NEW ECONOMIC THEORY OF COMFORTISM

NEW ECONOMIC THEORY OF COMFORTISM

People are currently complaining that marxism, socialism and communism are making a comeback into the ideological world, in spite of their constant failure and lack of any success. I'm personally not sure whether these ideologies are increasing or not, but they are definitely persistent and very damaging, even if they don't achieve the overthrow of the current capitalist system.

The big question is, why do they persist in spite of failure? I am convinced the answer is the downsides of the current capitalist system, and the degeneration of so called "social democracy". Capitalism works, but it has too many imperfections causing many people to fall into tragic circumstances.

The only way to defeat socialism, alongside the excesses of political correctness and open racism against whites, is to come up with a new economic system. This system cannot be a combination of socialism and capitalism such as "social democracy", which starts out well but then degenerates due to its socialist ingredients (look at Sweden, which currently accepts a massive number of "refugees"); it cannot be pure capitalism as it tends to generate small, arrogant, super powerful elites that keep most of the wealth and treat the rest of the population like dog faeces.

I have a proposal, it is a system called Comfortism, as it aims to make everyone, rich or poor, comfortable in both body and mind. In this system, middle classes and the rich don't have to worry about having their wealth stolen, as its not based on envy; on the other hand, the poor are guaranteed appropriate accommodation, which is sufficient clean and cheap, with enough electricity for cooking, lighting, computer use, and heating in cold countries; the poor are also guaranteed access to hospitals, doctors and free primary and secondary education, and cheap university education as long as it is in a STEM field (Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths), and also vocational fields such as Plumbing, Electrician, Builder. Social sciences and Law courses should be very expensive.

Basic foodstuffs such as bread, rice, pasta, flour, fruits , vegetables and beans (meat substitute) should also be provided to people who cannot afford them. Such a society should also be very tough on violent crime, which includes a swift death sentence for multiple murders, and forced dangerous labour for rapes, single murders, and large thefts, both white collar and blue collar, in order to prevent the formation of no go zones. A similar system to this was implemented in Singapore, and now it has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

This theory would be "Capitalistish", as it would contain the right to private property, including farmland, but would not be capitalist.

The theory of Comfortism must NOT contain the word Equality, and must NEVER make reference to Race or Religion. It must NOT contain the word "global citizenship", and discourage globalisation.

Unfortunately I don't have a degree in business or economics, thus I'm going to need some help in order to fully develop this theory; however I have met really competent people on Facebook such as Dave Roosters, Adam Boivin, Richard Wilson, and Lisa Walsh.

I'm thinking of the possibility of even collectively writing a book or a blog. If anyone wants to help I will be eternally grateful. I'm do sick of socialism, globalism and political correctness that I'm willing to write for free or almost free and let someone else keep the profits.


By mutopai west papua

Papuans were not allowed by the government to identify themselves as Papuans or Melanesians by: MUTOPAI WEST PAPUA

Papuans were not allowed by the government to identify themselves as Papuans or Melanesians : by: MUTOPAI WEST PAPUA
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Almost any cultural expression by the Papuans has for many years been considered by the Indonesian government to be a manifestation of the separatist movement. Papuans who sang in their local language could be beaten, tortured, detained or even killed by the Indonesian security forces in the name of eradicating separatism. Papuan traditional cultures were also treated as uncivilised and primitive by many Indonesians. The government sought to make Papuans feel ashamed of their traditional ways and to undermine these in the name of modernisation and development – or, more accurately, ‘Indonesianisation’. Papuans were not allowed by the government to identify themselves as Papuans or Melanesians: instead, the government taught the Papuans to call themselves ‘Indonesians from Irian Jaya province’. A significant example of the undermining of Papuan culture is the way that Papuans have been separated from their land. In former days, the Papuans were the owners of the forest under customary adat (traditional law). The forest had both an economic and a religious meaning for the Papuans. It was considered a source of food, a shelter in time of tribal war, and a place to communicate with ancestral spirits. To  the Papuans, the meaning of the forest is embodied in their saying: ‘the forest is our mother’. However, under Indonesian rule, Papuans were no longer considered as the owners of ancestral lands. Their lands were
plundered on the pretext of national development, and their forests expropriated and exploited. Companies with their head offices in Jakarta have divided the forests in West Papua among themselves. Government authorities and business people, who are mostly nonPapuans, have become the putative owners of the forests and land (at least for as long as it takes them to extract its resources). The Papuans, the true owners of the land, have become mere guardians of the forests, which are now considered to belong to other people.20 Once a private company has begun its forestry exploitation activity, the Papuans are not allowed to enter into the claimed forest, not even to collect firewood. The interests of most of these private companies are protected and safeguarded by the Indonesian security forces. When the Papuans demand their rights to ownership of the forest, they are accused of being separatists, the label that gives justification to the security forces to use violence against them.21 Many abuses have arisen from a military and police presence aimed at protecting mining firms, forest concessions and timber estates exploiting natural resources. In addition, the illegal logging business is thriving in West Papua. Often this takes place with the protection – and even the direct involvement – of the security forces. Indeed, the military’s  extensive business interests are an important factor behind their presence in West Papua. The Papuans are powerless in the face of this collaboration between the government, the military,  and the private companies who grab their land. As recognised by the Papuans of the Amungme tribe, ‘by using the label of separatist, and gun-pointing against us, the government, private companies and the Indonesians easily rob our land without consulting us.’

By: MUTOPAI WEST PAPUA