Why Is the State Also a Place of Business

(Note: From now on, every article with a title that has no author name in it, is written by me, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein)

(Philosocom's Money Directory)

(Philosocom's Directory on Politics)

(Background music)

*********************

Why We Form Nations

People establish nations for many reasons, whether or not these nations are recognized by others, or left unrecognized (AKA, micronations). The U.S was founded in the name of human liberty and rights. The Soviet Union existed to practice Karl Marx's communist philosophy.

Nations are not founded in a vaccum. The choice to create and develop a nation is backed up by some kind of rationale. Thomas Hobbes suggested a universal rationale, called the social contract theory. The social contract says this: In order to survive, we must exchange our individual freedoms and our independence. As such, Hobbes was an absolute monarchist who supported the British monarch in his time, several centuries ago.

Shared Identity, Social Contracts, and the Rubinshteinic Rationale

Allow me to propose a Rubinshteinic (I.E, my own brand of) universal rationale for the establishment and preservation of nations: Nations exist also to serve the functionally of business and commerce. They are, in a sense, corporations. And no nation can survive without funds. By developing the financial aspect of the nation, it can allow many other aspects of its management and support. From within and from outside its territory.

Why? Because money is the lifestream of any business, just like with nations. For money allows us not only to survive, but have far more possibilities in life. Hence why money is also a form of power. It is, perhaps, the reason as to why almost all nations are currently capitalist. Because prosperity allows them to elevate beyond survival, and focus on other tasks at hand. Tasks that do not have to solely be defined as mere luxury.

Funds are "energy" to the state, like food is energy for the organism.

Because my mistake over the years was to ignore the third functionality of money. It is not only used for either necessity or unecessity. But also, for benefit. And benefit can be of ourselves, of others, or both.

Even when it is for our own benefit or for the benefit of others, it can also be for the harm of others. It does not have to contradict when, for example, you supply aid for a tyrannical country. Because when you provide benefit to that country, you also add to the misery of those it oppresses. And adding suffering to this world intentionally, is a form of evil.

I suppose there isn't much of a need to be this naive on that matter, correct? The matter of hope. Of a better future. Of world peace. Ultimately, the nation is a business. And when its revenue is all good and well, why would its leader/s wish to risk it? After all, war is also a profitable business. Selling weapons and military technology, is profitable. Even state-funded criminal empires, are profitable.

Profit... is not only for the greedy. And not only for survival, either. It is also to actualize your hopes and dreams. It is also to build a better future for your children or successors. When you seek profit purely or mostly for luxury and unecessities, then consider the idea that you might be greedy. The same goes for politicians.

Some people, politicians included, cannot afford not being rich. Why? Because some people have plenty things they need to afford. Even if you want to donate to charity, you need to afford the money first.

Politics are also a matter of survival. Social survival, of course. Because even as dictator, disapproval from the people could lead to treachery, and treachery could kill you. The tyrant may want to be rich in order to survive through the means of corruption. Like paying bribes to keep certain officials in line. Like participating in illegal trades to ensure a nuclear program (Like with North Korea). And the list may go on and on.

When it comes to money, you may need to put, sometimes, your own morality aside. Hence why evil may indeed exist in capitalism. Because there are some acts that are more profitable than others, despite their moral nature.

And being able to provide and to generate profit, can ensure your relevancy in this social and political world. Even if you're not a politican or even a public figure like me. Your relevancy to others may also be measured by the profit you can generate for your household. Whether a man or woman, does not have to matter.

Because no one really likes freeloaders that are able to generate profit.

The Philosocom Vision

Knowing the importance of money in relation to relevancy, I stopped using Philosocom as a volunteering service... By building an infrastructure that has the potential to sustain itself for centuries, along with content preservation, I can give you a promise social media does not. For anything on social media, that you post there, can be deleted. Philosocom is made for longevity for both my and your content.

Join my growing empire, and you can contribute to a good cause that will preserve your content for generations in potential. And unlike in a country, I intend Philosocom to be read for free, no paywalls.

And there is no shame in wealth that is gained legitimately. Remember: This wealth can be used to serve others, too. Family, followers... citizenry.

We can use that power for good. Especially to those who need it more than us.

And a country that does it, is most definately a good one, morally.

Philosocom aspires to be a different kind of "nation". Here, everyone has free access to knowledge and discussion. As wisdom deserves to be accessible to all. After all, wisdom is the key to freedom.

Mr. Nathan Lasher's Feedback:

A government must be run like a business. It is the reason why governments survive. It is through taxation, seen on goods and services, that governments obtain money to operate.

It’s been many years, I believe, since a more capitalistic approach was taken and a government enforced a stipend to all residents which stated that they must pay x amount of money to the government. Nowadays, in America at least, it is seen that you get charged x amount of money depending upon the activity which you are undertaking. After all, the government must operate in that way in some capacity in order for them to continue to serve the people’s interests.

Aren’t all governments, democratic, formed out of public opinion? They start because enough people want them to form in the way that they do. Monarchs are another kind of example. Citizens giving up certain rights in exchange for a government which is backed by someone else’s wealth and not the state’s itself. A monarch will remain in power as long as they possesses the wealth to securely finance the government if necessary. I’m referring to this as buying power at its core. You can buy enough people's support that others will just blindly follow you out of herd mentality.

I don’t understand the ins and outs of military, not saying I never will only that I currently don’t. I still understand enough that they protect us so I’m fully ok with contributing my part to it.