I have taken this article from my website page. On Saturday I travelled to London with my friend who was giving a Tedx talk. The Ted team were incredible and the fast running seminar was a test for their expertise. During the drive home I realised many of the brilliant presenters would understand this essay:
My Philosophy of Selfness
1200 Words – Ten Minute Read
It is essential the open-minded thinker reviews the social system he lives within. The human beehive requires drones and leaders: To function well; the system we call establishment has to control the people it is supposed to serve. The failing’s of ‘the system’ affects all of us. One example is causing a social crisis: Is the lack of public housing: this results in public money filling the pockets of private landlords. Government rent subsidy is a shameful waste of taxes which increases the price of homes beyond the reach poor people. A circle of debt is made within a process which is supposed to help the impoverished. The answer is for local government to build new homes which have affordable rent. It would be prudent to ‘cap’ the contribution made to landlords, this would in the long term lower the cost of housing.
The political agenda will promise benefits to secure votes.’Vote for me, and I will pay for your education’ – ‘More schools, will give your child a future’ – ‘More police will make you safer’ – ‘I will secure your rent subsidy’. And truth to tell, these statements are evidence the ‘establishments system’ is not and will never work. Even worse is, social charity removes the possibility of people owning their homes. Because the rent subsidies paid by the government to landlords increases the price of property. The landlords pay higher prices for properties which provide their profits. In effect, this system diverts millions of pounds of tax into the hands of businesses. So insipid is the system; many people decide they will never possess their own property and accept their situation as a fait accompli.
Let us consider the situation further:
Entering into debt is to the benefit of the politician. Once entered, it is difficult to escape the spiral of debt. It could be argued: debt and the imprisonment of rented accommodation combine to control the poor better than any political propaganda. The politician offers financial incentives to vote for his party. The poor man only views the carrot of the politicians lies; he does to care to see the noose of political slavery called rhetoric which supports the bribe. Few can escape the slavery, employed people fund the ‘failing system,’ they are overworked and heavily taxed. Of course, the implication that debt is acceptable and excessive possessions prove they are wealthy means they have a credit card, overdraft and excessive mortgage debt. These debts enforce them to work long hours for little money. In effect, the debt enslaves them to earn taxable income.
It is suggested the ideas in the first three paragraphs must be understood if any hope of living a good life is to be achieved. The key to security is to be free as possible from the system which thrives on the slavery of debt. Of course, few will come close to considering the probability these ideas contain an element of truth. The key to security is to be free from debt and own your own home. Once achieved one is relatively free from the control of the institution.
An open-minded individual understands the reasons why citizens are indoctrinated by the illusion of accumulated possessions. People in the Western World are lead to believe possessions, excess wealth and pointless accumulation are indicators of wealth. This is far from the truth. An intelligent individual will realise living within one’s means is, in reality, an accurate interpretation of the words ‘successful’ and ‘wealthy’. He will understand why millions of people work for little money and accept debt as a standard way of life. He will understand why people accept the only reward for a lifetime of toil, is the possibility of a decade of retirement before the end of life. Ultimately, the open-minded thinker will understand that it is the social system’s indoctrination which leads a majority of citizens to believe their existence is the best they can expect.
Exchange the word ‘life’ for ‘compromise’ and reassess the life journey:
‘The Philosophy of Selfness’ helps the open-minded thinker discover different ways of considering the ‘compromise’. An acute observer may begin to suspect society is a vacuum which takes all. He may also see nothing is given in return for his contribution apart from manipulative rhetoric. We should accept the danger in this way of thinking: Those who openly acknowledge the realities will be seen by the closed-minded majority as selfish, and be assigned demeaning titles such as; anti-social, ignorant, without compassion.
An individualist may refuse to give to charity. A choice believed by many people to be the attitude of a mean or greedy person. I wonder how deeply the idea that charity impoverishes humankind is considered? Why is it unacceptable to ask if the percentage of taxes which becomes charity and foreign aid is sufficient contribution? Why is it unacceptable to offer the opinion that the sales of arms and ammunition are a cause of the poverty?
Selfness is about responsibility and integrity. The philosophy asks a simple question ‘If you lived by your efforts and became responsible for your environment. Would your compromise become a life?’ It is a compelling question, an initial seed of thought, which allows the ‘Philosophy of Selfness’ to grow within one’s psyche. Selfness questions beliefs and supposition, asking the question: ‘Is this information true or accurate?’ about anything which effects our close environments.
Many people will disagree with the sentiments in this introduction. I accept their right to possess their opinion. In fact, I agree with every human’s right to have their own opinion and belief. There is no point in me arguing the points made on this page. A reader can either consider them worth examination or dismiss the ideas. The fact is I will argue with no one. And with no disagreement, there can be no argument or feud. From my perspective, I can live a brilliant life existing with other people by accepting their right to possess their beliefs.
The idea is to accept and respect the opinions of other people is a powerful premise. Providing there is no attempt to indoctrinate, all is well. At the instant of sensing someone is inferring ‘My way is the way’ a human, whose desire to live within freedom will turn away. I have tested the idea of not interacting with those who seek argument or conflict., it is a life skill which makes life comfortable and secure. I look after my environment and demonstrate truth and integrity. I expect the same from those I interact and work with: if they fail to meet expectations: we will not connect again.
When someone reads about Jake in my book ‘The Beekeeper’ he will discover a character who follows ‘The Philosophy of Selfness’. In the same vein the unnamed character in ‘The Assassin’s Notebook’ is also a man of principle, regardless of his vocation. My fictional work examines the ‘The Philosophy of Selfness’ through the characters and situations in the stories. The fictional work is an extension of the philosophical endeavour. Those who find the core book ‘Never Let Anything Worry You’ of interest, will understand the sentiments of the stories in the fictional titles.
See You Soon
The book about the philosophy is HERE