This story of a Los Angeles resident taking it upon himself to create a solution for people who found themselves lacking basic resources, on the street in a perpetual cycle of poverty; juxtaposed - in stark contrast - by the "answer" from government is an appalling yet revelatory tale of what government actually does. (Video at the bottom of this post.)
On one hand we have a resident who sees himself as part of a community.
With some members of the community in dire need. He has some extra resources so out of the goodness of his heart he sets himself to the task of building a home for one of the unfortunate members of his community in need.
The Power Of The Crowd:
Through crowd funding he was able to raise money to continue his charitable work.
With so many people seeing the value in what he's doing. What's the government's solution?
To knock it down, destroy what he's built and propose their own solution, where they can endlessly hash out through focus groups and "planning" the best method of housing the homeless, meanwhile those who were given homes are now back out on the street.
On the other hand the government is acting as bully for the home owners associations and residents in the community who would rather see these people on the street than the possibility of a temporary decline of the value of their home.
It's understandable people don't want to lose value in such a large investment as their home.
Though I personally think even this is short sighted, (even if we set morality aside a moment) as it merely props up a traditionalist way of living. (Which also happens to benefit the state through higher taxes, etc.) If tiny home communities both for the homeless and otherwise became more the norm it would not only bring up the value of the living conditions of those attempting to escape the clutches of poverty,thus providing a more productive robust economy by extension. It would also become standardized to the point that it would eventually equalize.
Similar to the way we may see apartments in the same communities as million dollar homes.
Whereas, all apartnment buildings were once relegated to cheap tenements, low-cost housing and considered temporary residences, or even slums by todays standards. Today you can't rent an apartment in Mahattan for less than a couple thousand dollars a month for a cramped one bedroom.
There's another counter argument to this, that the tiny home craze/fad is itself a way to hide rampant inflation and a failing economy. Much like the shrinking bag of chips you buy at the grocery store that gets filled with a bit more air and a few less chips hoping the consumer won't notice, so too the homes get smaller, but it's trendy so it therefor doesn't = poverty?
I actually tend to agree with this. But solutions are still solutions and the economy is in the state it's in. If you need or want less you should be free to pursue that option. Also if you want more and someone is willing to give it to you or a group of people are willing to create it for you that should also be available. That's how we progress as a species. But I digress...
How They Hide The Corruption:
Over the past year I've been focused a great deal on online/e-commerce marketing, sales.
Because of this, I've become aware of a lot of the sales jobs used on people how they function and what's actually occurring. In this case, it got me thinking about sales funnels. You know, those ads we see on Facebook to "sign up for my free webinar!" Or get your free e-book! They all work pretty much the same. Obviously, they trade a value proposition for you email address and therefor your attention and to target you as a possible sale for whatever they're marketing. Today. Tomorrow. Forever. They then gather data and information to better sell to you and so on. The cycle continues.
A funny notion struck me when watching the proposed solution in the following video.
That ALL of these government programs are merely funnels. Ok. Not a major revelation?
But what if that funnel also acts as social proof to keep the state in power?
Reenforcing it's position like a front organization for a drug kingpin.
It gives people a reason to believe. Just like the revival church will offer up the claim of spontaneous healing as proof of their works. They put on a show. Ensuring the collection baskets will fill up allowing them to continue their operation.
But here's where it gets really insidious, while you can claim that the average church goer is brainwashed and under the spell of the church they still have a free will choice. They can choose not to go. They can choose to listen to their non-church-going friends, they can trade it in for another belief, for no belief at all for philosophy, science etc.
The options are all there they're available free to be chosen. Most importantly by making the choice to not give money and attention to those things which they don't believe in, they take back some of the power they were granting it.
With government, we have no such choice.
So while the state rolls out their solutions we can either agree or disagree.
But the effect is always pretty much the same. They go ahead and do what they were going to do anyway.
Psychologically speaking this leaves the average person with a couple of options. Agree and go along to get along. Which is what most people do. Speak against it and possibly wind up 'institutionalized.'
As an aside; The former is perhaps, as many have pointed out a state of stockholm syndrome and I'm not using this figuratively but literally. The state of primal fear involved in facing the truth of the matter that as the father of propaganda himself put it: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Which goes further than the scope of this post, but suffice to say the government isn't the only group using a front and in fact are themselves funneling power toward something larger, more corrosive to the human spirit.
Or the third way, the way of many voluntaryists, which is to live and act in a way that is as if the state didn't exist at all. To basically live as one sees fit following their own moral compass and values so long as they're not infringing on anyone else's. Break Free.
Thanks for checking out my stuff. If you like what you read/viewed here, please follow comment and vote.
I appreciate the support!
