Blogger Widgets

Friday, May 27, 2011

My Life Philosophy & My View On Unions


My philosophy on abundance, individualism, libertarianism, business & leadership.
By Diego Lucero  -- May 2, 2011



"Out of abundance He took abundance and still abundance remained" - The Upanishads.

John Locke once postulated that the mind is like a "blank slate" or "tabula rasa".  

   If I can just say first, as sort of a preface, I undoubtedly believe that all men are inherently good, even if the rest of the world tries it's darndest to have us choose evil.  The people that I know in my life are all perfect examples of that. Despite differing views, and strong opinions, we can find avenues for common ground, and reasons to agree. The very approach that good people take to finding truth through debate and friendly argument is the very fabric of a civilized, productive and innovative society.  We must remember the words of the wise Eleanor Roosevelt:  "Average minds discuss events.  Great minds discuss ideas."

   I am a Friedman/Rand/Hayek libertarian.  I have some different views on a variety of topics, and I really felt compelled to share my ideology and philosophy with you all.  I understand that these views expressed here are not shared by most people, and I must say that it is not my intention to offend or point fingers.  I just wish to share my philosophy for life, business, and my view of a productive government in the hope that with this small blurb, I could be of help to someone somewhere.  May we all come together in peace and understanding in discussion.

**************************************************************


Here it goes, my personal take on Individualism first:

"Out of abundance He took abundance and still abundance remained" - The Upanishads.

   Abundance is a principle for the ages.  It may be the most repeated, recounted and rewritten concept in the history of man. Out of it springs selflessness, love, service and industry.  Without it, there is no good that is done; nations fall.  With it, there is no end to good; economies thrive.  Oh how much the world needs individuals that live abundant lives!!

   Definition of 'individual', via Wikipedia: "[1]As commonly used, an individual is a person or any specific object in a collection. [2]In the 15th century and earlier, and also today within the fields of statistics and metaphysics, individual means "indivisible", typically describing any numerically singular thing, but sometimes meaning "a person." [3]From the seventeenth century on, individual indicates separateness, as in individualism. [4]Individuality is the state or quality of being an individual; a person separate from other persons and possessing his or her own needs, goals, and desires."

   Individualism is the natural extension of the belief in human capacity for selflessness (capacity for abundance).  Individualism is a tenet of moral code--respecting other's beliefs, origins, ideas, no matter how much you may disagree.  As a matter of fact, Individualism goes even further than that.  It can be said that it is the building up of others around you, the strengthening of all that come into your contact.  It's power is in the strength of individual cause.

Is it "baaaaad" to stick out?
   Ultimately, selflessness cannot be taught or forced on a population--it must be learned and practiced out of free will. Individualism perpetuates the belief that if you strengthen the individual, you will strengthen the collective ("collective" used loosely.)  I believe that the human spirit is naturally strong and idealistic. That being said, I also believe that no manner of laws or enforced opinion could convert a society towards any ideal... And it is my firm belief that laws can change nothing--except for who is in jail, and who is not.

   Individualism as a philosophy, empowers the individual, without impairing the empowerment of other individuals.  It allows for voluntary choices with all people, in all walks of life and society becomes a social contract between rational individuals.  This ideology is inclusive, and it includes union workers, managers, owners, neighbors, etc. 

**************************************************************

“government only needs to ensure that no one is harmful to anyone else.”  ~ Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson


   I see Libertarianism as the expression of abundance and individualism in a rational society.

The REAL solution to the world's problems.
  Libertarians are not anarchists.  Libertarians (or 'minarchists') believe in very limited government--*especially* on the larger scales (ie federal & supranational).  The parts of government that most Libertarians  see the need for is a local government that upholds the law, and protects it's constituents from evil (as is seen in a well-managed police force). Libertarians believe strongly in the ideas and notions set forth by our founding documents, especially the constitution as it was ratified in 1790.  

   Libertarians believe largely in non-interventionism, for both domestic policy and foreign policy. That means no wars to next to no wars, and as few legal constraints as could be allowed in good conscience at the federal and supranational levels. Because libertarians tend to believe that governments are unreliable, and that the best solutions always come organically from the people in their respective realms of comfort, the ideal libertarian society would be one where the community, then the city, then the county and state governments would be the "largest" and most influential of the governments (in that order--from most to least).  

   De-centralizing government authority does two things:  It protects against potential authoritarian power over a given region (Think Hitler, Mussolini, Mao), and it empowers the families and the individuals to direct the economy/society through their neighborhoods and cities according to the ideals of their local "collective of individuals".  (The latter idea is quite regularly attributed to being a classical socialist concept.)  This way, the governments that are closest to peoples homes could better support the families in their culturally empowered ideological pursuits towards success, prosperity and happiness.

   Libertarians are anti-monopoly for almost all ideas. They believe that an open and wide playing field for all rational businesses, organizations and individuals is key to a strong society. You will usually find Libertarians opposing the creation of, or sustaining of monopolies to encourage fair competition in the marketplace and to defend the right that all individuals are free to choose.  This means that they oppose government monopoly (any monopoly that is outside the monopoly of force as is expressed in a well-managed police force), and also oppose all forms of corporate or business subsidy, since subsidy would provide unfair advantage to one company over others in a market.


************************************************************

   As for my opinion on whether or not Unions can be called an individualist "right"--even though they are freely called a "collective bargaining" tool--is definitely no.  But I do believe that Unions CAN support individualist ideals.  However, history has shown that many Unions tend to give more and more to the members of the union at the expense of the expense of others involved (non-union members, business owners, and even at the expense of consumers.)  

   The common view of the need for Unions is that workers need to be "protected" from the greedy owners, managers, and stockholders that only care about profit margins and stock options.  The view is that the owners not only do not care about the workers that produce the product that the company sells, but that if they did, it would only be because they had to.

   I fundamentally disagree with that view.  I am an entrepreneur, and I know that if I were to produce a product or service, that I would need to take care of my employees to ensure that my company provides the highest quality work that we can provide for our loyal customers. 

   The true power of business and economy is in the individual, not the collective.  Let me illustrate a little bit over the next few paragraphs:

   Without loyal employees, I would have high turnover, and heightened expenses towards new hire training, lowered quality, which leads to a disloyal customer base (if I have a customer base at all).  With disloyal employees, I would have a next to non-existent profit margin (if I am lucky enough to escape bankruptcy, that is), and the stockholders would be very very unhappy with me.  

   If I were to lead a business without taking as good care of my employees as I can afford, I run the risk of bankruptcy.  I must, therefore, take good care of all individuals in my employ.

   I know that if I invest resources in my people generously, they may invest in me generously as well.  I truly believe that the true power of business and economy is in the collective of individuals, not the "individualist collective" of Unions. 

   When it comes down to it, goodness always comes from the greater good as it is expressed from the individual, because there is no collective in this world that can create a desire for good within another without first going through the individuals ability to choose for themselves. 

As Stephen R. Covey quotes so often:
Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.   (Viktor E. Frankl)

   We, as leaders, must (READ: need to) empower individuals to make good choices in their lives--for good choices ripple goodness to the rest of the world.  Good choices lead to strong society and people.  It is my belief, that with good choice, comes the cornucopia of blessings, many of which we do not yet understand. 

   And it is for this reason that I believe that the strongest form of government is a government that empowers all indivuals to make powerful choices without intervention.

   May we all see the value in unlimited potential and worth in others, regardless of race, religion, nationality or gender. May we build upon the principles of morality with each other, giving people the tools they need through our actions and words, while also empowering people with the room to grow and improve in all walks of life.   

   Such is my own personal philosophy, my ideas, and my thoughts on a few select, and normally contentious subjects that are in the public eye.  Please do not regard this note as representative of the views of all libertarians, mormons, or religions.

5 comments:

  1. This is good, it's always good to get a better understanding of another political point of view. From an idealistic standpoint, I can see how the Libertarian philosophy is very sound and, in a perfect world, it would work great. But of course, we don't live in a perfect world.

    "The common view of the need for Unions is that workers need to be "protected" from the greedy owners, managers, and stockholders that only care about profit margins and stock options. The view is that the owners not only do not care about the workers that produce the product that the company sells, but that if they did, it would only be because they had to."

    I happen to agree with that common belief, and disagree with your assessment. First off, you have to look at the reasons for the creation of unions in the first place, for that matter, the creation of workplace laws. Without unions and government intervention, factories would have continued to be able to employ workers 10 years old and work them 6 days a week from dusk til dawn. It's a simple matter of history, it's hard to argue with history, and no amount of philosophy can change what has already happened. If you can show me with definite certainty that what you suggest will actually happen, i'd be against unions too.

    But, my question now is, how would you get rid of unions? Would you make a law banning them? Wouldn't that go against your whole point of fewer laws?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ian, thank you for your well-reasoned and welcoming response and comment.

    I do not suppose that I know what is best for everyone. I don't hope to change anyone's mind, but rather I write only to give people something new to think about.

    But to answer your question: I don't mean to disconnect the people's support for Unions--Unions definitely have their purpose. Also, I don't like the idea of creating laws for the sake of enforcing a moral standard, even if the legalized moral standard supports my views. In other words, I don't like the idea of banning Unions.

    If I were to just look at the Union situation from a law creation/abandonment standpoint, I would tend to support the limitation of legal weight that the Unions have over the actual owners of the company (ie. stockholders) and boards of officers.

    I know the history of Unions pretty well, and I definitely agree with you that they helped the common working man to significantly change the poisonous culture in a budding industrial economy. Child labor laws, and increased median wage were all positive outcomes from that era.

    During the Industrial Revolution, Unions served a very valuable role in society, but now I feel that the climate has changed a bit. Before, employers were limited--most people were self-employed, farmers, etc.. Now--comparatively, we have many many more potential employers out there. And that creates a very real competition between companies for talented employees. Now more than ever, an employee really has a choice for what he will do for work, and who he will work for.

    These things have changed:
    1. People are more connected than ever, able to communicate with people whom they have never met before that can possibly provide valuable information to either party (or both).
    2. There are more employers in existence. This creates competition between companies to attract and keep valuable employees. In a very real sense, the potential employee has more "choice" than ever before.
    3. Change has become the only constant of our new economy. As competition tightens, each employer must fight to stay relevant. This means that companies will need to implement many changes, just to prevent their possible collapse in the market.
    4. With the current economy in depression, each company is fighting for survival. Actually, many of them have been fending off collapse for a while now.

    My own personal opinion is that modern Unions normally do not allow for change quickly enough to prevent the dissolution of the companies that are directly affected by the economy. I also believe that they are empowered by the government over the actual owners of the company--which I cannot agree with.

    However, my personal opinions about Unions are irrelevent (LOL), because I believe that the solution to addressing the rapid and constant changes in the world economy is not in the creation or enforcement of law, but in empowering and strengthening the people themselves.

    In my view, our culture in society has drifted away from a strong, unspoken moral standard. I believe that the key to success in any venture is empowering people to make good choices (good being defined as creating value for society, without harming others freedom to do the same). As leaders, we should focus on raising our kids and each other to treat others with kindness, love and respect.

    It's my view that the real change should be in all of ourselves, since each individual makes up a portion of society. If each individual strove to empower themselves and others to make good choices, society would succeed, regardless of the laws (or lack of laws) in place.

    It's definitely a longer, harder path, but in my opinion, it's results are sure.

    I plan on creating another post on how we can do just that. And, although you and I may disagree on some political points, when it comes to the topic of building a society, I think you and I can both agree that love and kindness are good places to start. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. A perfect world does not exist, but we still can create perfection where we stand.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Excellent points you make Diego, and I do agree for the most part. And your four points regarding how things have changed, are true, that alone does give me pause for thought regarding unions. We are a different society than the one we were when Unions first came into fruition. Either way, many unions have strayed from their original intent and at the very least, reform would be good.

    And as far as changing the attitudes of society, I can definitely agree with that! However, I don't think it matters at all the form of government we have for that to be true. As people become more righteous we start to love each other and help each other and we come to a perfect society, whether it is Communist or Libertarian.

    ReplyDelete
  5. And I completely agree with that! Bravo! I especially agree with this:

    "As people become more righteous we start to love each other and help each other and we come to a perfect society, whether it is Communist or Libertarian."

    I would say that the reason that I support a libertarian society is because it allows for people to go out on their own and create their own government separate from other groups, whether their city/community would be fascist, communist, libertarian or even anarchist.

    It would allow people to experiment a society without a market economy (capitalism), with a centralized economy (socialism), or somewhere in between--because each society would be separate, and would not directly affect other society's choices for governance.

    In this way, people can have a "choice" as to where they should move to, live, or visit etc. It creates a type of competition for what could be the most valued and/or effective government to the people.

    But when anyone breaks it down, the success or detriment of any society is manifest through the choices of it's people.

    ReplyDelete