The often ignored but legalized violence of Commerce

I was having a discussion with @sagescrub about the difference between commerce and interchange.  He liked the idea so much that he wrote about it on a post yesterday on @homesteaderscoop.  I know there is a lot of differing opinions about what commerce is or is not.  So I thought I should clarify my views so that people comprehend what I'm talking about.

Before we can get into a discussion like this, it is best to review a few key words so that we can put this into context.  

Commerce(noun):  "social intercourse;" 1580s, "interchange of goods or property, trade,"  - etymonline.com

I have no issues with this definition of the word.  This is normal, balanced and peaceful social behaviour between people and has occurred since our ancestors started walking upon this Earth.  The problem comes when we start looking at the next word.

Commercial (adj):  "engaging in trade," from commerce + -al (1). Meaning "done for the sake of financial profit"  - etymonline.com

The word that is of particular concern for me in that definition is the word 'financial profit'!

Profit (noun):  mid-13c., "income;" c. 1300, "benefit, advantage;"  - etymonline.com

This is where things get really dicey.  When you or I work on the land, we harvest that which was given to us for free by Creator and Mother Earth.  The raw materials are used to make things that are useful to meet our needs.  The raw materials have some value to us only in that we can made something from them through our work.  We add value through our own creative work to transform those raw materials into something that has even more value.  The value equates to the work, creativity, talents and abilities to perform those tasks in order to meet our needs.

Value (noun):  c. 1300, "price equal to the intrinsic worth of a thing;" late 14c., "degree to which something is useful or estimable,"  - etymonline.com

For example:  I find a tree.  As it stands there it has value to me as it is a spiritual being working in a symbiotic relationship with me and its environment.  It provides me with air to breath and other intrinsic benefits by it being alive.  I also have needs which requires that I look within my environment for things that will meet those needs.  

If I honour the tree, ask it for permission and provide an offering, I may be able to cut down that tree, haul it to my yard, cut it up to make lumber and firewood.  The work that I did added value to me as now I can use that wood to heat my home or build other things that I need like furniture, shelter, etc.  My effort and work is added to the original value of the tree to compensate the loss of value that resulted in me taking its life in a honourable, respectful way.

If I want to trade the furniture that I made with goods or services provided by somebody else, that is my right, granted to me by Creator.  This interchange of value for value is determined by the individuals involved, no middlemen.  As a result, there is no harm as each individual received equal value in their trade.  Let's say I traded the furniture for an equal value of bread.  We both walk away from the interchange not being diminished in any way.

Interchange (noun):  "to give and receive reciprocally; to alternate, put each in place of the other"  - etymonline.com

No profit took place as no advantage can be gained by people trading value for value.  It is important to remember that what I value may not necessarily be what you value and that is okay.  As long as I can find other people who value the work that I do and I value the work they do, then we have something in common to facilitate an interchange between one another.

The problem arises when the middleman or the idea of profits comes between the two of us.  The middleman does no work to add value.  He is only interested in profits, so these people are well known for purchasing goods or services from one individual, inflating the price to sell to another.  If you have ever purchased stuff from a retail outlet, then you are familiar with these middlemen.  Middlemen have also been known to purchase large quantities of goods, sit on them, create a scarcity market, drive prices up due to demand and then slowly sell his goods for huge profits.  They are even willing to harvest everything in order to control the commodities or even let goods rot or spoil in order to maintain scarcity and profits.  Did this middleman add any value?  No.  In fact he causes harm through greed, hording, inflating prices, spoilage and other harmful behaviours.  I will go on to suggest that people who profit off the labour or value that others contribute, is also engaged in violence through the legal principle of profit.  That would include most business models that leverage the value provided by employees in order to turn profits for themselves.  

This aspect of commerce is where the violence resides.  I've read many papers written by authors long ago, that suggest that the purpose of government was to tax and govern the activities that create profits as that is where the risk of harm resides.  The problem with government is that they now include all activities within this scope and that is not their function or purpose.  For some reason, people feel it is acceptable to take advantage of others in order to gain a benefit, privilege or advantage.  While this is now a legal activity, we disrespect others in the process and we don't stand in honour either.  This is not a loving act and as a result, the gulf between the rich and poor continues to widen.  This gulf will trigger conflict as we are starting to see in France, Venezuela and other countries around the world.  

When we focus on our own creative energy to make things we need for our lives, we are not engaged in profit making.  We are actively engaged in creating value.  We create value without money.  Even if we have no money, we ALWAYS have the capacity to create value.  Poverty is created out of the commercial financial system as it is defined by how much money people have.  However, we ALL are capable of creating value.  People have a very hard time seeing the difference because we assign dollar values to everything in our lives.  EVERYTHING is for sale, including our bodies, time and everything we find on Mother Earth.  But price is not the same as value!!!  

Price = value + profit.  The profit component of that formula results in people raping and pillaging the value of other people and the spiritual beings we harvested.  Profit is what lead to the rise of government, governance, banking, corporations, violence, control and domination of the physical world.  

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." - Matthew 19:24 

However, if we remove the profit component and return to value based interchange between one another, kick out the middle man and return the people to the land, we are left with a model that no longer produces billionaires or homeless poverty.  People have to work to meet their needs, but at least the middlemen are gone and the desire to benefit or take advantage of others.  This is the model that Gandhi worked hard to implement during his campaign against the British occupation of India.  He worked hard to remove the means of production from the corporation and return it to the people.  He recognized the harm and dangers of the middleman and took active steps to remove them.

The means of production must return to the people.  Connect the producer with the consumer, preferably both are the same individual.

F.S. Church, published in Harper's Weekly, January 17, 1874, p. 61. [Public domain]

When we return to the land and start homesteading, the primary focus is to acknowledge the true spiritual, emotional, mental and physical value of all life on Mother Earth.  That true value is more than any price the profit makers try to place on it.  The value must also include the impacts of our actions or inaction on those seven generations from now.  Profit makers only care about making money today, no matter the harm that they do to others.  

I know this seems like I am splitting hairs, but when it comes to violence, those subtle difference suddenly become glaring issues.  The word commerce today is associated with the current economic models that govern our interaction with one another.  Those models include profits and putting a price tag on everything.  There is great harm in that model that I cannot support or encourage.  People can only participate in that model if they have the currency of the realm, fiat currency, aka debt instruments.  As a result, the rich will own the world, everyone else will be slaves and that is a travesty of biblical proportions.  

If we want to fix the formula, then price must equal value.  No profit.  No middlemen.  No greed.  Barter is the king of this formula as tokens (dollars/currency) are not involved to tarnish or influence the trade.  The problem with barter is that it is difficult to carry around all our stuff so that we can trade with others.  The internet does help in that regard as we can connect now without traveling. 

Don't get me started on the mechanisms built into modern currencies as inflation, fractional reserve banking, ability to create money out of thin air and other mechanisms built into the tokens we use to try to reflect value; they are all designed to suck our energy.  The biggest vampires on the planet are the bankers and the governments that surrendered the capacity to govern the money supply.  They are the masters of profit, control and power.  They are the biggest tyrants on the planet and they LOVE commerce.

This is why cryptos are so important.  If we can wrestle the power to govern the token supply away from the bankers and govern it ourselves, then we can place a value on those tokens and return to a non-violent form of interchange with one another.  However, we absolutely need to get ride of fiat currency in order to do that.  

Meanwhile, I refuse to engage in commerce for profit.  However, I am more than willing to engage in commerce so that I can trade value for value.  Because that is so confusing, I'll refuse to use the word commerce and just say that I am willing to interchange with you, as long as you acknowledge that value is in the eye of the beholder and not dictated by some pirate on the seas of commerce!