Is Love a Weakness? (By William Bond)

By William Bond 

(Originally posted on the Rasa Von Werder blog)

Popular culture tells us that it’s alpha people who rule the world. But these alpha types are generally the most, aggressive and deceitful people on the planet. So many are the worse types of people we have, that are ruling our world. It’s why we live in a unfair world of conflict, war, genocide and oppression. So we would be better off is loving people rule our world instead. But there is a common belief that; “love is a weakness.” and there is good reason why people believe this. Loving people will put the needs of others before their own and are not assertive or aggressive with other people. Because of this, some unscrupulous people will take full advantage of loving people and exploit them. Its for this reason, many people assume that loving people are weak, but is this true?

We generally find loving behaviour more in women than in men and there is a evolutionary reason for this. It is known that women have a maternal instinct, where women not only want to give birth to children but also want to care and look after them until they are capable of looking after themselves. We see this behaviour not only in human females but in mammals and birds. The reason for this is that if mothers of many animal species didn’t care for their young, the species they belong to, would go instinct. So even though we assume that love in a weakness, if mothers didn’t have a this powerful instinct to care and look after their children, the human race would die out. But we find that women not only have an instinct to care and nurture their own children but also the children of other mothers. As well as caring for the sick, elderly, animals and men. So in theory we would all be better of if we had maternal minded women rule the world. But unfortunately it’s not as easy as that, as we seem to live in a system where loving people are excluded from power, whether they are male or female. 

So we live in a world where loving people are thought of as weak while selfish and assertive people  are seen as strong. But unfortunately we pay a heavy price for these beliefs because we end up with selfish and ruthless people ruling our world. When we look at history we see its a story of conflict, wars, genocide as well as a huge disparity of wealth between rich and poor. This is because we generally have selfish and uncaring people in positions of power. A ruler who desires to start a war to conquer another country obviously doesn't care about the harm a war will do to the people he is invading. Or even the harm it might do to the people of his own country, if the war goes badly wrong. Likewise, a government who follows policies that greatly benefit only a small ruling elite at the expense of the majority of the population, also clearly doesn’t care about the people they rule. 

This has been the story throughout history and its still true today. Where in the 21st century we still have wars and genocide, as well as a huge gap between rich and poor. So what can we do to change this? And the obvious answer in democratic countries is to vote into power loving politicians who care about the people they rule. But off course there are big problems in trying to do this. It is claimed that the USA has; “the best democracy that money can buy.” Unfortunately this is not only true of the USA but in all Western democratic countries, where corruption in politics is commonplace. So even if the voters, voted for a politician who genuinely cares about people. He or she will be side-lined from any position of power by the majority of corrupt politicians. Who don’t want anyone upsetting their gravy train.

A politician that did work out that people do want caring and loving people in positions of power was Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand. She campaigned on the basis that she was a genuinely caring person and through this became Prime Minster. But once she was in power, she proved to be a normal, lying, scheming, two-faced politician. Who never intended to keep her election promises and did the opposite to what she said she would do. This made her so unpopular with the people, that her own party had to get rid of her before the next election. But this does prove that people do want to be ruled by loving and caring people, but what prevents this from happening, is corruption. 

The point is that if we were able to get rid of corruption, and had a political party who did campaign on the basis they are genuine loving people who would care about the people they rule. And then when they got into power, kept all their election promises. So they ruled for the benefit of the majority of people and not for the benefit of the billionaire class. Then in every election the people would always vote for a party like this. So if politicians did do this, then love becomes a strength and not a weakness. 

But of course getting rid of corruption is not easy, but it has been recognized world-wide that corruption is what destroys all countries. For instance we have seen over the last 50 years the decline in power of all Western counties. The main reason for this that at the beginning of 1980s Western countries started the policy of, “deregulation”. Where it was claimed that too many regulations stifled business. But what they didn’t point out was that these regulations were there to prevent corruption. So by getting rid of these laws has allowed corruption to thrive, until it took over the whole political system of the Western world. Bringing about the decline, in the power of Western democracies. Why corruption is destroying Western countries is that wealthy entrepreneurs no longer invest their money into manufacturing. Because they can make far more money in, insider trading, share buybacks and other dodgy money-making schemes. So the manufacturing base of Western countries has declined through neglect and has gone East. 

Meanwhile the government of China recognized that it was corruption that was hampering the grown of their economy. So they started a campaign to stamp out corruption, to the degree where anyone found guilty of corruption can get life imprisonment or are executed. Not even billionaires are immune from this. China has executed 14 yuan billionaires between 2003 and 2011 on corruption charges and other crimes. This would never happen in Western countries where billionaires are above the law and can literately get away with murder. It is the anti-corruption drive that is one of the main reasons for China’s growth and prosperity. Because in China for anyone to bribe a government official is seen as a capital offence resulting in life imprisonment or the death penalty. While in Western countries it’s seen as normal business. 

Which means that if Western governments fail to address the corruption problem, then the decline of all Western countries will continue. So if we look at it in the long term, countries that stamp out corruption will always be more successful than countries that allow it to continue and flourish. China is able to stamp out corruption because it’s a dictatorship and its government saw the billionaire class as a threat to their power. The trouble is with this, is that this doesn’t guarantee that a future Chinese government will think the same way. A future Chinese leader might not understand the dangers of corruption and allow it to thrive bringing ruin to his country. Then unfortunately the people won’t be able to do anything about it because China is a dictatorship. Although it has to be said this can happen in a democracy, like we saw at the beginning of the 1980s. Where the disastrous policies like; deregulation and “trickle-down economics” were adopted. Which greatly benefited the wealthy at the expense of the common people and caused the decline in Western manufacturing.

So we can see clearly that corruption will lead to the total disintegration of Western countries which will in time force them to change the way they govern themselves. In that time of change, we have to stick to what works and understand what doesn’t work. So the number one item on this list will be to stamp out corruption. Then create a system where honest, loving people get into positions of power. This can only be guaranteed in a democracy. Some people have claim that the best type of government is a benevolent dictatorship. Which in theory, sounds like a good idea, but no one can explain how to ensure we get benevolent people in positions of power. This is why we need democracy because even though it can be subverted by corruption. Its still a method where the common people will have some say in how they are governed. 

So to achieve a better form of government we need three things: A democratic system, then to have a type of constitution where all forms of corruption are stamped out. Then finally a willingness of voters to vote into power honest, decent politicians who care about the people they rule. It’s true that there will be other Jacinda Ardern type politicians, who claim to be loving and caring people but are in truth just lying, two-faced politicians. But in a system that stamps out corruption, then this type of politician cannot thrive and will be soon be found out. 

In mainstream politics, people debate which is the best political system. So some people might advocate capitalism while others will advocate communism. But to me its more; “the singer not the song.” Whatever system we have, if the rulers are corrupt, stupid or even insane, they will destroy the country they are ruling. While intelligent, competent and caring rulers will ensure the country thrives and the people enjoy a high standard of living. We can see this in recent history, in the time of the Soviet Union the Capitalist system of Western countries worked better than the Soviet communist system which finally collapsed in 1990. But in the 21st century we are finding that the Chinese communist system is working better than Capitalist system of Western countries. It’s claimed that the reason for this is that, Chinese rulers are very pragmatic and are more interested in what works and doesn’t work. While Western rulers are blinded by ideology. A less than charitable reason is that it’s also claimed that; “China is ruled by engineers and scientists, while the West is ruled by lawyers and clowns.” 

So clearly the type of rulers we have, is far more important than the political system they use. This is why we need to get rid of the idea that, “love is a weakness” and instead realise that we want loving, caring and competent people ruling our world and do everything we can, to ensure that this happens. 

Neoliberalism: The Religion Of The World, Flesh, And Devil (Updated For 2024)

Neoliberalism.  It is a rather obscure-sounding term with a somewhat nebulous meaning.  It's anonymity and vagueness shroud it in mystery.  And yet, it is the very ideology at the root of most, if not all, of the modern world's problems.

So what is it, exactly?  It is best defined as a dogmatic belief in the inherent superiority and supremacy of unfettered free markets and privatization (and commodification) of nearly every single thing in the Universe.  Inequality, however extreme, and even greed itself is recast as virtuous (think Gordon Gekko of Wall Street).  The rich and the poor deserve their lot in life, because reasons.  Or something.  Poverty is in fact a feature, not a bug, as the resulting desperation makes people that much easier to exploit via economic coercion.  People are just objects to be used, as are animals and Mother Nature herself.  Citizens are reduced to mere consumers and wage-serfs, if not full-blown slaves.  And like the robber barons of old, today's high priests of neoliberalism are totally fine with robbing from the poor, giving to the rich, and torpedoing what's left of the middle class.  The only difference is that nowadays they typically do it with a smile and a veneer of pseudo-progressivism, while laughing all the way to the bank (often quite literally).

Neoliberalism's warped and twisted code of pseudo-ethics harbors a massive, gaping void that is essentially a moral black hole, since this ideology lacks a truly moral and spiritual component underneath it all.  Its entire foundation is shaky, empty and morally bankrupt, totally rotten to the core.  And yet, it has such mass appeal on both the (pseudo-)left and right of the political spectrum that it transcends that very spectrum.  And while neoliberalism is clearly the darling brainchild of patriarchy, it is such a wily and devious shapeshifter that it even transcends patriarchy itself as well.

From Reagan to the Clintons, Thatcher to Blair, Milton Friedman (who first coined the word neoliberalism) to Thomas Friedman, Greenspan to Powell, Facebook to ExxonMobil, Purdue University to Perdue Chicken to Purdue Pharma, Trump to Trudeau, Obama all the way to Biden, and Boris all the way to Natasha, it seems like no mainstream or pseudo-alternative politician, ideologue, technocrat, maven, or tycoon has been able to avoid being infected by neoliberalism to one degree or another, and sucked into its lifeless, soulless abyss.

(Trump, with the notable exception of opposing some of the "free trade" component of neoliberalism, otherwise supports essentially all of the rest of their evil and demonic agenda in practice, his disingenuous rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.  And ALL neoliberals, Trump included, are largely anti-union in practice, if not also in theory as well.)

Though secular in nature, neoliberalism has all of the zeal of a religion, even a fundamentalist one.  And its dogmas have basically become the new orthodoxy from about 1980 onwards.  And we can thus conclude that neoliberalism is essentially the religion of the world, the flesh, and the devil, filling the voids left by the implosion of the mainstream patriarchal religions.  One can even call it a cult as well.

In Christian theology, the "world, flesh, and devil" have traditionally been considered the three primary enemies of the soul, as a sort of "unholy trinity".  Now, I personally believe that there is some nuance to this in that the world is only evil because of who rules it (i.e. the devil who works through men, particularly the oligarchs and their sycophantic lackeys), and the flesh is only evil when we choose to make it that way, since matter is essentially just a slowed-down form of spirit.  Neither of these first two are inherently evil or irredeemable in themselves.  But under the current regime of patriarchy, living exclusively for these two things is believed to ultimately lead to the third member, the devil.  Or wetiko, if you prefer.  Whatever it is, it is pure evil energy that cannot ever be redeemed.  And neoliberalism, in its sheer vileness, vainglory, often gratuitous cruelty, and wanton idolatry of money and worldly power above all else, effectively worships all three members of this unholy trinity.  There is really no denying that at all.

The rise of selected flavors of Christian (and other religious) fundamentalism since the 1980s has NOT stemmed the tide of neoliberalism, and the two increasingly seem to be joined at the hip nowadays.  And while patriarchy is currently in its death throes as we speak, the implosion of patriarchy and patriarchal religion is clearly non-linear, erratic, and chaotic.

And most notably, the recent rumors of neoliberalism's supposed death from the COVID-19 pandemic have been greatly exaggerated.  And by that, we mean that, if anything, neoliberalism has actually GAINED strength overall from the lockdowns and related restrictions which effectively robbed from the poor, gave to the rich, and torpedoed what was left of the already shrinking middle class.  It was basically the heist of the century, if not the millennium.  And not only did these draconian measures not appreciably save lives in the long run, they actually cost lives, particularly among poorer people and people of color who got the brunt of both the virus itself AND the collateral damage disproportionately shunted onto them while the affluent got to "work from home".  There was certainly nothing genuinely leftist or progressive about doing that!  And the novel experimental gene therapies that self-identify as "vaccines" have been not only a major cash cow for the oligarchs, but also have been (via mandates, "passports", and segregation) an effective weapon of power and control over the masses, especially via divide-and-conquer.  Not to mention, dare I say, a bioweapon as well, given all of the excess deaths, injuries, and disabilities (sorry, "coincidences") that have resulted from these concoctions.

The pandemic is long over, and all restrictions have ended as of last year, but the legacy and precedent still remain.

And, of course, Women have clearly gotten the brief end of the stick from the pandemic response as well.  Lockdowns had increased male-on-female domestic violence and Women had lost more jobs than men have as well.  Meanwhile, the majority of designated "essential" (read: expendable) workers have also been Women as well, especially in healthcare.  And school closures have also forced Mothers to either 1) stay home with the kids and lose income as a result, or else 2) take on a triple burden by trying to juggle it all at once.  It has led to nothing short of a collapse of Women's health and work.  Thus there is clearly nothing even remotely feminist about these toxic and illiberal policies, but rather these are things that neoliberalism salivates over the most.  The Rockefellers and their cronies must be grinning from ear to ear right now as we speak.  And while these pandemic and lockdown-related phenomena are over, there is no denying that it set the Women's movement back decades, and no sooner has the movement only begun to recover, than the right-wing reactionaries and counterrevolutionaries are trying so hard to drag Women back to Margaret Atwood's worst nightmare as we speak.  And that counterrevolution, of course, is also in league with...you guessed it...neoliberalism. 

TO HELL WITH NEOLIBERALISM!