'Spear' Points

Some Observations on Left and Right as Two Sides of the Same Mirror:

Twentieth century capitalism was a fine system for turning luxuries into necessities, while twentieth century socialism was a fine system for turning necessities into luxuries. So where are we now?
 
It can be argued, however, that as the twentieth century went on what occurred in many nations was less "capitalism" than "state corporatism," in which the apparatus of the state was made to serve the interests of the corporations—of "corporate persons" before human persons. Similarly, as the twentieth century continued, what occurred in other nations was less "socialism" than "corporate statism," in which the apparatus of the corporations served the state—of "the national interest" before individual human interests.
 
One might even go so far as to suggest that what was developing by the end of the twentieth century was a variety of transnational feudalism, though the left preferred to call it "internationalism" and the right preferred to call it "globalization." Neither of these approaches is sufficient to address the challenges the human species faces during the twenty first century, however—precisely because both squander too much of the creative and imaginative potential inherent in individual human consciousness, in order to maintain their power.
 
 
More soon!
Howard V. HendrixObservations on Left and Right as Two Sides of the Same Mirror:
To make a fortune out of someone else’s misfortune was the duty of the twentieth century capitalist; the duty of the twentieth century socialist was to make a misfortune out of someone else’s fortune. As a result, twentieth century capitalism was a fine system for turning luxuries into necessities, while twentieth century socialism was a fine system for turning necessities into luxuries.
 
It can be argued, however, that as the twentieth century went on what occurred in many nations was less "capitalism" than "state corporatism," in which the apparatus of the state was made to serve the interests of the corporations—of "corporate persons" before human persons. Similarly, as the twentieth century continued, what occurred in other nations was less "socialism" than "corporate statism," in which the apparatus of the corporations served the state—of "the national interest" before individual human interests.
 
One might even go so far as to suggest that what was developing by the end of the twentieth century was a variety of transnational feudalism, though the left preferred to call it "internationalism" and the right preferred to call it "globalization." Neither of these approaches is sufficient to address the challenges the human species faces during the twenty first century, however—precisely because both squander too much of the creative and imaginative potential inherent in individual human consciousness, in order to maintain their power.
 
Best,
Howard V. Hendrix