We all live our lives by morals and ethics.
Ethics or moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.
Ethics seeks to resolve questions of human morality by defining concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice.
Morals are the thought content of the mind, and ethics are how we express those thoughts.
They are behavior.
Throughout history we have striven (very badly), to instill universal behavior.
The most obvious ones are 'thou shalt not kill', or 'that shalt not steal' (both of which fundamentally concern property rights. You are your own property).
ALL universal preferable behavior (UPB) ethics are restrictive - negative - and NOT positive, affirmative behavior.
Positive ethics are philosophically, and logically, incorrect.
If the ethic is self contradictory, then it can no longer be a universal ethic.
If it is ethically right to steal (a positive action) then nobody can ever be stolen from, as it is now consensual.(it is right to steal it cannot be theft).
All universally preferable behavior is restrictive in nature, and is more clearly defined because of this.
UPB and property rights are inexorably intertwined.
Property starts with the self.
Any ethic that contradicts this by advocating external impositions, contradicts this.
The non aggression principle is a UPB ethic, for example.
What has all this got to do with Steem?
Any structure not built upon UPB ethics as a framework is essentially a corrupt system.
Corrupt systems never endure, as they collapse in on their own hypocrisies, eventually.
Governments and the contradictory ethic of 'to steal is bad - and enforcing it through it's own law enforcement - but at the same time - stealing off every tax payer through coercion.
This philosophical hypocrisy - once seen - only leads to eventual decay - and destruction - of the said hypocritical system.
I point this out to illustrate that correct ethical principals will trump all other considerations.
(unless you believe the human being does not want to operate under ethical codes- that's sociopathic).
Structures built within the ethics of UPB will endure, just as ones not structured this way, will not.
I have been dissecting the steem whitepaper over this last few days - and I was shocked.
I mean seriously shocked.
This is supposed to explain things. (to intelligent investors? - fuckin' hell!!!)
And it does.
It quite clearly illustrates the 'logic' processes going on a steem inc. (and I would suggest either low IQ, or very high, IQ. I'll leave the personality types out of it, for now..).
In my next post I will dissect the paper - line by line- in my usual, 'not sarcastic at all' , happy clappy manner - from a philosophical, and UPB perspective.
.....the principle of property rights needs to be fully understood in regards to steemit, and it's flaws.
(this is NOT to say steem will not have any success- it may well do - but that's a different subject).
For a free market to function, it has to respect property rights as a fundamental principle. It ...HAS.... to.
IT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT THIS .
Without property rights there can be no free market - by definition of what a free market is.
(the free exchange of good or services)
Property rights are an essential part of this equation. You cannot buy or sell something that is not yours (or given to you by a consensual contract, to buy or sell).
The concept is not difficult to understand. In fact.... it is very, very, simple.
Steem is produced each day to fill up the rewards pool. This is done through the labors of the witnesses. It is their property.
The steem is then -by consent (in return for reward) , then put into the daily rewards pool - to be distributed among steem users in various ways.
At this point the witnesses abdicate their ownership of the produced steem. To who? They give it to no one , just a concept.
You cannot give property to a concept, only other people.
The reward pool is a pool of value, but not owned by anyone....?
To maintain the chain of ownership -ergo respecting the property rights principle - then the steem produced would have to be allocated to users on production, and not for some arbitrary redistribution based on stake size. (very marxist).
And here is the glaring problem...
At this point in the steem reward pool process, it then becomes no ones property!!
And this is the flaw.
You cannot buy, sell - or do anything with - something that is not yours without consent.
THERE IS NO ONE TO GIVE CONSENT - AS THE STEEM IS NO ONES PROPERTY AT THIS POINT.!!!!!!!!
The practical result of this in the steem ecosystem is a free for all, where the biggest stake holders have the ability to take the biggest proportion of the rewards pool.
It is philosophically corrupt - as property rights cannot be enforced.
(I won't even get into downvotng... it now becomes glaringly obvious...)
UPB cannot be the template of ethical actions - if their are no property rights.
Communal property rights does not exist - cannot exist - except in the delusional mind of the Marxist.
This is not to say property cannot be communal. (it can be, quite obviously).
But the rights to the property is totally different matter.
So in Steem, we now have a pool of value that somehow belongs to no one .
We also have a pool of people wishing to take as much profit as possible from that pool, for themselves.
( decided by stake size).
This cannot - ever - be a free market.
Without free markets, there can never be true price discovery - as we can see everyday - $50 rewards for 5 words and $1 reward for a 2000 word essay.
If you are unable to see the glaring reality of this corrupt system, and use 'the free market' as some kind of defense - then you are totally incorrect in your logical, and intellectual perspectives. ... as shown above.
To try and defend the system with any reference to free markets or value - is to reference it to property rights.
Whatever your motives are for defending this structure , they are not motivated by the ethics of UNIVERSALLY PREFERABLE BEHAVIOR .
This is misguided at best - or disingenuous and manipulative at worst.
The rewards pool is owned by no one.
It cannot be owned by everyone if profit motivations( which is a function of free market and price discovery) is in play.
This has far reaching consequences to the long term viability of steem....
Systems built on meritocracy and ethical principles will endure.
Systems built on 'non free' markets will collapse.
Again this is not to say Steem will no have success in some capacity - short term - but as I said before in reference to governments - WHEN people eventually see the structural flaws in a system ans are not built around sound ethical principles, people will turn away from it.
Steem is not some radical new concept - it is a flawed philosophy loosely based around ' might is right', and communism...
And I'll leave it there.
The dissection of the whitepaper is next - and what a fuckin' train wreck that is.
Anybody sold on steem with that word salad - needs to seek some psychiatric help...
Anyway.... enough of 'how to make friends on a Saturday morning'...I'm off... for now..
(let's see if I now get $100 worth of upvotes...Because this is worth $1000 - It might be the savior of steem....)