L M

The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the revolution, as David Horowitz taught us is the effective (and sometimes literal) mantra of radical Communists in the West. (This is also on the last page of the Communist Manifesto in other language, by the way.) So, Israel. The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the revolution. The issue is not Israel; the issue is the revolution against America and Western Civilization. Israel is not the point and never has been the point except for some of the Muslim jihadis directly in the area. Turning Israel into a point of division and propaganda against America, American interests (including our alliance with Israel), and Western Civilization itself has always been the real issue, even with much of the activity of Hamas, etc. Yeah, sure, the jihadis (and maybe some of their bigger friends) would like to see the destruction of Israel, making Israel part of the issue itself, but their main target with the anti-Israel narratives is NOT Israel at all. Or Jews. Or anything of the sort. It's America, American interests, and Western Civilization. The purposes are to divide Americans, especially conservatives, distract from the real problems (as is always the case with rampant antisemitism), maybe sever the US-Israel relationship, and ultimately transform America into something more useful for their broader global revolution. If you turned against Israel in the last 3-5 years especially, you are a useful idiot or knowingly malicious actor in this cause. You are either evil or the banality of evil personified. Left or Right, you're a tool.

I really think we need more people just making the practical and moral cases for profit. I'm not talking about profiteering or whatever, or the abuses of monopoly, but profit itself. The profit motive is a rather amazing incentive. I'd say it's one of the most important innovations of human history except that it's also literally the law of all ecosystems (and humanity and society are actually ecosystems made of human beings, not some kind of single human meta-organism, which is a common but very wrong belief). In nature, flowers produce costly sugar water (nectar) and plants produce costly fruits primarily to lure in pollinators and animals that will eat the fruits. The plant is expending resources to produce something it actually doesn't need so that insects, birds, and other animals will solve certain problems related to plant reproduction and dispersal, given that plants can't really move. The plant is "motivated" to do these things because it profits from the interactions; that is, it gets more out of the exchanges than it puts into them relative to its underlying goals. The animals involved do these things because they, too, profit from the interactions; that is, they get more out of the exchanges (food) than they put into them relative to their underlying goals. Both do what they do because they have a net gain, profit, and both sides profit due to the exchange. This is how it works, so it's how it works in human societies too. Profit solves a crucial problem in ecosystems: it allows entities that don't care about each other to do things that satisfy the others' needs, and it does so by incentivizing an exchange that leaves both better off. It is in the plant's reproductive self-interest to produce nectar in flowers and fruits around their seeds. It is in the animals' self-interest to gather food in this way. The plant does not care about the animals; it just wants to reproduce. The animals do not care about the plants or their strange sexual behaviors; they just want a full belly. These exchanges happen constantly, everywhere you look because both sides benefit from the other without having to care about the other at all. Societies are like this. They're made of lots of individual people who extend beyond the family unit or clan or even friends-network who simply don't care about each other except in the most abstract sense. They aren't motivated to work for others in the abstract, but they are motivated to work for themselves and their kin/network. This is human nature. It will not change by any amount of force or socialization. Profit performs the not-at-all-magical (see the ecosystem of birds and bees, flowers and trees above) magic trick of turning working to produce solutions to other people's problems into self-interest. This is literally the glue that holds societies together. That is, once you get beyond very small, very tight networks built on other kinds of affective bonds, profit is what makes society work (as is the case in all ecosystems ever anywhere always). So, profit is the glue that holds society together because it incentivizes people to come up with solutions to other people's problems, even if they don't know or care about those other people. This in turn promotes peace because people want to live and work in a stable situation where everyone can do this for themselves. It also holds society together even more effectively than politics and identity can, and more broadly. It also incentivizes solving problems, especially scalable problem-solving. If you want a successful, productive society worth living in, it's held together and incentivized by profit. This is profoundly moral and practical. Profit actually does more, though. It seems magical because it's unplanned, but it's actually not magical and just fundamental common sense that even birds, bees, flowers, and trees follow without any real planning capabilities. For example, profit encourages abundance but without waste. Flowers don't make more nectar than will attract pollinators because it would be a waste of energy that could be used for other purposes (including developing their fruits, growth, etc.). Nature does not reward waste. The same cuts the other way. This fact is even more obvious with profit, guided by human reason, though. If you can make something for $5 and sell that thing for $10, you have a $5 incentive per unit to make more than you personally need. If you can sell 1000 units, you're incentivized to produce 1000 extra units beyond your needs because you'll pocket $5000. That's called surplus. It's called abundance. It is the only thing that generates and spreads wealth. You're not incentivized to make 1000 surplus items at a cost of $5000 to you to make them just to make them. No one (except lunatics) would be. You're incentivized to make 1000 extra things at a cost of $5000 to you because you can reliably sell them for $10000 and pocket the extra $5000, which you can then use however you like to meet your other needs and wants. So, you're incentivized to make a surplus by profit, but there's more. For one thing, you're only actually incentivized to produce a surplus of useful things (useful to other people who will buy them at a price that gives you a greater return on your investment). That's pretty "magical." Flowers don't exude poisons to attract pollinators. They exude nectar, something pollinators want and will exchange effort that results in pollination to obtain. Profit doesn't just encourage surplus; it actually encourages abundance: the production of surplus of things people actually want. For another, because there's more, profit discourages excess. If you can sell 1000 units, you won't make 2000 units just to make them. If you do, you'll pay a price. The price is your costs to make them. If we use the numbers above, it would cost you $10000 to make 2000 units, and when you sell all 1000 you can sell, you're stuck with 1000 units in inventory and broke even by bringing in $10000 in cash. Your incentive isn't good here. You wouldn't do it (twice). That is, profit also encourages producing the right amounts of useful things and not more. Do you have any idea how valuable and important that information is? Profit does it without ANY planning whatsoever because societies and their economies work on the logic of ecosystems. People see needs (including wants), which are "ecological niches," and fill them usefully, abundantly, and not in excess all because the incentives direct them to do this and not differently or more or less. And it's not magic. But wait, there's more! Ecosystems do not operate on a model of cooperation. Sure, some things are symbiotic with one another, but overall, the law is actually competition. This is because nature is ruthless and individuals are ultimately the units. The same is true of societies, which are mostly made of people who don't know or care about each other except in the weird abstract sense that doesn't motivate a lot of behavior, especially sensible behavior. The profit motive also encourages competition. Let's look at the numbers from above. You can make the thing for $5 (including the worth of your own time and effort) and want to sell them for $10. I can make them for $5 too and am willing to sell them for $8, taking just $3 per unit. You're about to experience a lot of pressure to lower your prices or make your product better to justify the greater cost. Now we have lower costs and product improvement being incentivized by competition for profit. (Just like faster bees get more nectar or whatever.) The profit motive actually encourages, again, with no central planning, finding the ideal cost of goods and services while also encouraging people to differentiate, innovate, and improve their products. If you can make a fundamentally better product than I can for $6 a unit instead of my $5, I can sell my cheaper one for $8 at $3 profit per unit and you can sell yours for $10 at $4 per unit, and we are now competing in a differentiated market instead of directly. This increases the total abundance of the entire society by offering more choices to more people. It arises because the profit motive offers more than one (prosocial) way to deal with market competition. So then there's even more. Profit unlocks a law of economic efficiency called "the law of comparative advantage," which is just the claim that people will fill the economic niches most suited to their talents, abilities, and temperaments given the opportunity to do so. In essence, the law says that people in free economic situations will gravitate toward where they have the greatest relative advantage over their peers in producing or serving. That is, people will do what they're good at (and fill different niches as a result). Think about it: you're not going to be inclined to do something you're bad at if you can figure out how to serve others and make a profit from something you're good at. Why? First, your own personal interests and happiness, I suppose, which is only first because you're not that hungry. Second, which is first when you are that hungry, because you can make a larger profit per unit effort when you do things you're good at (that people want). Profit therefore incentivizes a natural sorting in the economy that moves people to the places where they are most valuable. It isn't perfect, and not everyone is the most happy there, but the incentive structure constructed by profit is toward getting everyone in their most useful role, subject to some logistical constraints like locality. Moving everyone toward their most valuable role is a huge benefit of the profit motive. But profit incentivizes the other end of the deal too. It moves other people to where they're willing to fill niches that need to be filled (sometimes because it's their most useful option): work like cleanup, janitorial, hard and dangerous jobs, etc. It's the same exact force based on the same exact foundation: profit. Profit is not just the glue that holds society together, then, it's the lubricant that keeps it moving and the fuel that drives its activity. It's pretty amazing. This can go on and on and on and on talking about all of the generally beneficial, moral, practical, and good reasons to support the profit motive, which is little more than the securing of private property, the right to set the terms of your own exchange (but I repeat myself), and facilitating means of exchange (like money). It's literally just the logic of the ecosystem, and the logic of the ecosystem is the logic of society, no matter how much people want to change that with dumb ideological programs. (No, human beings will not evolve beyond the logic of the ecosystem. In fact, that's not just wrong but a category error. Society IS an ecosystem, and that's not based on human nature itself.) Profit, when you actually understand what it is, is more than just an incentive structure and the glue that holds "extended society" (per Hayek's terminology) together. Profit is evidence of service. One of the things socialists tend not to understand about profit is that it's the excess price people will pay to obtain a good or service without having to provide it directly for themselves (subsistence). Profit is the amount over the raw value of a thing people will willingly and gladly part with from their own as a showing of a kind of gratitude for what they're receiving through someone else's effort. Smart people are glad to pay toward reasonable profit, too, because they want good producers to feel incentivized to keep producing. The flower that produces the best nectar will attract the most bees and hummingbirds. Finally, as I've already stated, profit actually is the only way wealth can be created and distributed. Wealth is the accumulation of problem solving capacity, essentially, and it is therefore the accumulation of surplus value obtained in every exchange of production, goods, or services. People pay for products at the price they're offered because they are convinced, frequently rightly, that they will have more value by buying the product than by leaving it. People sell products because they are convinced, frequently rightly, that they will have more value by selling the product (exchanging it for money or other stuff) than by keeping it. Both parties do the exchange because they believe they'll have more after the exchange. That surplus value that is created in the act of mutually profitable exchange is... wealth. Wealth is both created and distributed by this process, and the engine of the process is profit. So, like I said, this could go on and on, and I hope it does. I think we need a lot more people a lot more of the time preaching about the practical and moral good of profit because our society desperately needs to hear it right now. In the end, there are two kinds of mindsets: the profit mindset and the welfare mindset. The profit mindset is the logic of the ecosystem, and we live in an ecosystem. The welfare mindset is a poison that denies the reality of the ecosystem mindset in favor of something wrong where they get a handout, which is mostly a downward spiral. In nature, there's no free energy, and the same is true in human ecosystems, which we call society. We need to preach the good news of profit.

At the end of the day, Communism and all other totalitarian systems are not economic, social, or political theories. In a way, they're all idolatrous false religions, but at their roots are incorrect theories of human nature. To be clear, Communism is at its foundation an incorrect theory of human nature. It will therefore never work and will always kill and destroy. It shares in common with Fascism, other forms of socialism, Nazism, and lots of mondialist and New Age ideologies (think United Nations here) a simple incorrect foundation for human reality. These all assume humanity is a single organism (or "meta-organism") rather than a ln ecosystem of interacting individuals. All collectivism suffers this fundamental and basic error, so it will all always fail, no matter how it expresses itself (including in theocracies like Islam or Christian tyrannies). The idea is expressed most clearly in the "corporatism" of Fascism, per Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile, posting that the whole society is a single body ("corpus," hence "corporatism"). The institutions are like organs, the individuals like cells, and the state and Party like the central nervous system. Everything works together for a common goal. Communists see this same model in "the people," who experience "inter-being" or "interdependence," which is the new mondialist and New Age way of putting it, but it's the same thing. We're all cells in a single body run by the state, all working harmoniously for everyone's success. Weirdo New Age mondialists at the UN like Robert Muller called not just humanity but the entire ecosystem of earth a "meta-organism" whose central nervous system is the UN itself. The UN's purpose as "World Brain," in Muller's vision, is to take control of the future evolution of man and the Earth. Marx called this "humanization" of man and Nature. The Fascists and Nazis embraced the same project to advance humanity to its next levels of human organization. It's all basically the same. It's also all wrong in basically the same way. Humanity, and human societies, are not like organisms. They are like ecosystems. The difference is that in a body, all the parts and cells work together by design to support the flourishing of the organism. In an ecosystem, individual entities and parts might cooperate, act symbiotically, compete, or predate. Dragonflies don't cooperate with mosquitoes; they eat them. And they don't cooperate with bats to eat more mosquitoes more efficiently; they compete in conditions that eventually reach carrying capacities and therefore scarcity. Your liver, heart, and kidneys do not do this. They serve specialized functions in a single interdependent organism. The fact that ecosystems thrive (or don't) is not the result of organic coordination but a property that emerges (or fails) because of individuals filling various niches, mostly opportunistically. Collectivist ideologies not only get this wrong but adopt the murderous belief that the people who aren't getting it wrong are the problem. Those people must be bent, broken, or destroyed until they believe or at least stop not believing. Of course, human beings have a high capacity for collaboration and intentional cooperation, to our mutual benefit, but that doesn't change the basic fact that societies are ecosystem-like. It just explains how we fill our niches. And it doesn't change. Collectivist ideologies like Communism are therefore wrong theories of human nature, doomed to fail, kill and destroy. It will not work this time. You and yours cannot make it work. You cannot crack the code. There's no code to crack, and trying just turns into cracking skulls in pursuit of total failure.