Karl Marx was concerned with “Social Justice” or economic justice. He recognized that the owners of the means of production were at the top of the heap and oppressed those below who had to work hard, and could not franchise themselves. What does it mean to “franchise” oneself? An individual can only work so many hours per week. A 40 hour week is a standard work week, but someone who is motivated to do more can earn more, at least that works in theory. Some employers are mandating more than a 40 hour week with no additional compensation. That is a violation of the Biblical precept of a “workman is worth his wages”.
To franchise oneself is to make others work for you. Mc Donald’s Hamburger chain is probably the most dramatic and wide spread franchise in the world (Subway may have taken over that position?). In a franchise system, the franchisor is able to get a little bit from the profit of the labor of the franchisee. The more franchisees, the more in profits. The franchisee does not mind, because the franchisee is profiting greatly from the business model being applied. In this example, the means of production are owned by the franchisee, and the franchisor owns the intellectual, and/or copyrights and licensing authority. The employee has a job, but relies upon wages. The manager knows the jobs throughout the business franchise, and as such, he can operate on a salary (guaranteed income, but many hours are required, and no consideration is given to how many hours). So now, we have the owners of the intellectual property, owners of the means of production, managers, and employees. This system has worked well in America for many decades, but it is starting to come under attack.
The influence of Karl Marx’s radical economic and social justice theories are being employed by numerous parties to effect “change”. In 2008, we heard of “Hope and Change” from then Presidential candidate Barack Obama. Barack Obama never worked a labor job to the best of this writer’s knowledge, and he espoused a Communist ideology. Communism is one of many economic ideologies. In the case of Communism, the state owns everything basically, and they show favoritism to a few “oligarchs” or privileged characters. As in all but Christian free enterprise, Communism and all of the rest of the economic “isms”, are for the elite rich. Of course the stated ideals pay lip service to the poor, but the poor remain poor in those different “isms”.
England was sinking deeply into the mire of Socialism/Communism when the “Iron Lady”, Margaret Thatcher, sold off a lot of state owned businesses. England then had a very nice economic recovery. The problem with a state owned enterprise is that there is no single responsible party to see to it that it succeeds and fulfills its intended purposes. Add to that a Communist ideology, and not only is there no real responsible party, but the parties involved don’t even care. As long as they get theirs, everyone else can go down the tubes with their blessing. Under Communism, the individual is subsumed into the state and as such has no rights, no property, no significance. Believe it or not, there are people deceived into believing that is a good thing. What do you think?
Many Links Below – Become Informed!
Feel Free To Pass On Any Posts
Pensamiento Peligroso writes the truth as he sees it, and if it upsets you, then it makes you think!
www.touchstoneconnect.com Subscribe for free – no ads!
THERE ARE 25 LINKS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE ON THE RIGHT SIDE – OTHER REPUTABLE SITES FOR YOUR EDIFICATION INCLUDING G. Edward Griffin, John Stossel, Walter Williams, Zero Hedge to name a few.