Cenocracy.org
The idea of a Basic Income Guarantee is an example of a change in thinking that highlights the necessity of establishing a new formula of Government. There is a growing understanding that the present formula of governance is not adequate to the task, because it limits the scope of solutions that are available, but can not be applied so long as the current formulas of government are kept intact. The inadequacy of the present formula of Democracy being practiced will continue to fail us. Social self-governance models of practice must adapt to changing realities that involve ALL OF US participating. The Economics of life, living and the environment must be altered to suit ALL OF US. Such a dramatic shift in thinking will no doubt be at odds with current practices of capitalism that are aligned with self-serving greed that may one day be viewed as a social disease.
Necessarily so, historical precedents involving dramatic changes provide us with instances where violence becomes an inevitability because there are those in authoritative power who will not want to change because it suggests a loss to their personal power and income. And there will be those outside such authoritative groups who also refuse to change, as well as those who are fearful of change and will fight against change. No matter how much we advocate a peaceful interest in contributing to a large and calm-headed social dialogue, others prefer to do their talking with violence and destruction. Noting a mood of such, the government... backed up with the resources of businesses and perhaps the media as well, may instigate one or more acts of violence in an effort to deter any further discussion unless it is under its terms... which means maintaining a status quo that perpetuates the same social problems decade after decade. The development of such ideas to benefit humanity reflects the need for a Cenocracy. But we must be realistic in acknowledging that such ideas are promoting the eventuality of a Revolution to take place. While peaceful Revolutions are possible, they are few and far between.
A discussion about a Basic Income Guarantee necessarily entails a discussion about ideas which crop up with respect to attitudes involving perceptions that have long developed the notion of "Deserving and Undeserving Poor". Whether or not you prefer to dismiss such an inclination as having no merit for inclusion in a discussion about a Basic Income Guarantee for everyone that may give the impression of providing a type of minimum social wage to everyone (but dismiss the application of also regulating a "Maximum Income Guarantee" in order to prevent hoarding), such attitudes will emerge because many will want to migrate the topic in-line with their ego. In other words, many will think:
- They are more deserving.
- Others are less deserving.
- Some are not deserving.
Regardless of how someone calculates percentages based on personal experiences or observations of others, a dichotomy arises and may well develop into a polarization that stalls any useful collaborative discussions... much less be able to reach a consensus for implementing a wide-spread social program directed towards assisting society... if even on a trial basis. The deliberative ego of individuals necessarily wants to create social/cultural conditions by way of political action that help to produce a type of cultural mirror that will best reflect their notions of self- importance. In other words, they want society to produce varying types of measuring sticks by which they can best witness their own presumed better-than-others worthiness, even when expressions of humility are used. Humility... to assume oneself as being more humble than another, is but another tool used by those wanting to confer a super-standard model of display to themselves... whereby others are thus seen not as an equal... Some people like to brag. With attitude, with possessions, with words, with actions and even with variations of opposite characterizations.
A Religious person "does the work or will of God" is an attitude by which to measure their own above-standard humility, value and "chosen-one" purpose. Additionally, for some religious persons, if you do not believe as they do, or do not attend church, than you may be called a pagan, a heathen, or an infidel... if not some lesser value.) Fighting attitudes which perpetuate current notions of "deserving and undeserving" will have to confront religions and businesses as well as governing policies. For example, the Church of Latter Day Saints requires members to have a "Temple Recommend" in order to be viewed as deserving of one or another benefit. Other tools of measurement involve some recognized membership value that businesses, for example, bestow upon employees by requiring them to wear badges, perhaps providing a clothing allowance for some certain attire, and converse in a language that one may describe as a workplace vernacular. The requirement of certain work-place skills also is a tool of measurement that may be used in forming a "deserving and undeserving" opinion, even if such words are not used to describe actions which reveal an underlying attitude one ascribes to with unrecognized social behavior.
But let us take a look at the "Basic Income Guarantee" proposal as a means of beginning a serious consideration to overcome obstacles for alleviating social problems brought about by income disparities. The following YouTube presentation is a good start for promoting an open dialogue:
Basic Income Guarantee
By Richard Gilbert, Ph.D
Professor of Psychology
Loyola Marymount University
Los Angeles, California
With commentary by Suzanne Taylor
Here are some other examples of related information:
Basic income is an unconditional and regular payment meant to provide enough money to cover a person’s basic living cost. In January of 2016, the fourth largest city in the Netherlands and its partner, the University of Utrecht, will create several different regimes for its welfare recipients and test them.
(published in Journal of Political Philosophy 5, No. 3 [1997])
Richard J. Arneson March, 1997
A key concept in Victorian attitudes towards poverty was that of the ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving’ poor. The deserving poor were those who were poor through no fault of their own, either because of illness, accident or age, or because there was no work available for them (perhaps because of a factory closure for example). The undeserving poor were those who were poor because of laziness or personal problems like drunkenness. Victorians were very concerned with how they could help the deserving poor without encouraging laziness in the undeserving poor.
Woodhorn Museum: Part 2— Deserving and Undeserving Poor
(Note: for those unfamiliar with the term "Victorian", it refers to the era of the British Kingdom's Queen Victoria [1837-1901])
From the Business Managed Democracy Perspective:
“Business-managed democracies are those in which the political and cultural arrangements are managed in the interests of business.” Sharon Beder, 2009.
Initial Posting Date: Saturday, September 19, 2015
Updated Posting: Sunday, September 20, 2015