reflections on democracy.comments

7/30/2019 Reflections on Democracy.comments

1/56

Reflections on Democracy,

Capitalism and Socialism

Dear

"Rotary will continue to be charitable, but it can do

more than that. Let us make Rotary exterminate the

cause that makes charity necessary". This pearl ofthinking by our founder Paul Harris was published in "TheRotarian" magazine of August 1916. In this line I will add

the reflection by the French writer Victor Hugo:"We practice charity when we could not impose

justice". Because it is not charity that we need.

Justice reaches the causes of the problem; charity

mitigates its effects. Monsignor Jacques Gaillot, also aFrenchman, with a serene look and pondered voice,dedicated his religious vocation to the defense of humanrights, particularly those of the poor and of the prisoners of

justice. He completed this reasoning: "I do not say that onemust deny a plate of soup or a warm shelter to someoneliving in the streets. There are urgencies". I will do this, butmy conscience will not be at peace, because I think that wemust struggle against the structural causes that bond thesepeople to injustice. The saddest thing for me is that peopleget accustomed to injustice. For this reason I say: "Wake

up! This is shameful! Let us show our indignationtowards injustice!"

This is the reason why I now address you these words - Ithink that we can lead discussions in the Rotarianworld to including in our agenda the focus on poverty andits causes. In this way we will not only mitigate its effectswith philanthropy, but also attack the causes of social

exclusion. Only with acts will we attract support and build


2/56

credibility to include this topic in the agenda fordiscussion. I am enclosing herewith, for your consideration,my text titled "Reflections on Democracy, Capitalismand Socialism". Several Rotarian bulletins are publishingit in Brazil, in 7 chapters. I am pleased to offer this textfor your Editor to consider it for publication. Pleasecount on my sincere cooperation.

Ronaldo Campos Carneiro

PDG 2008-9 District 4530

[email protected]

Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism

and Socialism

Proposal for an agreement of wills

Why the government intervenes in the economy

Conception of the right: the entrepreneur State Conception of the left: the providing State Methods of technocracy The political system Bases for an agreement of wills Natural consequences of this agreement of wills



3/56

[email protected]

Brasilia, dec., 2007, Brazil

Why the government intervenes in the economy

A system of human coexistence which does not

provide equal opportunities to all is incompatible

with market economy.

Those who have had opportunities in life, that is, propernourishment and health services since their childhood,

coupled with access to the educational system, will havehigh consumption needs and a high purchasing power. Theywill have all the money necessary to consume the goodsand services that meet their aspirations and expectations.

In a market economy, where people freely decide what toproduce and consume, under the relentless law of supply

and demand, societys savings will naturally flow to themore profitable sectors, because all investors desire tomaximize their capital gains.

It is more profitable to produce television sets, videorecorders and personal computers than to tend to theprimary needs of human beings like nourishment, health

services and education. To face this problem in the


4/56

spontaneous allocation of societys savings, the governmentis forced to intervene, so as to encourage investments oneducation and medical care, as well as the production ofmedicines and basic goods like meat, milk and potatoes, forexample.

The capital represented by the available savings is anabsolutely non-ethical entity, which will not normallydistinguish between manufacturing food for babies orcanons for war. It is the financial attractiveness of each

productive sector that matters for investors.

These spontaneous imbalances in the capitalization of thedifferent sectors lead the government to tax the wages ofworkers and the profits of entrepreneurs, because these arethe two generators of resources in a society. Everything,absolutely everything that the government does is made

financially possible by taxes and fees on the productiveprocess. This means that the entrepreneur and the workerwill pay for all official bills.

When it intervenes in the economy, the government actssimply like a pump of financial resources, taking them fromthe productive process to subsidize agriculture, cattle-

breeding, health services and education, for instance.However low in efficiency, this pumping mechanism isnecessary, within the current rules, to correct imbalances inthe capitalization of the economic sectors.

Another instrument used by the government is the bankingsystem, which operates like a dam controlling the flow of a

river: it determines the allocation of the available capitalaccording to the priorities of government bureaucrats. In


5/56

this situation the banking system loses its importantcondition of inductor of development to become a simplegovernmental instrument. The taxes applied to theproductive process reduce its vitality, because they areadded to the final price of goods and services, thusreducing their penetration in the market and creatingvacuums of production.

The bureaucracy will then fill in these vacuums throughcompulsory destinations of resources resulting from acts of

will of the government. In this manner savings are blockedin the banking system to subsidize small enterprises,exports, agriculture, etc. The need for governmentintervention in the economic process is limited toencouraging or supporting the sectors of nutrition, healthand education, which cannot progress alone.

That is why governments around the world have tosubsidize those three sectors of the economy in some way.All other governmental operations stem from this need ofsubsidies, since nutrition, health services and education areprecisely the sectors that determine equal opportunitieswithin any society. In error incur all those who consider itpossible to remove the interference of the State in theeconomic process, under the rules of coexistence currently

prevalent.

Without this interference hunger, disease and illiteracywould completely block the production and distribution ofgoods and services, thus increasing the distance betweenthe rich and the poor. Once the economy does notspontaneously produce what is needed, the government


6/56

must pump resources into those sectors, to make themoperate as needed.

An admirable analyst of the European economy, the lateJOAN ROBINSON, diagnosed with great accuracy the needof profitability for investments to induce development, butshe did not present operational solutions for the productionof socially necessary items.

The government is a bad manager of resources under any

perspective: financial, economic, institutional ortechnological. It is not wise to leave to the government theincentive, production and distribution of socially necessarygoods and services which are like any other: they need tobe efficient in their goals, profitable to attract investmentand competitive in their development of technology.

It is a great inconsistency to imagine that manufacturing TVsets is an economic process and that providing health is asocial process. Both processes are socio-economic. When incharge of providing health, the government will takeresources from the television factory, by levying taxes onthe workers salary and the entrepreneurs profit, since itdoes not generate its own resources.

From an economic and political point of view, the mostmeaningful in all this is that a systematic transfer ofresources is established in the productive process, notaccording to the natural law of supply and demand, butaccording to the human will of government bureaucrats.This results in the sterilization of resources.


7/56

No matter what concept one has of democracy, the fate ofcitizens must never depend on the virtue of their rulers. Itwas a huge amount of financial resources, taken from theproductive process in the form of taxes and allocated byacts of human will of government bureaucrats, that madepossible all world-wide conflicts and the recent arms race.

One must always question human fallibility. It is certainthat if "we, the people" could decide where to apply our

resources, we would not have the current state ofbelligerence. This only happened because the fiscalmechanism raised resources from the production processand allowed their allocation by an elite of rulers.

That is an essentially undemocratic process. Democracyrequires not only universal suffrage but also the de-

concentration of resources by the ruling power, in a waythat will allow each saver to freely decide what to do withhis savings.

These are the general lines of the AGREEMENT OF WILLSproposed below, to workers, entrepreneurs and thegovernment, that seeks to stimulate production and ensure

the consumption of nutrition, health services andeducation, while promoting the de-concentration ofresources now allocated by acts of will of governmentbureaucrats.

To stress the need of such an agreement of wills, we will

study the methods used and the results obtained by the


8/56

ideological right and left, as well as the performance oftechnocrats and politicians in the management of theresources taken from the workers salary and theentrepreneurs profit. To manage such a huge amount offinancial resources with acts of human will, many differentcurrents speculate about the peoples will or about how tomanage those savings to induce development.

Conception of the right: the entrepreneur State

How does the right manage those resources? Or rather,how does it allocate the resources taken from theproductive process? They believe they must generateproductive jobs, investing in the basic sectors of theeconomy such as energy, transportation,telecommunication, etc. They thus create state companiesto fill the vacuums created by the government itself, with

its taxes that stifle the private production process.

In a market economy, whenever there is the will and theeconomic potential to consume, there will always be thefinancial possibility to produce, according to the available

technology. This means it is totally unnecessary for thegovernment to use the resources of society, suffocatingprivate initiative, to produce steel, energy, etc. If thatsociety has the will and the economic ability to consume,private enterprises will do so with much more competence.

This government interference will, moreover, lead to the

creation of state monopolies, as harmful to the economy as


9/56

the private ones, because the lack of competitionengenders technological stagnation and an undesirabledistortion in growth that increases the vulnerability ofsociety as a whole. The oil shocks in the 70s and 80s put incheck the development of all societies depending on thisenergy source as the basis of their economy. A handful ofproducers threatened global stability as a whole when theydecided to manipulate oil prices.

But what would happen if the energy sector were in the

hands of the private initiative, freely operating in acompetitive market? Who would build our hugehydroelectric facilities? It is quite possible that we wouldnot have these majestic works, but there would be no lackof energy, and growth would be multi-sector, at a costmuch lower than that determined by state-ownedcompanies.

The investments of the private initiative are based oneconomic rationality, as a matter of survival in acompetitive market; the same does not apply to theinvestments decided by a handful of bureaucrats. Ifdevelopment were left in private hands, we would have

several energy sources being developed simultaneously,using the sun, the wind, hydrogen, alcohol, etc., allcompeting among themselves for a lower cost and reducingthe vulnerability of most societies.

Encouraged by an alleged developmental momentum and

having suffocated private initiative to the limits of its


10/56

survival, state-minded leaders will borrow, from othereconomies, the funds needed for their monumentalprojects, starting a process of indebtedness that the entiresociety and future generations will have to pay. Borrowingsavings from another society is only advisable with acorresponding policy of incentive to exports, to stabilize thebalance of payments. Otherwise that debt will require anew state intervention in the productive process.

It is a strange kind of nationalism, where the State controls

companies in the productive process and in order tomaintain their investments and operations needs to raisefunds abroad, thus submitting society as a whole to thewhims of external creditors. This is indeed nationalism thewrong way round.

The most paradoxical aspect in the rationale of state-

minded rulers is that they concentrate on physical energieslike oil, ethanol and hydroelectricity, to the point ofindebting all of society, when they have available, at home,the most fantastic of all energies, manpower, that ends upwasted and relegated to a secondary plane.

Concerned with the vulnerability model of growthdependent on imported energy sources, as induced by thegovernment itself, state-minded managers started acampaign for technological alternatives and, for the sake ofnationalism and energy independence, stimulated theproduction of alcohol to replace gasoline. This was onemore campaign by the government, which would have been


11/56

unnecessary, had energy production been originally left tothe private initiative in a competitive market.

Each of these interventions costs money that thegovernment will take from the salaries of workers and theprofits of employers.

As a matter of fact, the state-minded philosophy representsa conception to supply goods and services in the economicinfrastructure. But what about consumption? In aneconomy with concentrated income, it is inevitable that thetariffs of a state-owned company become instruments ofgovernment to control inflation. If its tariffs do not coverthe production costs, that companys budget will thendepend upon more taxes on the private productive process.

If state-owned companies can operate in a competitivemarket, on purely commercial terms, that is, according tothe forces of the free market, they need not be state-owned, for the private initiative will play that role moreefficiently. When deficit-stricken, they will need foreign ordomestic credit, or resources from the public budget. Whothen pays the bill is either the consumer of their goods andservices or the taxpayer. As the government uses their

tariffs to control inflation, state-owned companies generallyhave deficits and require additional taxes.

The fact of the matter is that the economy has nonationality. It does not behave as bureaucrats would like itto, but according to the possibilities of production andconsumption, regulated by the law of supply and demand.

This law operates in the broad economy just like the law of


12/56

cause and effect works in the physical world. Admittingnationalities in the economy is like imagining that the lawof gravity applies only to certain countries!

Periodical changes in the command of state-ownedcompanies, for political reasons, also make them vulnerablefrom an institutional point of view. Unlike private initiative,one must keep in mind, a democracy usually replaces itstop managers from time to time, making change inevitablein official companies as well. On account of political change,some societies are right now in the process ofdeconstructing what had been done with the arduous workof many years.

Democracy must be preserved, of course, but the spacenow occupied by state-owned companies should be left toprivate initiative. Job-generation is not a task for the State,which produces only lesser jobs. It is private initiative that

creates productive employment.

Well, this brief evaluation of the philosophy of the right forthe management of resources taken from the salary ofworkers and from the profit of entrepreneurs takes us tothe conclusion that such interference by the State isunnecessary. First, because it occupies spaces belonging to

private initiative and suffocates it with a growing need oftaxes; second, it engenders vulnerable growth, in eachsector and institutionally; third, it stimulates monopoliesthat block technological development and result in theindebtedness of society as a whole.

But the most significant and perverse in all this is the ever-

growing need to transfer resources normally regulated by


13/56

the law of supply and demand into the control ofgovernment bureaucrats. This leads to the concentration ofpower in the hands of a few and builds an antithesis ofdemocracy.

Conception of the left: the providing State

Let us now see how the left tends to manage the resourcestaken from the salary of workers and from the profits ofentrepreneurs. Believing that such resources should have asocial purpose, they adopt social reform as theirwatchword. The truth is that in a society with concentratedincome, social demands are so strong that the amount ofresources required by them is enough to kill privateinitiative and the market economy itself.

The methodology of the left is above all assisting,paternalistic. Its ideologues falsely assume that wealth is

the cause of poverty, so they must tax the rich to help thepoor. This is true only in a stagnant economy, whereavailable resources are constant; but in a developingeconomy with equal opportunities for all, it is perfectlypossible to grow and distribute simultaneously.

Society must rationally seek to provide equal opportunities

and not simply stress the effects of inequality. A system ofperverse coexistence that does not offer opportunities to allis indeed responsible for the concentration of income, theproliferation of slums, the persistence of rural poverty andmany more problems. Leaders from the left seek to correctthe effect, not the cause of that distortion. They strive toobtain income distribution, instead of increasing income

generation, in a manner that would incorporate marginalworkers into the economy.


14/56

How can one distribute income, if each person individuallyis willing to increase their own income? It seems that

everyone is in favor of distributing every others income,never their own! The provision of employment according to

job demand results in decreasing salaries, so thegovernment is forced to establish a remedial minimumwage level that is often incompatible with human dignity.

With sound reason, the left postulates to increase thisminimum wage, but any salary increase without thecorresponding productivity increase will eventually augmentthe price of goods and services and reduce their marketpenetration, thus bringing about more unemployment. Asmaller number of workers will be earning more, whileothers will be simply excluded from the labor market. Suchis the perverse effect of a commendable postulation.

What happens in practice is that some organized laborunions, having more leverage on their employers, obtainhigher wages, better working conditions, reduced workinghours, etc; but all of these advantages will inevitablyincrease the final price of goods and services. Thenautoworkers, for instance, will improve their standard of

living, but automobiles will cost more and fewer consumerswill be able to buy them. Economic activity will be reducedand unemployment generated, precisely in the morevulnerable area of unskilled workers, who have less powerof mobilization and pressure.

Unemployment then becomes a problem for the

government, which has to tax the productive process even


15/56

further to meet social needs. In this vicious circle someworkers do improve their standard of living, but at the costof excluding or marginalizing substantial portions of thelabor force, which the government will have to assist inunemployment. More resources will be needed to help the

jobless and for public security, penitentiaries, philanthropyand so on.

All those expenses are paid with levies on the wage ofworkers and on the profit of entrepreneurs, in a process

where the bureaucrat is just an intermediate. This is a no-win game. It is a natural desire for any citizen to earnmore, but such a progress is only possible througheconomic growth, with the productive process in expansion.Around a constant cake all guests will be fighting to takethe larger slice, inevitably excluding the weakest.

The most nefarious effect of all this is unemployment,which brings understandable despair: youths trying drugsto escape the cruel reality of their lack of opportunities,children suffering the pangs of hunger with no prospects inlife. It is degrading to human condition to passively observethis situation; so much human energy dissipated andwasted because of our inability to create a system ofcoexistence carrying that energy to productive

employment.

Development is only meaningful and valuable when allbenefit from it.

Confronted with the shortage of housing, government

bureaucrats establish funds collected with mandatory


16/56

contributions taken from the wages of workers and theprofits of entrepreneurs to finance home construction. Theyalso stimulate, in the savings market, voluntary funds forthe same purpose. But homes are a cumulative property,so their owners can have as many of them as theirpurchasing power permits, and then use them not only forliving but also for rental.

In practice, this mechanism results in the allocation of thesavings of poor and rich alike to finance buildings for the

rich. It also leads to the official control of savings, whengovernmental agencies operate as costly intermediatesbetween savers and consumers. In a market economy,whenever the government decides to intervene for theproduction of cumulative goods, it will benefit those whohave greater purchasing power.

Concerned with the existence of much unproductive landand many landless peasants, leaders from the left decide topromote mandatory land reforms. This interference,apparently beneficial, brings disastrous results. In additionto generating conflict between landowners and the landless,it violates the fundamental right to private property andpolarizes society. The simple combination of workmanshipand land is not enough for agricultural production, because

other inputs are necessary, such as capital, technology andmanagement.

The result of an improper land reform is low productivity (inmany cases to the point of risking the peasants livelihood),and sometimes confrontations of unpredictable political

consequences. Every private property represents a socialmortgage, indeed, but in this case the ends will not justify


17/56

the means. Such social responsibility cannot be enforcedthrough denial of the right to private property. There aresmarter ways, more ethical and less violent, to redeem thatsocial mortgage.

Force is the weapon of the incompetent, whereasintelligence is the instrument of the wise. Whatever cannotbe transformed by intelligence, cannot be transformed byforce, either. Whenever society uses unethical means toachieve its goals, no matter which, it brings imbalances tothe legal symmetry and thus contributes to thedeterioration of the positive values of mankind. If thegovernment, which is responsible for the shared values ofsociety, may violate the principle of property, then privatecitizens may perfectly rob banks.

The fact is that, in the name of social values, the leftpromotes a genuine festival of inconsistencies paid for by

the worker's salary and the entrepreneurs profit. Thesystem of lotteries and gambling promoted by thegovernment is a clear example of inconsistency and lack ofsound alternatives for raising financial resources. Withalleged social purposes, the government violates its owndistributive principles: the lottery operation means no morethan taking money from the many to put it in the hands of

a few. What it promotes is an industry of dreams andillusions, effects without cause, money earned withoutwork, contributing to the further alienation of humanbeings.

Ethics should always prevail in human attitudes.

Within this mediocrity of government actions, the day is not


18/56

far when prostitution will be exploited in the name of socialvalues! The most perverse effect of this attitude, difficult tomeasure but with terrible consequences is the deteriorationof societys values, in view of the example set by thegovernment itself.

Well, this superficial appreciation of leftist philosophy leadsus to conclude that while the ends pursued are as healthyas possible, the means used by them are ineffective, un-ethical and inconsistent in a market economy, because theygenerate unwanted conflicts to distribute income andproperty, leading to state-controlled savings andstimulating the alienation of human beings.

From a political point of view, the philosophy of the leftleads to a growing transfer of resources normally governedby the natural law of supply and demand to the human willof government bureaucrats. This is the antithesis of

democracy, because it concentrates power andsubordinates the fate of all citizens to the virtue of rulers.

The method of technocracy

Placed in the epicenter of the confrontation between rightand left, the technocrat is invited to organize the process of

collection and allocation of government resources. This isthe formula found to give a supposed technical rationalityto human action in political systems. Ideologically neutral,technocrats seek to replace the law of supply and demandin the relations between the government and society.

Government is an institution that invariably spends more

than it collects, either because of the high social demand in


19/56

societies with concentrated income, or because of aperverse desire to feed the military might in rich societies.Technocrats are thus faced with the chronic problem offinancing public deficit. This dilemma will shake the self-assurance of any serious economist and take him to theconclusion that his government is an unfeasible economicinstitution. To make it feasible, four formulas can beadopted: tax increases, domestic indebting through the saleof government bonds, borrowing external resources orissuing currency.

The hard point is to determine the most nefarious of theseformulas. Tax increases suffocate the production processand their maximum limit is the survival of market economy.Internal or foreign indebtedness draw against the situationof future generations. Finally, the issuance of currencywithout growth is an inflationary crime, equivalent toforging money. The only difference is that forgers will be

arrested, whereas technocrats will go unpunished.

Whatever the formula adopted, the bill is always paid withthe worker's salary and the entrepreneurs profit.

Rich and institutionally stable societies withdraw the powerto issue currency from the executive branch of government,

granting autonomy to their central banks. They get alongwith low inflation rates and finance their eventual deficitswith loans or taxes. The situation becomes critical insocieties with a high social demand, where the power toissue currency is directly linked to the political survival ofthe government, and the central bank issues currencyaccording to the rulers instructions. In this case technocrats

become accomplices in an economic crime of disastrousconsequences.


20/56

It is even understandable when politicians adopt thissolution, ignoring the economical consequences of their

decisions. But any technocrat who lends credibility to theissuance of currency without economic growth is acharlatan more interested in keeping his post than inmanaging a sound financial system.

The internal placement of government bonds in thefinancial market creates an unproductive circulation ofpapers in which societys savings are channeled to thepublic coffers through financial intermediation. These papertransactions lead to the most absurd results, because theybenefit the banking system to the detriment of theproductive process. A society that gives priority to sterilesectors, penalizing the productive ones, is inconsistent and

cannot reach stability over time. This technocratic solutiontries to engender an impracticable economic process. For inthe economy, as in physics, it is impossible to generateenergy from nothing. Only productive work will generatereal wealth.

The external debt of poor countries in modern economy

revives the colonialism of past centuries, because it submitsentire societies to the guidelines of the creditor nations.The technocrats instrument is the control of the flux offinancial resources, which brings a fragile stability to thesystem by heating or cooling demand according tomacroeconomic needs. The control of financial flows,however, cannot by itself generate development.


21/56

Available savings, representing the fruits of workaccumulated in the past and not yet consumed, shouldhave the single destination of becoming investment, flowingdirectly from savers to the production process via the stockmarket, a truly efficient and democratic system to generateproductive employment.

Inflation, the deterioration of the purchasing power of anycurrency, is the price paid by society for its inequality of

opportunities and corresponds to the cost of the socialdebt. Its causes are structural, stemming from rules ofcoexistence that result in price increases without acorresponding productivity, or from the multiplication ofcapital without productive work.

These structural causes are represented, among others, by

unprofitable State investments, subsidies to official tariffs,artificial raises in salaries, social reforms and consumercredit allowing prices to be established by the producer, notthe market, as well as the technocratic control of profitsand salaries. They all result in public deficits.

The most cruel tax paid by society is inflation, for it directlyharms the poor who are defenseless.

The so-called inflation of demand or inflation of cost resultsfrom a technocratic incompetence in regulating the fiscaland monetary policies or in managing supply and demandof capital in the financial system. There is no limit to the

creativity of technocrats and the unorthodox group tries to


22/56

explain inertia as the cause of inflation. For them inertialinflation is the diagnosis and price control is the medicine.This concept is as absurd as the troubles brought about bythe application of its antidote.

The false attractiveness of price control is in providingadditional oxygen to the political survival of rulers, but witha strait jacket on the profits and salaries that will pay forthis senseless approach. When easing price control,technocrats act as if the structural inflationary forces had

been eliminated when prices were frozen.

This is like temporarily blocking the valve of a pressure panand concluding that there is no more pressure at all.Multiple indexes, tables, graphs and miraculous acronyms,supposedly faultless, are used by technocrats to manageprices and salaries and to measure the catastrophe in

course. So many acronyms are used that the alphabet willsoon become insufficient to name all of their infallibleformulas!

Inflation is the by-product of a distorted socio-economicsystem that does not offer equal opportunities for all. As a

structural phenomenon, it cannot be eliminated under thecurrent rules for coexistence. If the causes themselves arenot dealt with, their results will inevitably remain.

The graphic result of those unorthodox adventures is avalley followed by a peak in the structural inflationarycurve, where the area of the former is exactly the same as

the area of the latter, with inverted signs. Serious troubles


23/56

in the productive sector bring about anxiety, anguish andperplexity to investors, who prefer to place their capital inthe financial system rather than in productive investments,while they try to monitor the changeable will of technocratsin charge. The number of failures corresponds to thenumber of attempts made.

To enable the poor to have nutrition, technocrats imposecontrol on the prices of basic products. When the price ofmeat is frozen, for example, capitals will abandon the

cattle-breeding sector, since no farmer will accept to workat a loss. As a consequence less meat will be produced andthe pressure to increase prices will be inevitable. To assistthe cattle-breeder who argues that it is impossible toproduce meat with current costs, technocrats must controlthe prices of his factors of production: fodder, fuel, salaries,agricultural equipment, etc. This goes on and on, resultingin a need to control all prices.

This way, in societies with concentrated income,bureaucrats end up controlling the price of all goods andservices, that is the profits of all entrepreneurs and thesalaries of all workers. Once more, the formula adopted willnot reach its original purpose: allowing the poor to

consume meat products. The Austrian economic school,through Ludwig Von Mises, identified this paradox in thetechnocratic formula. The simple solution for it is instimulating production and simultaneously ensuringconsumption.

The fact is that all technocratic propositions are extremely

mediocre and have terrible side effects. When acting as the


24/56

absolute judges of prices and salaries, bureaucrats take allvitality from the productive process, which cannot thengenerate productive jobs. Technocratic schools likemonetarism and structuralism, supply-side economics, etc,have no logical consistency at all. They are failedtechniques with no scientific confirmation, sometimesadopted in societies that accepted to become biglaboratories for a process of trial and error.

That is why international agencies, which try to monitor the

economy of indebted nations, acting as auditors for creditorbanks, have harvested resounding failures: recession andunemployment, hunger and poverty. The best they couldobtain was a compromise solution between inflation andunemployment, called stagflation. Such a result is anoffense to human intelligence.

The government is economically impracticable as aninstitution because its revenue and expenses aredetermined by acts of human will. Economics is a sciencewhose mechanisms are valid and applicable when the will ofeconomic agents is limited by the natural law of supply anddemand. For this reason the economic formulas employedby the government are inefficient and poor in results.

From an institutional point of view, government bureaucratsare very bad managers of resources, because they grow inthe shade of favoritism, subservience, incompetence andobsequiousness, in an environment where friendship andpolitical influence count more than merit and efficiency.Deprived of the healthy competition that generates

professional stimulus and technological advancement, this


25/56

system is prone to the proliferation of monopolies,oligopolies and cartels.

Private initiative, operating in a competitive market with fullemployment, is a superior model for the production ofgoods and services. This does not mean that workers andentrepreneurs in the private sector are superior beings,chosen by divinity. The model of private initiative issuperior because it operates in a circumstance wherehuman will is limited by the inflexible law of supply and

demand. If the technocratic method presents ridiculousresults in the economic field, its political consequences aredisastrous: protected by an aura of respectability,bureaucrats give apparent credibility to an increase ingovernment revenue, that is, to the concentration of power,the antithesis of Democracy.

The political system

If in the production and distribution of goods and servicesthe State is a disaster, in the regulation of social contractsand in the solution of conflicts it has an essential and

irreplaceable function. The executive power grewexpressively in those societies experiencing a combinationof market economy and central planning, to face theirinequality of opportunities.

When access to nutrition, health services and education is

assured to all, the strong presence of the totalitarian Statebecomes unnecessary. It is parliament, made legitimate by


26/56

direct elections, that concentrates the real focus ofdemocratic power. The complexity of modern societiescannot be managed by central planning, and the so-calleddemocratic centralism is a sophism appealing only toautocratic leaders.

The hypertrophy of the executive power and the enormousamount of financial resources available to the State, to beallocated by acts of human will, take unscrupulouspoliticians to a frantic race for power at any cost, where

they do not disdain, in certain cases, alliances with deceit,fraud and corruption, in the words of Vilfredo Pareto.

In fact, these politicians progress demagogically, makingpromises with no support in real possibilities. This kind ofState is financially impracticable, considering that to everyincrease in its revenue corresponds a reduction of the

resources available, suffocating the productive process.

Confronted with a lack of solutions for socio-economicalproblems, politicians seek new forms of organization or newconstitutions for their societies, as if this were a universalpanacea to solve all of their problems.

Capitalism and communism are two dated theories that didnot work in the history of mankind. They can be comparedto a boat with two oars: one is the social, the other theeconomic dimension. Directing this boat is the politicaldimension. Capitalism concentrates on the economic oar,whereas communism emphasizes the social oar. That is


27/56

why the boat keeps turning around itself, with evidentdamage to the political dimension.

These two systems of human coexistence are circulartheories: no matter what the starting point, their dynamicwill always bring you back to where you started. It isuseless to change the oarsman or to replace the ruler,because the mechanism remains the same.

The fundamental problem of this changelessness lies inseparately considering the social and the economicdimensions. There is no social process dissociated from theeconomic process: all productive processes are socio-economic in their nature. When the governmentconceptualizes as social the productive process of nutrition,health and education, it must tax the productive process,establishing an insoluble vicious circle.

No society can progress without human energy, whichdepends on nutrition, health and education.

One conclusion of what has been said is that the sectors of

nutrition, health and education must be made attractive soas to stimulate their capitalization and to avoid the ironhand of the authoritarian State. Another is that the right,the left and technocracy have no feasible solution for themanagement of savings as a whole, that is, the taxes leviedon the productive process. The earlier this is perceived, theless will be lost in frustrated attempts.


28/56

Well, making mistakes is not a tragedy. The real tragedy isnot learning from mistakes. The great truth is that, in thefield of political economy, we are all incompetent, incapableof setting rules conducting the simultaneous production anddistribution of wealth, to a just and democratic socialdimension.

We are Homo sapiens who, according to anthropologistLinneu, only dare to call ourselves this way in Latin. Wemanaged to create fantastic technologies in broad sectors

of society, but we are just toddlers as far as humancoexistence is concerned.

Only a holistic paradigm, a global view of the socio-economic and political dimensions, will reach practicalsolutions for human coexistence. The formal speech wehear is about democracy, but the methods employed serve

only to fill the coffers of the State. This paradoxtransformed the democratic regime of the people, by thepeople and for the people in the autocratic rule of a regimefor the people, in which the fate of the ruled depends onthe virtue of rulers.

The world witnesses nowadays, between perplexed andimpotent, the supremacy and domination of thebureaucratic class, for in their practical evolution thecapitalist and communist systems converge inevitably to atotalitarian regime. That is to say, the inequality ofopportunities under the rules of human coexistence isgenerating the most terrible process of domination andhuman bondage: the dictatorship of bureaucracy.


29/56

The right seeks to allocate the compulsory savings ofsociety in the economic plane and the left on the socialplane, both pressing public deficit in an inflationary way.They both have their reasons based on an ideologicalreference, but the whole is not logical. One must replacethe changing reference of ideas with the invariable logics oflife. The lack of concrete solutions for the aspirations andexpectations of the people is totally discrediting politicians.

However, if an ideological consensus or a complete, sincere

and truthful agreement in the field of political ideas isunfeasible and undesirable because it leads to a dictatorialState, The Agreement of Wills must seek the consensus ofinterests. All those able and willing to join this agreementwill do under the motivation of their own interests, providedthat the mediation of these interests is regulated by thenatural laws of supply and demand or of cause and effect.

Bases for an Agreement of Wills

Complaining is to no avail, as Karl Marx said, becausePhilosophers just interpreted the world; it is necessary totransform it. This assertion and the reasons stated above

lead us to the need of new rules of coexistence, or anagreement of wills assembling workers, entrepreneurs andgovernments. Let us consider its fundamentals:

The productive process, that is workers and

entrepreneurs, will directly take responsibility for

providing nutrition, education and health care to the

social nucleus depending on the production of goods


30/56

and services, after acquiring them for their free

market prices; and the government will reduce its

taxes in an amount corresponding to the cost of

these new responsibilities taken by the productive

process.

Applying this formula one will have a labor-capital relationin which a specific clause will indicate in each labor contractthat nutrition, education and health care will be assured byemployers, to each worker and his beneficiaries. It is

evident that such mechanism can only be made financiallypractical if the State withdraws the taxes corresponding tothe cost of those services.

Stress must be made on the fact that this will not be onemore tax on the productive process, but a redistribution ofresponsibilities with a reduction in taxes: the productive

process appropriates the economic profit, by taking overthe social cost of nutrition, education and health care. As amatter of fact, it is the productive process that currentlypays the bill of nutrition, education and health care,through an expensive and inefficient flow of resourcesresulting from taxes, for the government to allocateresources to agriculture and to maintain an inefficient

system of education and health care.

Our proposal eliminates this flow and recognizes thatprivate initiative is much more competent to provide thosegoods and services. It also recognizes that the consumptionof those goods and services is independent from purchasingpower, because it constitutes the necessary condition for

survival and progress in any society. Finally, it admits that


31/56

the human work force is a process of transformation ofenergy only made practical if the human energy is assured.

Included in our proposal is the recognition that nutritionand health care are interdependent, non-cumulative needs.In other words, no one gets hungry or sick voluntarily;moreover, there is no point in providing education if healthand nutrition are not assured, up to an optimum point.

In this way the production process will have costs of twodifferent natures, one of them economic and correspondingto the acquisition of the necessary production factors likeraw material, equipment, salaries, etc, the other social andequivalent to the cost of nutrients, education and healthcare, to provide these elements to the social nucleusdepending on the productive process. On this social costthe government levies no taxes, to make possible the

agreement of wills.

Human life on earth is thus made possible in dignifiedconditions.

What incentive would be given for the productive process totake over those responsibilities? Evidently, one must notexpect any act of solidarity, for that would not beexpectable from human nature. The fundamental stimulus,as usual in the language of entrepreneurs is cost, that is,the interest of those involved. It is cheaper to directly takethose responsibilities than to transfer them to thegovernment. Taxes will be progressively reduced, making

practical a market economy totally free to produce and


32/56

consume for completely free prices. The heavy hand of theauthoritarian State is progressively suppressed and aninvisible hand will end up in charge of the production anddistribution of wealth in society.

The State, or the executive power, is economicallyweakened and civil society is enriched, in a pattern whereall, rich and poor alike, have the same opportunities. Thismakes it possible for the nation to control the State.

Well, let us name these rules for human coexistence as aHumanist Regime and check the deep changes that willoccur in the social, economic and political fields.

Natural consequences of the Agreement of Wills

In the Humanist Regime agriculture no longer requiressubsidies, because it becomes an extremely attractivesector, spontaneously capitalized through the stock marketunder totally free prices. The Malthusian limiting law will nolonger impose itself. In an equal manner, the sectors ofeducation and health care no longer need the crutches of

the State and become naturally profitable, receivingresources from the stock market.

The banking system, as far as the acquisition and sale ofcurrency is concerned, is made impractical by the loss offunction and high cost, since the government no longerneeds to use banks as instruments for the mandatory

allocation of resources. All other applications used as


33/56

savings reservoirs lose their function as well, becausesavings start to flow naturally and directly from savers tothe productive process, via the stock market. This brings anend to speculation. The unproductive bureaucratic sectoralso becomes unnecessary: a small portion of it can beabsorbed by the legislative power, the rest by privateinitiative.

State-owned companies in the productive sector will nolonger receive official subsidies, because the flow of

resources will have been reverted, being allocated byprivate initiative. In this new reality, they will have to opentheir capital and take resources from the stock market,thus having to reveal competence and rationality in theirinvestment decisions.

This results in the privatization of state-owned enterprises

and, with total freedom for production and consumption,there will be no room for monopolies, oligopolies or cartels.Thus comes back the healthy competition that generatestechnological progress. Society ceases to be vulnerable inits unidirectional growth and evolves to a broad,multidirectional and competitive development. In theenergy sector, for example, several sources will be

developed and will compete among themselves with totallyfree prices, bringing evident advantages.

The complete liberation of prices and salaries will inevitablyconduct to full productive employment. The historicalexperience of the industrial revolution of two centuries agocorroborates this assertion, with a difference: in the

Humanist Regime the sectors of nutrition, education and


34/56

health care will be tied to the multi-sector explosion ofdevelopment.

In a situation of full productive employment, a fundamentalchange occurs in the labor-capital relation: salaries are nolonger determined by acts of will of employers, but by themarket. There is no need to establish a minimum wagelevel. This system engenders expansion and distribution,simultaneously. More workers will be joining the labormarket, so more members of the active population will

reach dignity and make progress.With the spontaneous capitalization of agriculture, thedevelopment of this sector is tied to the other sectors of theeconomy, that is, the results sought by land reform areobtained: land for the working peasants. Ethical principlesare not violated and the right to property is respected.

Urban reform will be inevitable, as well, because the socialcost subjacent in the productive process will press thoseenterprises with a high demand of workmanship, preciselyin the crowded urban centers where nutrition, educationand health care are more expensive. In order to increaseprofits in a competitive market, these enterprises will moveto areas distant from the great urban conglomerates,

taking schools and hospitals with them. Decentralizationwill be automatic, because the social cost will become oneof the factors for companies to choose their location. Thestagnation and later reversion of the migratory flow willpromote a balanced occupation of rural and urban areas,bringing evident advantages to the quality of life.


35/56

The Humanist Regime attaches economic profit to the socialcost: the profitability of the productive process depends onthe improvement of nutrition, education and health care. Inthis new reality, the economic power starts to work in favorof society, not moved by solidarity, but by sheer economicinterest.

This way the sectors of basic sanitation (water andsewage), housing, transportation, environmental care andall the others which in some way have a role in the welfare

of communities, can be operated on purely commercialterms by private initiative, in a competitive regime.Capitalization will be done via the stock market, underprices and tariffs allowing profitability, and all social classeswill have access to these goods and services.

As a matter of fact the Humanist Regime, offering equal

opportunities to all, allows wealth and forbids poverty. Theeconomically active market is now society as a whole.Production and distribution rests with private initiative, thatoperates in a competitive market with full productiveemployment. Technological development will be fantastic inall fields of human activity. We will have a world deservingthe pride and admiration of our children and grandchildren.

Social security can be totally private, in a situation wherepeople freely choose their institutional plans or put theirsavings on their own savings accounts, for old age. Understable and long-lasting socio-economic rules, that is, totallyfree prices and salaries, all individual savings in eachsociety will be channeled directly to the stock market, in

this way contributing for the generation of productive jobs


36/56

and eliminating all financial intermediation. We will have asociety of maximum efficiency, both productive anddistributive, where poor and rich will have identicalopportunities.

Suppressing financial intermediation will suppressconsumer credit and prices previously determined by theproducer as a function of his costs. The productive processwill adequate its output of goods and services to thepurchasing power of the market. Simpler, cheaper products

will become available. Significant in this is that theHumanist rule leaves the allocation of financial resourcesunder the control of private initiative, instead of the State,and regulated by supply and demand instead of human will.

The admission of previously marginalized workers into thelabor force will allow societies indebted internally and

externally to pay for the debts accepted by our incompetentgeneration. After that, markets will be openedinternationally, allowing the free production and circulationof wealth. This opening is inevitable, since the economicprocess has no nationality. We will also witness the end ofthe humiliating negotiations of foreign debts, in whichindebted societies, begging without dignity, are submitted

to foreign economic policies based on false theories thatoften end in resounding failure.

Sports will have and extraordinary development; theproductive process will quickly observe the influence oftheir practice on human health. It will be cheaper to investin sports than to buy medicines. The competitive sports

that have mesmerized the world in the Olympic Games and


37/56

other international events will be indications and inspirationfor the technologies to be developed in a competitivescenario. Human beings will overcome their own limits.

Having his basic needs satisfied, man will search forspiritual nourishment and all expressions of culturalmanifestation will circulate in a market as big as thepopulation. Nourishment will be our medicine, asHypocrates proposed, because the productive process isextremely competent in the optimization of the binomial

nutrition-health when profits are at stake. Agricultural andcattle-derived products will be commercialized verydifferently, flowing directly from producer to organizedconsumers, thus capitalizing the productive system andeliminating undesirable intermediation.

Society will have more jobs, progressively higher salaries,

less taxes, less violence and less prisons, in a continuousprocess where independent, active and productive humanbeings will write their own history.

In the political field, the legislative and judicial powers arestrengthened, whereas the executive is weakened, leaving

to private initiative the production and distribution of allgoods and services. This will leave no room foradventurers, demagogues and opportunists. They will loseinterest if they no longer have resources to allocate by theirown will.

Reliability will be restored to political activities, carried out

by citizens competent for the legislation and adjudication of


38/56

conflicts around social contracts in favor of the community.Each politician will be respected for his skill, not for hispower to distribute selfish favors. Universal suffrage andthe free press are infallible medicines for this depuration.We will finally have a democracy of the people, by thepeople and for the people, where we the people shall decideour own destiny, according to the irreplaceable andinalienable participation of each one, in the pursuit ofhappiness.

Human rights, sung in prose and verse in the well-meaninguniversal declarations, will be finally made financiallypossible, under just and democratic socio-economicstructures.

Inflation will be definitely deleted from the economicvocabulary, after the suppression of its structural causes

that were engendered by the pressures of the right, the leftand technocracy on the public budget.

In other words, suppressed will be the pressures from theentrepreneur State for investments, of the social State forsocial subsidies and of the technocratic State for the

emission of currency. Under the Humanist Regime theproduction and distribution of goods and services is totallyprivate. Governments lose their economic function,including the emission of currency, in view of the circulationof companies bonds. Citizens will use those bonds toexchange goods and services that represent theunequivocal and legitimate ballast of capital: productivelabor.


39/56

The suggestions below, made by Adam Smith as I recallthem, are especially meaningful advice for managers of thehumanist regime:

It is, therefore, greatly presumptuous and impertinent forkings and ministers to intend to regulate the economy ofprivate citizens and to restrict their expenses, either withsanctuary laws or forbidding the import of foreign luxuryproducts. It is always them, with no exception, those whomost spend in society. They must then control their own

expenses, leaving to private citizens the control of theirs. Iftheir extravagance does not ruin the kingdom, neither willthat of their subjects do it.

In another passage Smith stresses:

The statesman who intends to determine to people howthey shall employ their capital, will be not onlyoverburdening himself with unnecessary care, but willpresume an authority that could never be safely trusted toa single person, or to any council or senate, and thatnowhere will be as dangerous as it is, in the hands of aman endowed with enough senselessness and presumption

to feel capable of exerting it.

When We the People can freely decide where to allocate oursavings, the arms race will be rendered impractical.

Although the means proposed by the Humanist Regime are

distinct from other philosophical currents, the results it


40/56

proposes will appeal to all those in the current politicalspectrum: conservative, liberal, laborites, democrats,communists, socialists, conservationists and many more.

These results can be entirely reaped in no more than 20years, the time when children born today will join the labormarket. The transition period will require the utmost care tokeep social balance. Before anything else, this proposal andits expected results must be exhaustively discussed by allthose who use intelligence as an operational instrument.

Solutions are available for our current problems. Thehottest places in hell are reserved for the undefined, thepassive and the opportunist.

The Humanist Regime is devoted, above all, to thedevelopment of all human potentials. It is based on aphilosophical conception very close to that under which we,

human beings, were placed on this planet, when there wereno diseases, no hunger, no poverty or illiteracy, nor capitalaccumulation. Nature gives us everything with no pricesattached. From nature we get nourishment and healing,and we learn, observing it, how to produce goods andservices useful to us, in total freedom of creation andreproduction.

These ideas require a profound meditation by all those whohave responsibilities in the conduction of their societies.Before it is too late, we must go back to our origins, todeserve any future at all.


PDG 2008-9 District 4530


41/56

[email protected]

De: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: sexta-feira, 25 de maro de 2011 14:01

Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Dear Ronaldo,Thank you for sharing your writings, they are deep insightswhich can guide legislators.Keep in touch. Best regards.Wilfredo Segovia

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

De: Rotary Africa [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: sexta-feira, 25 de maro de 2011 03:45Para: 'Ronaldo Carneiro'Assunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Many thanks for your e-mail, I have passed it on to theEditor.

Warm wishes,Sharon RobertsonROTARY IN AFRICAPBO: 18/13/13/3091Tel: 031-267-1848

Fax: 031-267-1849--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

De: sakuji tanaka [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: sexta-feira, 25 de maro de 2011 00:48Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism


42/56

Dear Ronaldo Campos Carneiro,

Thank you very much for your message.I will study by your e-mail from now on.

Sincerly,Sakuji Tanaka----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

De: David Campbell [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: quinta-feira, 24 de maro de 2011 21:23

Para: 'Ronaldo Carneiro'Assunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Dear fellow Rotarian Ronaldo,

Your email says I can count on your sincere cooperationwith respect to your paper on Reflections on Democracy,Capitalism and Socialism.

Trusting the sincerity of your statement, I would ask yourcooperation in observing a very central tenant of Rotary.That is, Rotary is a non-political and non-sectarianorganisation and that it is inappropriate to use Rotary as avehicle to promote ones personal political or religiousviews.

Respecting this fundamental tenant of Rotary has alwaysbeen a challenge for us as Rotarians. But, one of themiracles of Rotary is that because of its non-political/sectarian foundation it is able to accomplish greatthings and transcend the political and religious barriers thatso easily divide people. I have been a member of 4different Rotary clubs in three countries. My fellowRotarians have been liberal and conservative, royalist andrepublican, capitalist and socialist. They have beenChristian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, and Atheist.

I am mindful that while Rotarians are political creatures asindividuals, ROTARY IS NOT POLITICAL. I genuinely


43/56

understand that there will be gray areas as to where onespersonal political views cross the line into violating Rotarysnon-political principles. However, I doubt if many woulddisagree when I say that that the paper you are asking

Rotarians to disseminate is not in that gray area. It is avery political document with strong positions about a widerange of political philosophies.

As someone who sees himself a political liberal, I canpersonally agree with a great many of the ideals that youpromote in a call for a Humanist Regime. However, Icannot ignore the extensive political statements you make.I see no conflict with a Rotarian making those kind of

statements as a personal political position but doing it inthe name of Rotary, or using Rotary as a vehicle topromote political positions, compromises our organisationand its worldwide service.

After reading your paper I was impressed by yourcommitment to service and your desire for a morehumanistic society ideals that are cherished by allRotarians. And I can see your passion. Yet I know thatpassion often blinds us to principles. So I again appeal to

you to be respectful of Rotarys non-political principle.

Warmest Regards

David Campbell

Maketu, New Zealand

From: Ronaldo Carneiro [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Saturday, 26 March 2011 9:05 a.m.To: 'David Campbell'Subject: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism and Socialism

Dear David thanks a lot for your comments. I reallyappreciate although disagreed of some of your evaluation.In fact Im confronting values but Im not supportingcapitalism or socialism Yes, I support market economy because there is no solution out of market Yes, I support

nutrition, health and education basic Rotary presidential
mailto:%5Bmailto:[email protected]%5Dmailto:%5Bmailto:[email protected]%5D


44/56

priority over the last years Yes, I support exterminatethe cause that makes charity necessary instead of

disseminate philantrophy!! Im not interested indiscussing personal politics andIm sure that passion is notblinds my principles. I prefer to focus on causes instead ofmitigate the effects of exclusion. The paper Im askingRotarians to disseminate is very political document withstrong positions about a wide range of political philosophiesand principles that I strongly support. Im absolutely surethat Im in line of rotary principles since our founder PaulHarris - "Rotary will continue to be charitable, but it

can do more than that. Let us make Rotaryexterminate the cause that makes charity necessary"

The Rotarian august 1916. Count on me to shake thatincredible organization. Ron Carneiro

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

De: David Campbell [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: sexta-feira, 25 de maro de 2011 20:22Para: 'Ronaldo Carneiro'Assunto: RE: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Dear Ronaldo

When I said that passion blinds people to principles I wasnot referring to your principles but Rotarys principles. Isuspect that your passion has blinded you to Rotarysfundamental principle of being non-political. In your emailbelow you state very clearly that your paper is a verypolitical document. I totally agree... it is highly politicaland therefore it is contrary to Rotarys principles to useRotary as a forum for promoting your personal political

views. It is a huge leap of logic to say that being in line


45/56

with Rotarys humanitarian principles makes it OK todisregard Rotarys non-political principles.

While we as Rotarians honour Paul Harris as our founder,

and while his words still motivate Rotarians today as theydid a hundred years ago... we must be careful not to makethe mistake of using his words about Rotarys commitmentof humanitarian service as a reason to ignore Rotaryscommitment to being non-political. Rotary is very clearabout this and you need to look no further than the concisestatement which appears on Rotarys website. If you clickon About Us you will be presented with two very shortparagraphs that express the essence of Rotary for all tosee. In the first paragraph it says that Rotary is anorganisation made up of 1.2 million community leaders who

provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethicalstandards in all vocations, and help build goodwill andpeace in the world. I have no doubt that this is a Rotaryprinciple that you passionately endorse. It is a principle

that leaps out to any reader of your paper. It is a principlethat we both are passionate about.

Then, in the second paragraph it goes on to state theprinciples that make it possible for Rotary to effectivelycarry out its humanitarian values when it says that Rotaryis nonpolitical, nonreligious, and open to all cultures,races, and creeds. Notice the word NONPOLITICAL.

Finally, Ronaldo, I find it quite ironic that you and I seem tobe in total agreement on virtually every aspect of yourpaper. We both agree that is consistent with thehumanitarian principles of Rotary. We both support Rotaryworking to eliminate of the causes that make charitynecessary. And surprisingly there is no disagreementbetween us with the fact that your paper, while supporting

humanitarian principles is also a very political document(your exact words below). And that is where the problem


46/56

lies. In the end, its really a matter of your decision todisregard Rotarys fundamental non-political principle andseek to use Rotary as a forum for your personal politicalviews.

In the spirit of finding a common ground with you I wouldlike to reflect on your statement that you seek to

exterminate the cause that makes charity necessary instead of disseminate philanthropy. The word

Philanthropy is a wonderful word composed of two Greekwords: philos which means to love, and anthroposmeaning humankind . Philanthropy simply means loveof humanity. So, I submit that the extermination of thecause that makes charity necessary is not the opposite ofphilanthropy. it is philanthropy at its very best.

Rotary reminds us over and over that we can promotephilanthropy without involving politics. And if fact, theeffectiveness of Rotary depends on respecting thisprinciple.

Regards

David

De: Ronaldo Carneiro [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: sbado, 26 de maro de 2011 12:20Para: 'David Campbell'Assunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism and Socialism

Dear David few disagreement with big agreement. Thankyou for your comments. As rotarian I really appreciatededication of your time to smart comments on my text bythe way, the meaning ofphilanthropy as love ofhumanity from greek is new concept for me thanks.

Well David we need to discuss more the meaning of political in my understand Rotarys principles of being

nonpolitical, nonreligious, and open to all cultures, races,

and creeds basic idea is not allow discussion on themes


47/56

that split persons means not to discuss political party but political philosophy is highly recommended. In otherwords: how can we bother with a big social exclusiontreaten effects and not focus on causes? Hope to find youto go deeper in this theme. Regards. Ron Carneiro

De: Artur Lopes Cardoso [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: segunda-feira, 28 de maro de 2011 05:16Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Meu Caro Comp.

Recebi e vou apreciar para eventual publicao.Muito obrigado.Artur Lopes Cardoso

Portugal Rotario

De: Richard Fisher [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 06:44Para: Ronaldo CarneiroCc: Alan IsdaleAssunto: Re: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Good Day. Thank you for the thought provoking sentimentscontained in your email which I will pass on to those whowill be interested.Kind regardsRichardRichard Fisher

Address: 10 Marwick Road, Cowies Hill, Durban 3610

Email: [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


48/56

Phone: + 27 31 7011894

Cell: + 27 82 8976509

Fax: + 27 86 6053150De: contato [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 09:57Para: 'Massimo Massi Benedetti'Assunto: Rethinking the world for future generations!!

Thanks Massimo Im happy that youre interested in

such matter. Ethics of labour thats what we need!!! Myprivate address:


SQN 106 bloco F apto 305

70742-060 Braslia DF Brasil

I agreed that text is too long, but Several Rotarian bulletins

are publishing it in Brazil, in 7 chapters. See below a shorttext about Democracy, capitalism and socialism. Count onme. Ron Carneiro

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

De: Massimo Massi Benedetti [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 03:12Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Re: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism


49/56

Dear Ronaldo,thanks for sharing with me your highly valuable thoughts. Ifully share your views and as a matter of fact the mainfocus of my year was dedicated to the ethics of labour fromdifferent perspective. I took as a platform the Rule of St.Benedict which is extremely modern and more advancedthan any communism or capitalism (for more informationgo to the "Folador Massimo" web site. I did organize sixforums on the subject whose proceedings have beenpublished recently. Although they are in Italian I would bepleased to let you have the book if you send me your

private address.In regard to the publication of your manuscript it is to longin the present format to be published in the district journal.It would be helpful if you could produce a concise abstractwhich I could forward to the editor and may be the full textcould be downloaded in the district's web site. However themanagement of the journal is not under my responsibilityso that I cannot promise any positive outcome. What I can

assure is my support to the initiative.Looking forward to hearing from you,Yours in Rotary

Massimo

Massimo MASSI BENEDETTI

Rotary International District 2090 (I)Governor yr 2007-2008

Via della Vendemmia 7, 06125 Perugia (I)

Tel/Fax +39 0755899768

Mob. +39 3488403067

De: contato [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 10:31Para: '[email protected]'


50/56

Assunto: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Dear Alok thanks for your interest see below anothertext. Count on me. Ron Carneiro

De: ALOK BILLORE [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 01:15Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Re: Reflections on Democracy, Capitalism andSocialism

Dear PDG Ronaldo,

I have gone through your article which is the reality of lifeand a proper expression of concern to make this world abetter place to live.

I am immensely impressed to go through your views and

thank you for including my name in your email list.

I am forwarding this article of yours in our district on thegroup mail for the benefit of our Rotarians which wouldprovide a guideline to those who are interested tocontribute through their time and energy.

You are a philanthropist and I admire your concern for thecause.

Respectful Regards,


51/56

Alok.

De: Debasish Mitra [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 29 de maro de 2011 00:28

Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: PDG DEBASISH MITRA ONLINE

Dear PDG Ronaldo,

Greetings,

I truly appreciate the Article presented by you which I feelis thought-provoking. I have forwarded the same to myfriend Prof Sanjoy Mukherjee who is a Professor at theIndian Institute of Management for reading & comments. Ishall also forward this to our Bulletin Editor.

Keep in touch & stay well.

Warm regards

Debasish

De: roberto na uol [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: quinta-feira, 31 de maro de 2011 16:53Para: 'Ronaldo Carneiro'Assunto: RES: Reflexes sobre democracia, capitalismo esocialismo


52/56

Ronaldo;

Grato pelas consideraes a meu respeito. No estou melembrando de onde nos conhecemos, se que nosencontramos alguma vez. Dei uma lida rpida no texto quevoc mandou. Se voc conhece minhas posies a respeitodo setor eltrico brasileiro, assistiu a alguma palestra ouparticipa do grupo de discusso que participo, sabe que,respeitosamente, discordamos em alguns pontos. Por noter nenhuma formao poltica ou econmica que possa

avaliar o que voc diz, s posso usar a minha experinciaprofissional. Sou engenheiro formado por uma empresaestatal que, infelizmente, parece estar morimbunda aps otsunami neo-liberal do governo Fernando Henrique e ocancer do aparelhamento poltico da "companheirada".Tenho muito orgulho desse currculo e acho que essaempresa tem resultados histricos para mostrar. O que eutenho presenciado em todos esses anos, pelo menos na

minha rea, no confirma as suas teses. Lembre que aempresa do desastre nuclear japons privada. Mas, nofique zangado, pois hoje, dado o estrago no quadroproffisional dessas empresas, no mais certeza se vale apena mant-las como esto.

Abraos

Roberto Araujo

De: Waldecy Rodrigues de Souza[mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: segunda-feira, 16 de maio de 2011 15:46

Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Portugal rotario- reflexes sobre democracia


53/56

Prezado Ronaldo

L atentamente as suas reflexes sobre democracia,capitalismo e socialismo.

Obrigado por ter enviado e parabns pela qualidade dotexto.

Cordialmente

Eduardo de Barros Pimentel

Presidente da

Fundao de Rotarianos de So Paulo

F/ (11) 3829.2872De: Henrique Lellis [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: tera-feira, 17 de maio de 2011 16:02Para: Ronaldo CarneiroAssunto: Re: Rotary and democracy

Carssimo Ronaldo

Receba nossos sinceros cumprimentos pelo belssimotrabalho que nos serve como grande aprendizado.Gostamos tanto que reenviamos a companheiros nossos.SinceramenteHenrique Lellis

De: Ing. Otakar Vesel Rotary[mailto:[email protected]]

Enviada em: quinta-feira, 9 de junho de 2011 10:13


54/56

Para: 'Ronaldo Carneiro'Assunto: Rotary and democracy

Dear Ronaldo Campos Carneiro,

Thank you for your offer. I think that here, in our District2240 (Czech and Slovak Republic), this would not find ause for the present. But I leave it open. If a situation wouldchange I will contact you.

Kind regards

Otakar Vesel

PDG 2005-06

Rotary International

Distrikt 2240

Potovn adresa:

Lineck 277, CZ-381 01 esk Krumlov

Tel.: +420 380 702 112

Fax: +420 380 711 875

E-mail: [email protected]

www.rotary.cz; www.rotary.sk

De: Davide Zoggia - PD [mailto:[email protected]]Enviada em: quarta-feira, 6 de julho de 2011 11:11Para: [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]://www.rotary.cz/http://www.rotary.sk/mailto:[email protected]://www.rotary.cz/http://www.rotary.sk/


55/56

Assunto: Cancellando la parola "province" non si riducono icosti della politica

Ciao ,ieri il PD alla Camera si astenuto sulla proposta dicancellazione delle Province perch non cancellando unaparola che si risolve il problema dei costi della politica.Esiste una nostra proposta per quanto riguarda il riordinocomplessivo del sistema delle autonomie locali e delleregioni e in questa si colloca anche quella specifica relativa

alle province. Un riordino che non deve e non pu avvenireindipendentemente da una nuova e pi snella visione delloStato, per fornire cos servizi efficienti e non duplicazioniburocratiche.

Ecco perch non sufficiente dire che si aboliscono leprovince. E facile demagogia tracciare un segno sullaparola province, sarebbe una operazione identica a quella

fatta da Berlusconi con le grandi opere, con i famosicartelloni pieni di segni che, da inchiostro, non si sono maitrasformati in infrastrutture.

La nostra proposta concreta e riorganizza il settore converi tagli e grandi possibilit di risparmio, essa gidepositata in parlamento ed visibile sul nostro sito

internet allindirizzopartitodemocratico.it/leggeprovince

Se si vuole fare serio bisogna quindi dire a chi, una voltaabolite , vanno le funzioni delle province, almeno quelleessenziali, come verr dislocato il personale che oggi vilavora. Altrimenti, parlare di costi della politica solo per leprovince diventa un modo per eludere il problema, per non

affrontarlo mai sul serio.
http://mmk.pdnetwork.it/link.php?M=43414&N=212&L=398&F=Hhttp://mmk.pdnetwork.it/link.php?M=43414&N=212&L=398&F=H


56/56

E i tempi di questa nostra riforma saranno brevissimi. Ilpaese va riformato e riavvicinato alle esigenze dei cittadinie in questo ci stiamo impegnando.

Grazie per l'attenzione, aiutaci a diffondere la proposta delPD

Davide Zoggia, responsabile Enti Locali Pd

Partito Democratico

Sede legale - Via Sant'Andrea delle Fratte 16,

00187 Roma - Tel. 06/ 675471 - Fax. 06/ 67547319

Sede nazionale - Via Sant'Andrea delle Fratte, 16

00187 - Roma CF: 90042750472 - Tel 06/ 695321

Ricevi questa comunicazione perch iscritto al

portale partitodemocratico.it.

Per non ricevere ulteriori comunicazioni da questa

newsletter clicca qui

---------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------
http://mmk.pdnetwork.it/link.php?M=43414&N=212&L=190&F=Hhttp://mmk.pdnetwork.it/link.php?M=43414&N=212&L=190&F=H

reflections on democracy.comments

Documents