any idea that would successfully solve it.

On the other, if today’s policy continues the monopolistic companies would acquire the whole profits while the rest of the world would not be able to earn money for living. The owners of such companies would gain an enormous power in the world while the rest of the world would be totally deprived from their human rights.

Today, we are witnesses of the creation of enormous economic differences among people and countries without precedent in the world history. One can discern in such differences the great future problems, starting from uncontrollable migrations with all types of criminal involved, up to wars. One single major economic crisis can easily cause the wars of the desperate in any part of the world. It tells that the ideology of capitalistic liberalism cannot contribute any more to the development of society, and that the time has come for a new economic system to emerge.

Beside that, capitalism has built an exaggerated production that senselessly waste natural resources.  Insufficiencies of natural resources that are unavoidable fact with such a wasteful consumption will in the future certainly force people to fight for survival. If nothing significantly changes that would sooner or later without any doubt create unlimited number of wars in which a large part of humankind will disappear from the surface of the world. If you are privileged by a geographic position or by status in the world and if alienated life has made you cruel, you might call it a natural selection. But we who call ourselves Human beings must prevent it by creation of a much better world. 

The development of production technology requires less working hours for an equal production. There is neither need nor possibilities for all the time growing production. One day, sooner rather than later, it will be necessary and really welcome making shorter working hours in order to be created working posts for all of the workers and to be increased the quality of life. That is a hard task for capitalism. Beside that, the future will require much more cooperation along workers, companies, and countries. The latest is an impossible task for capitalism and that means that political and economic changes are necessity for creating a better future of mankind. 

Neo-Imperialism 

The rich in the United States have created a masterly product of their interests and try to impose such a system upon the whole world. In their possession are all international banks and most of big banks worldwide. They get associated in the IMF and World Bank that provide credit finance to the whole world. Since the associated hold monopoly, they are able to establish the lending conditions they wish. Also, they are making use of their enormous financial power without choosing the means for accomplishment of the ends. They give orders to, blackmail and bribe the influential people worldwide and in this way exercise control almost everywhere. If a country opposes their interests, they spare no effort in destabilizing such country. As masters of the United States of America, they directly or indirectly influenced almost all wars and overthrows that have taken place in the world after the Second World War.  

Their organization is nicely reflected in the manner in which they imposed their order upon the East European countries. It is undisputable that the socialist states were in crisis. But also is undisputable that they set in motion a huge propaganda mechanism that imperilled the orders in these countries. It is more difficult, though, to prove the fact that they have probably caused revolutions in all of these countries. The US tycoon George Soros, who calls himself a philanthropist, donated one billion Dollars to the countries in East Europe for the purpose of an "open society" development. One who knows well the capitalist system is very well aware that there is no philanthropy or humanism there. Instead, it is exclusively the economic interest that has the main say in such system. The quantity of money allocated as a grant to the East European countries cannot belong to George Soros alone even though he must have possessed many times larger amount of money. It points to the high degree of organization of the world's rich.  

George Soros is most likely a public representative of an unreachable for public organization without an independent decision making right. If you think that organization is illegal then you are probably wrong because these people have power over the legacy in western countries. They can make legal almost what ever they want. They also have power over your mind through unlimited organized propaganda so that an average man will not even think about legacy of such organization even it starts to operate publicly what is quite unbelievable. 

Large donations to the East European countries offered a possibility to western tycoons to exert influence on the creation of internal policies in these countries. The first request of the "open society" was introduction of the free press, which actually became free from the state structure, but not simultaneously free from foreign influences. Behind the façade of public welfare, the mass media began to propagate the interests of the world tycoons. They quickly acquired the right to directly tailor the internal policies of these countries. The request soon followed for a multiparty elections, drastic and accelerated introduction of the market economy, which resulted in the closing down of insufficiently profitable plants, unemployment, significantly greater work burden on workers, and a general fall of the standard of living.  

Following the degradation of the already bad socialist economy, East European countries unavoidably need new loans. Special lending terms and conditions will not, however, allow them to pull themselves out of the inconvenient position. Anything worth in these countries has already been purchased cheaply by the world rich, or will be purchased cheaply under pressure. In this way, the countries in East Europe have become economic colonies. The money invested for the "open society" needs, will return there by exploitation of these countries in amounts many times larger than those invested. Allowing Soros's "open society" to enter a country meant de facto, allowing entry to the enemy. On the other hand, there were not many options available. Denying him the entry meant suffering unpleasant organized pressures from the West. There is no need for one to be too intelligent to suppose that they are planning for these countries a life of the non-privileged population much worse than in the States where the life is already markedly bad.  

The USA taxpayers finance the huge army that cares for its order in the world. The war against Iraq is a good example confirming the above fact. The war was launched with a view to protecting the right of the owners of corporations to exploit oil in Kuwait. Owners of the corporations sent American soldiers to this country to lose their lives there in order to protect their interests. However, the owners of corporations did not pay that war but the American taxpayers and taxpayers of NATO member countries. The owners of corporations even earned money by selling the weapons to the USA Government that was used for their private war. The war is, naturally, presented as a victory of America, of the "democracy", and not as victory of the owners of the corporations that were the only profiteers. However, this is not enough. In not a long time the whole developed world will be financing their expanding NATO. Thus the world’s rich will get more free of charge solders that will be ensuring and expanding their order even more mercilessly.  

The power of the owners of corporations is greater than that of any emperor in the history of the mankind. They do not have absolute power; however, they possess unbelievable political and economic instruments used for making pressures anywhere in the world, ensuring in this way that their will be implemented more efficiently than it could have been imagined by any emperor in history. The only thing it can lead to is nothing else but a great evil.  

Naturally, the alienation forces the rich to increase their power. When they are not able to achieve their objectives by diplomacy, complots and cunning, they then resort to the use of the power they possess and in that regard do not differ much from Napoleon's or Hitler's conquests. The markedly autocratic system of the West showed on the example of the aggression against Yugoslavia that it is acting in a more cunning manner, but that it has not evolved if compared with the earlier dictatorship systems. 

Why did they attack Yugoslavia? Yugoslavia was a country with some elements of the market economy. Gross national income of the developed countries of the west was about three times that of Yugoslavia, but the population in the west do not benefit from this fact, because the rich take the profits away. The living standard of an average Yugoslav did not lag much behind the living standard of the most developed countries in the world, and the total quality of life was, without any doubt, ahead of that in the rest of the world. The education was of high quality and free of any charge. The health and pension insurance was rather solid. The crime was at a low, and the safety of citizens at a very high level. In short, Yugoslavia used to have social benefits that an average American does not have. Such a country was not a good example for the liberal capitalism ideology of the western world. No doubt that this was certainly one of the reasons for the aggression that followed. Moreover, for world emperors the geo-strategic position of Yugoslavia has always been attractive, due to which the peoples in the region have always suffered severely. Yugoslavia is the only European country that did not succumb to the longstanding hegemonic policy of the west, and this is the reason why the west engaged in its destruction for more than 10 years.  

How did the aggression against Yugoslavia materialize? No matter how good a system Yugoslavia had, it was still far from the ideal. All decisions at the federal level were taken by consensus of the representatives of the republics, which was not easy. If a decision could not be taken, the whole country suffered inconveniences. Then followed political pressures from the West supported by economic blackmails. Among the pressures was the request for the freedom of mass media, of a sort that is non-existent in the west, either. That freedom was destroying the ideology and authorities, offering new values that are generally under the control of the world rich. Under the influence of propaganda, it was not difficult for people to think that their contribution to the community was not sufficiently rewarded. The dissatisfaction that arose from that and the liberal movement created under the western pressure became ideal for the big manipulators, nationalists and criminals who used to throw the sources of all problems out of their own communities, thus gaining sympathy of the non-informed and irresponsible population. In the end, the policy of the world's imperialists called the "New World Order" formed a great irresponsibility of the population for their own future, and successfully prepared the ground for further conquests.  

From then on, the imperialists of the world have supported the secessionists in Yugoslavia in making illegal secessions of the republics. According to the constitution of Yugoslavia the secession of republic was possible only by consensus of the representatives of republics. Slovenia's president Milan Kučan would never have dared to leave the negotiations on the peaceful solution of the crisis in Yugoslavia and to carry out the secession that practically meant violence, or to be more precise, the aggression against Yugoslavia had he not been strongly supported by the "New World Order". Croatia's president Franjo Tuđman was power-grubbing enough to carry out an aggression on Yugoslavia; however, he would not have been successful without the weapons and support received from the "New World Order". Bosnia and Herzegovina's president Alija Izetbegović had signed prior to the beginning of the war in this republic the Lisbon Treaty on the Peaceful Solution of the Crisis, together with Serb and Croat representatives. After that, the former US Ambassador to Yugoslavia, Warren Zimermann, publicly stated that he had encouraged Alija Izetbegović to withdraw the signature affixed to the Treaty, which was a direct cause for the beginning of the war. Prior to the commencement of the war in Kosovo, the representative of the US administration, Richard Holbroke, met in Kosovo overtly with the leaders of the rebels of UCK, the organization included on the then American list of terrorist organizations.  

The enormous support of the "New World Order" to the secessionists was naively accepted with deep gratitude by the beguiled secessionists. Namely, the world imperialists only masterly realized the old and verified "divide et impera" formula. Secessionist countries got bloody civil wars that put them back, and their recovery from the consequences of the wars will last for decades. If we exclude the privileged members of society, all these nations will in the future live in a worse or much worse manner than they lived in Yugoslavia, while the only profiteers will be the world imperialists.  

The world imperialists, thanks to their full control over the mass media, were misinforming the world about the genesis of the Yugoslav crisis. This was, naturally, another form of support to the secessionists, and of the pressure on the Yugoslav authorities. Then they recognized the forced secession of the Yugoslav republics in violation of international laws. The Helsinki Convention explicitly prohibits the forced change of the borders in Europe.  

Because of its non-succumbing to the pressures of the world's power-wielders, Yugoslavia was for eight years exposed to brutal economic sanctions, a pure crime imposed by the world masters. The economic sanctions resulted in the closedown of plants, and made the Yugoslav economy to collapse. Throughout this time Yugoslavia was caring of, on average, 500.000 refugees expelled, or who ran away, from the secessionist republics. Although the economic sanctions ruined the Yugoslav economy, the country did not give up.  

Finally, in Rambouillet, in 1999, the powerful of the world lost patience and gave an ultimatum-based request for a classical armed capitulation of Yugoslavia. The Austro-Hungarian Empire had done something similar, which ignited the First World War. However, the present-day imperialists are far more powerful in relation to the rest of the world than the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the time, and they knew that. They launched the armed aggression against Yugoslavia, contrary to international laws and the UN Charter. The decision on the aggression was not made in any parliament in the world. Nobody asked the people; the decision about the aggression was made by private capital for the purpose of its own expansion and hegemony. The attack on Yugoslavia was a classical fascist aggression realized mainly by the leftist, workers', and democratic parties in power in NATO member countries. We are today the witnesses of the masterly prepared world conspiracy of the rich against the poor.  NATO is definitely the army that is meeting the interests of the richest people in the world, and they are owners of that army.  

The rulers of the world committed the war crimes by attacking Yugoslavia generally, and the civilians and civil property, in particular. This is the official finding of Amnesty International, one of the few, up to the certain degree still independent international organizations. The owners of corporations were pressing all NATO member countries' statesmen to launch the aggression. However, the chief executor was the United States president Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton is, together with his yes-men and order-issuing personalities responsible for the death of 504 civilians and 417 soldiers killed during the bombing of Yugoslavia, and have, therefore, to be called to account. NATO inflicted a material damage to Yugoslavia in the amount of about 50 billion Dollars, and must be called to account for it. In any other case the criminal immorality will expand around the world with unforeseeable consequences for the mankind. Then the price will be much higher for all of us. 

NATO justifies the aggression on Yugoslavia by the exodus of the Albanians from Kosovo that took place after the aggression, and which was to a large extent organized by the powerful in the world in their attempt to justify their aggression. By its attack on Yugoslavia NATO converted into a terrorist criminal organization. Anybody monitoring the aggression on Yugoslavia could on a daily basis see that the western society was led by the monsters who did not even try to hide themselves. More about that at http://www.deltax.net/bissett/ and http://www.balkanpeace.og/. It is more than obvious they will try to destabilize every country they do not control. This is a crime and we should name it as such. If nothing changes, the people who launched the aggression against Yugoslavia are undoubtedly heading, sooner or later, for a new world conflict. No matter how much we admire the development of science and technology, nothing has happened in the development of the society that would allow expecting something else.  

And to crown it all, in order to subjugate the disobedient nations and countries, they established in Hague the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. This Tribunal is illegal since the UN Assembly did not found it. The International Tribunal in The Hague was set up by the world imperialists with an idea to prevent any opposition to their hegemony. This Tribunal tries selectively the persons from the former Yugoslavia. Thus, under the auspices of the privileged UN members and under US pressure a racist tribunal was created. In this way, the criminal got the legitimate right to try his victims. More about this issue at http://members.tripod.com/kosovo99/an1.htm.  An international tribunal that would try international criminals is necessary; however, it would have to try all criminals equally by applying the internationally recognized laws and criteria.  

The former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosević, currently the most known prisoner of the Hague International Tribunal, certainly relied on the laws more than all his enemies taken together. But this was not enough at the time of the creation of the "New World Order" based on hegemony. His opposition to world imperialists, without having ensured prior sufficient support in the country and abroad, was a great mistake. In the end, with an enormous versatile intervention of the powerful in the world, the yes-men of world imperialists came to power in Yugoslavia and Serbia. The new authorities delivered Slobodan Milosević illegally according to the Yugoslav constitution to the International Tribunal in Hague. Yugoslavia thus finally capitulated. Finally, the peace has been established by the colonization of an independent state. 

The rulers of the world of today, although far better prepared than their predecessors, are committing the same mistakes. They have a strong alienated need to conquer the whole world. However, they will not be able to achieve this goal because always emerges some kind of resistance that prevents such endeavour. Needless to say that it is precisely here where a great danger for the future of the mankind lies. The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York was a consequence of the US aggressive policy. As a result, more than 3,000 innocent people were killed. And now, the American representative of the world leaders George Bush junior is going to reduce a danger from terrorism by a stronger oppression of the world. The US cannot avoid new punishments for such behaviour. The world leaders are not that much stupid that they cannot see it, they simply care more about their alienated interests then about the lives of people. 

Intolerance among ideologies and arrogance of extreme leaders firmly shows that terrorism and conflicts among people will grow. The question is whether millions of people will again be killed before extremists on all sides lower their appetites and start to equally respect other people and their interests?  

However, the largest danger comes from the world imperialists. Capitalism will sooner rather than later get into deep crisis and then it will become very aggressive. Beside that, the new imperialists are building their empire on immoral foundations and that is why we already have a deep moral crisis in the developed world that will, no doubt, erode and destroy their empire from within. As the result of that the whole world will be in big danger.

 ***** 

The history of the mankind is the history of the man's inability and of the rule of the authority, the history of authoritative, imposed and, therefore, alienated categories of values, of the alienated movements and, consequently, of knowledge. The history of the mankind is alienated history.  

If you think that the development of society has made the situation any different today you are very wrong. It has only brought new forms that hide the needs of man to take control over a man. Today most presidents of the countries swear about democracy but in reality they successfully avoid it as much as it is possible because they like to keep the power in their own hands. Most priests prey to God that Jesus comes soon but in reality they would like much more to keep the right to interpret His words the way it suits them best. Most company owners swear about the free market but in reality they try hard to make a monopoly for themselves. Also they like their workers to believe they are all together a big family because that stimulates their work but the owners keep right to make decisions alone and take all the profits for themselves. Most teachers rules over the students by the knowledge they have acquired and therefore do not like it to be changed. Most parents swear to God about their love for their children but in reality they love their power over the children. The situation is similar to these samples almost everywhere. 

There is no doubt that all these rulers over the man tie the man in every moment of his life. Once the man becomes aware of himself in such a society, he is already linked with the influences of alienated generations, and forced to accept the alienated world as the other world is inaccessible, he does not see it. Authorities also impose alienated values to the people and that certainly brings large inconveniences to individuals and to the society as a whole. If the man tries to overcome the inconveniences stemming from alienation it would be hard for him to reach any good result because the alienation has taken from him the ability to recognise his natural needs, because he already largely thinks through the alienated premises of comprehending the causes of the inconveniencies, because he comes across the obstacles of the alienated society.  

Because of the lack of objective knowledge, the alienated society is subject to accidental selection of determinations that stem from the alienated visions of conveniences.  Such a society is inclined to idolatry, fetishism, and very superficial election of vital determinations. The man in an alienated society bases his own belief in the conveniences on alienated assumptions and therefore sooner or later experiences disappointment. He comes in contradiction with his own nature, which brings him great inconveniences.  When the man's alienated needs come in real life across obstacles in his alienated consciousness, his subsistence is also endangered. Then the very doubt in the correctness of his orientation brings the tension that pushes him to strive for the alienated vision of survival. Such struggle may without objective reasons endangered other people.  

Endangering of the man's alienated needs brings along the aggression by which the alienation may be recognized. Such a man is waiting for any opportunity or authoritative invitation to act aggressively. If the man forms a narcissistic vision of consciousness, he then induces a great destruction toward his environment. A destructively oriented man destroys the conditions for the exercise of his own benefits. Instead to purify his thoughts, draw conclusions within the limits of the possibilities, and then move forward, such a man passes through life blindly with strong destructive emotions and strives, as such, in favour of his own impotency, for his own inconveniences.

When in the man's vision external forces are too strong, the man then suppresses his own needs. The man cannot meet the suppressed needs, which induces a non-defined anxiety in the man through everyday life. Separation of life from the man's nature brings neurotic disorders and depressive states. The man frequently finds the way out of such states in a temporary curb of emotions by means of alcohol, drugs or medicaments.    

The more the man is alienated from his own nature, the greater the deviations of his personality are. Also, contradictions in the man are larger and it is more difficult for him to control his own emotional states, including the energy. The man is then inclined to any form of self-destruction. In extreme cases, the alienation generates, due to non-satisfied needs, the tension of such proportions that the man cannot objectively comprehend the nature. Such a man is an ill man, and such society is an ill society.  

Anything the man does in life, he does it with the idea of his own prosperity in mind. However, in the present-day alienated society, where subjective, erroneous categories of values are created, the effect is contrary. The alienated man lives along the principle of own negation, he acts against his own nature because he does not know his nature. The problem of alienation of the society is a deep problem and needs, therefore, to be opposed in a comprehensive way.  

The analysis given up to now allows one to conclude that all social inconvenient phenomena arise from the man's inability or from the lack of knowledge and alienation originated by external or, more precisely, authoritative limitations. One can conclude in this connection that all socially positive phenomena may arise from the knowledge acquired in natural life based on freedom and equality of all individuals, because the man's productive power develops only in such way.

The power of a man over a man is certainly the main problem of today's society. That is what needs to be eliminated if we really need to solve the problems we have today. It is not easy to be done at all, however this book offers a convincing solution. By this solution we all need to sacrifice something in order to get much more and to make a far better world.

The society would need to form a system able to exist productively without the authorities and their ideologies, in the freedom and equality of all its members. It would need to allow each individual to acquire knowledge by his own practice. It is hard for the man as an individual to form an objective idea about the laws of the movements in nature, because autonomy directs him easily toward subjective determinations and, consequently, toward alienation. The society as a gathering of subjective individuals may by equal relation form through practice a more objective vision of the reality. The more the society will get to know the real laws of the movements in nature, the real value categories and its real nature, the less alienated it will be. This will allow it to come closer to its own nature, meaning to its prosperity. 

  Back to Top