Tolling the Virtues of Communism in Homogeneous Populations

private capital markets are known for their efficiency in commanding labor however homogenous populations are more likely to govern through socialism or communism because of the tendency of like racial and ethnic strains to ensure common survival. china is a perfect example of a “red” state that is so not by virtue of our design but by it’s homoegenous collectivist population that bee-hives their common necessities of survival. in contrast, the united states is well known as the stalwart capitalist society for one main reason. class, do you know what this is? slavery! that’s right, slavery! for the very purposes of quickly establishing efficient and productive colonies in the formerly native indian populace, slavery was required and promulgated as the circumstance labor model for the sake of systematic picking of large agricultural lots via specialization and economization of labor accomplished for larger societies and what would eventually be performed by machine. leaving a large number of disemployed black slaves with little to do but procreate. intolerance for this creed among white english protestants stands to this day and is the death knell that drives through the very vampire heart of the social system like a stake. because of this segment of the population, far removed from the traditions of the white anglo-saxon, there is not a common thread or theme for survival in common but rather competition among the classes and hitherto the ethnic races. where in marxist sense, a rich man profits from labor buy selling the production of labor for a higher price than which he bought while labor gets by selling for what they consume monthly, weekly, or even daily, or even the still richer person who credits the transactions of buying and selling for the capitalist at a premium. generally shared ideals in more homogenous civilizations are shared by wealth and common taxation systems with more luxuries, trade, and consumption for the state’s working class. the capitalist thus depends on the creditor relation to increase his capital and both the creditor and capitalist depend on the worker for producing objects of basic consumption. the creditor operates much like an authority by establishing his stakeholder debtors privately via the operation of selective preference. thus the creditor-capitalist relation operates much like the civil serfdom of middle age europe where the worker is imported to bear fruit upon the land by the operation of tithe or work for the credit. the modern happenstance of this is the rented office space, materials bonded and insured to fulfill the tasks of serfdom. the concept of fealty likewise arises among the accumulated wealth of the capitalist/creditor where families govern larger estates through a network of gratuitous transfer bound by loyalties of marriage and husbandry. in contrast the hithertofore mentioned family caste of fealty, the terrain of serfdom and the nation of collected and loyally abided serfdoms constituted the collective taxing authority which uses aggregrate spending capacity collected from all of the loyalists to perform functions for collective benefit such as roads, gates, bridges, labor education, and conservation of the peace among the thus stratified classes. fealty castes are generally reserved for skilled labor positions that are generally borne into by hereditary or other apprentice. Taxation on the premise of public consumption is something of an eyesore in the united states, where however the standard of living is higher than most other countries. whereas the rich creditor can elect to consume from imports or operate several such serfdoms in several nationalities simulatenously. the more modern example is the proxy system where a share of an aggregate corporation is used to vote for operators to conduct the labor of the corporation (an artificat of the feudal system) binding these systems is the usury or the standard practices of accounting. however this system does not always work perfectly. the competition among the working classes yields the best producer or a range of the best producers for the best price. despite this the other workers that are not production-level still need to consume and must either select lesser skill-intensive jobs or consume from the well of the public consumption. the inverse is true as well where the rich capitalist is not often the best laborer through degradation of practice and may be an object of resentment or scorn from not only the disemployed workers consuming from the public wealth but even the skilled workers who do not desire less than the strict rigorous and moral ethic of disciplined labor from their proprieters. even worse slothful consumption and waste and mismanagement of either the skilled working class or both could result in revolt or overthrow of the so-called aristocrats, traditionally ordained via chain of title from the king, lordship, or authority of the sovereign government. sometimes the character and style of extant labor positions are in the format that the degree of skill and preparation required to master is more than the reward or the availability of productive offering, thus producing the race to the bottom. this is in contrast to the general labor principle held in privilege by the capitalist known as the race to the top.