Let’s have a look at some garbage:
Keynesian economists often argue that private sector decisions sometimes lead to inefficient macroeconomic outcomes which require active policy responses by the public sector, in particular,monetary policy actions by the central bank and fiscal policy actions by the government, in order to stabilize output over the business cycle. Keynesian economics advocates a mixed economy – predominantly private sector, but with a role for government intervention during recessions.
Siiiiigh. This long-winded explanation is pretty much a self-justification of taxing the market (a uniform devaluation of all currency is equal to a tax as the impacts are equivalent) through printing more money (see: Quantitative Easing).
How does that work?
Increasing the money supply has the net (though not instantaneous) effect of inflation. This is based on scarcity: when money is more scarce, its individual value is higher. Thus when it is less scarce (more total bills in the money supply), money has a lower value.
Inflation is thus an invisible tax: acting over longer periods of time. Imagine my surprise to learn that Keynesian economics are “Marxian” (double-sigh)… Marxist derived economics are always about progressive taxation. Unfortunately in this day and age, inflation is often “delegated” to another country, so there is a large distance between the cause and all of the effects of deflation; that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.
Thus the loss of value of money may not be felt instantaneously, but it nonetheless creates supply and demand “singularities”, such as the widespread “Ghost Towns” in China: creepy.
Marxism Cannot be Reformed
The problem with Marxism is fundamental. It is reductive (does not account for variables like charity and natural differences in personality/disposition). Moreover, creates the problems it purports to solve (think SJW’s “victim mining”). Because people assume Marxism is true, they will defend it at all costs, often taking leaps of logic that would be insurmountable by most.
If you don’t see the danger of this, consider: how many of world leaders are willing to be honest about the roots of their corruption and greed? What proportion delegates its lies to proxies? We are now living in a world where good people are punished and bad people are rewarded with state authority!
Marxism Dumbs People Down
Given the trends and information available, how dumb would anyone have to be to believe the “official story”, especially since 9/11! Given that there is between six and forty percent trust in the mass media, let’s consider the competing hypotheses:
- the media is credible
- the media isn’t credible
I hope for the former (based on idealism) but always presume the latter (by realism). It is my opinion that no one thinking independently could ever believe the official story of 9/11.
We Must Address Marxism on an Ideological Level
Like any other supremacist cult, it must be approached on a fundamental level. Those who seek to downplay this threat are advised to study the history of China! There is already mass hysteria and pain going on, do we really want to end up like China, who gives citizens incentives to socially ostracize people who tell the truth? The party rules by cruel authoritarianism, harvesting organs from humans from rich countries: all thanks to the blind psychopathy of statism!
Slave propaganda has already started on a socio-cultural level in Canada. How long before some virtue-signalling bureaucrat passes more laws to further this aim?
❤ More on Marx (and more!) from Guruji. ❤