Marxism has defined the thinking of recent generations because it was the first philosophy to address the feeling of “alienation” that has become seemingly commonplace in the modern world.

But Marx’s shallow attempt at philosophical psychology misses the root cause of this estranged feeling.

It’s not that people are truly longing for utopia, or have been duped into accepting capitalism because of false consciousness.

Rather alienation arises from the absence of meaningful work.

Think about it.

Most of our collective life frustrations comes from the fact that our work doesn’t seem like it’s paying off existentially.

Which has nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with our inability to appreciate the value of what we create.

Instead of taking the time to appreciate the things we make and do, our philosophical attention has been drawn toward figuring out which victim class we belong to — a perspective that is as existentially alienating as it is psychologically deflating. After all, people are not losers.

They are creatures of opportunity, capable of great things when those around them believe in and expect great things.

For even the most tedious tasks add to the collective satisfaction of happy customers.

And even the most menial customer service job provides others with the delight of another’s company.

And even more advanced jobs give us the opportunity to serve even more people by solving more complex problems and providing them with even more goods and services in ways that make the best things in life even more available.

And if more people shared this perspective, we could collectively build a world where work feels less like a burden and more like a calling.

A calling to contentment.

A calling to service. And a calling to something bigger and more purposeful than ourselves.

All of which would enrich everyone personally and existentially in ways that Marx’s stagnant utopia never could.

The problem, then, is not the economic system.

It is the poverty of our imagination.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and is a professional advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

The world has undeniably transformed into a safer and more enjoyable place with remarkable progress shaping every aspect of modern life.

More people are living longer than ever before, with global life expectancy rising substantially.

The typical citizen today is wealthier than anyone else at any other point in history.

And the modern world overflows with novelty and entertainment enriching lives in ways past generations would find unimaginable.

Yet, a striking paradox persists: many believe the world is more dangerous and violent than ever.

Which is understandable.

In humanity’s primordial beginnings survival was a constant struggle with environmental threats far outnumbering available resources.

Early humans also posed significant dangers to one another, waging wars and capturing others for pride or as trophies.

This evolutionary backdrop has left a lingering precivilizational mentality reinforced by frequent depictions of violence on TV and in the news.

Which has made it difficult for some to fully accept the peace and prosperity ushered in by modern systems like capitalism.

To bridge this gap society must renew it’s faith in our ability to uplift one another by changing our attitudes and institutions.

Education systems, for instance, should prioritize instilling merited confidence in our collective future. And they should do so by emphasizing our shared historical progress over our petty fears about civilizational collapse.

Likewise discontentment should be welcomed and viewed as a catalyst for entrepreneurial, philosophical, and political innovation.

And most importantly humanity should embrace the benefits of capitalism—such as economic growth, technological advancements, and improved living standards—so people can properly align their historical attitudes with the realities of a safer, more prosperous world.

With this progress, societal joy may flourish as abundantly as the material advancements driven by the world's innovators and great thinkers.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as a professional advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work athttps://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

In the beginning humans lived in a state of threatening abundance.

There were seemingly infinite predators and innumerable threats to human survival.

Life was chaotic.

But as humans adapted to their environment they gradually became more like it in its abundance.

Humans multiplied to match, and eventually surpass, the number of the threats in their environments.

And as populations grew so too did what makes humans most human -- their ideas.

In this way humans took what makes them distinct, brought it into the world, and became one with the world they naturally inhabited.

Human creativity evolved to match the creative abundance of the natural world.

And this is why capitalism is such a success for humanity.

Capitalism -- or better yet open markets ,entreprenuralism, and mutually beneficial exchange -- incentivizes and affords people the ability to act in so many different ways. And all of these different ways of acting collectively mirror nature’s infinite number of organic innovations.

And they’re just as beautiful in their variety as nature is in hers.

As proud people then living in harmony with nature we should do more to preserve this natural state and accelerate its outgrowth.

More people.

More ideas.

More markets.

More business.

More diversity.

When people embrace this abundance mindset -- not the fake abundance of socialists who want to create more stuff so there’s more to redistribute -- then more people will be happily harmonized with a truly natural way of life: living in prosperity.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as a professional advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work athttps://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

In the Dark Ages philosophers, theologians, and the elite praised poverty as the just result of righteous suffering.

But they did so for reasons other than the belief that doing so would benefit humanity.

They did so because poverty worship was an easy way to gain a following and status without having to do much.

Just repeat the self-justifying prejudices of the impoverished masses, and they would willingly flock to whomever.

Today’s leading progressive intellectuals and politicians are no different than their predecessors in the Dark Ages.

At the same time they decry the effects of poverty, they subtly glorify the poor as inherently virtuous and encourage those suffering from it to treat their struggle as deserving of a badge of moral superiority.

Simultaneously, they dismiss ambition and upward mobility as mere “social constructs,” further undermining the desire for self-improvement.

Of course the best things in life -- innovation, progress, and prosperity -- are social constructs.

They’re social constructs built on a foundation of ingenuity and desire for societal improvement.

But that speaks to the socialist rule -- everything that doesn’t go along with their narrative must be reduced to insignificance and dismissed.

Which also highlights the poverty of their world view.

The socialist world view is so impoverished that it struggles to explain anything of any complexity.

Because socialists want a world as impoverished, simplistic, and mired in futility as their ideas are, while they take joy in their dogma choking progress and chaining humanity to an unthinking mediocrity.

But we’re on the dawn of a new era -- where the answers to the world’s most complex are as rich as the wealthiest Americans.

And one day humanity will cash out on these solutions, transforming them into innovations that restore society to its natural state of abundance and prosperity.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as a professional advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work athttps://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

The abundance of goods, services, wealth, and leisure of the present create a deeper appreciation for the struggles of those in the past.

Which means that with each passing day that capitalism brings us so much stuff, wealth, and health, the more meaningful the moments of yesteryear become.

Or, to go further, the wealthier we become the more history is enriched by our gratitude for those who endured hardships before us.

Which is all the more reason to celebrate entrepreneurship, open markets, and innovation.

Because compared to other competing views of history the capitalist perspective imbues the present, past, and future with an ever increasing existential significance as profit margins and GDPs soar.

Other theories are more bleak.

In progressivism, history -- or the story of human struggle -- is to be brought to an end by a self-righteous bureaucratic elite whose pure intentions and philosophical brilliance is presumed to be enough to eliminate human struggle.

Which means the value and meaning of the past are diminished because of their utopian expectations of the future.

In the traditional conservative view history is an eternal reflection of God’s goodness, which means that the meaning of history never improves or declines. It stays a continuous and timeless essence whose value is indeterminate to everyone except God.

And in the eastern view history is nothing more than a continuous cycle of life and death, whose only value is in escaping it through the attainment of religious perfection called nirvana.

Again meaning neither the past nor present have any existential significance.

Only capitalism multiplies the meaning of the past, present, and future as economies grow and people prosper.

Which is why it’s the best. Capitalism transforms economic prosperity into existential significance in the marketplace of our minds, while paying out huge dividends on the hopeful ambitions of our heroic hearts.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and is a professional advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work athttps://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

To the confusion of communists, big, open, and profitable markets have made people less competitive with one another and hence less willing to act on their violent impulses and tendencies.

First markets have made it more rewarding -- both monetarily, societally, and intellectually -- to cooperate with people than to harm them.

Which was not always the case.

Prior to 17th century industrialism bandits, warmongers, and imperialists had the incentive to -- largely because of the relatively small size of their commercial marketplaces -- plunder others because doing so would allow them to become wealthier than what they could expect to be if they worked hard or became entrepreneurs.

Second markets gave birth to the middle class.

Which, being neither dependent on the largesse of the government, nor slaves to their elitist desire for power and luxury, are the only social class capable of advocating for individual sovereignty and personal independence.

Third, the large number of goods and services big, open, and profitable markets offer provide the material comfort necessary to eliminate the frustrations of poverty including violence and lawbreaking.

Fourth the desire of the capitalist to make markets ever more profitable eliminates the justification for competition -- i.e. war -- between nations.

Fifth markets enrich people to the point of naturally making them more willing to be more charitable, and hence more cooperative, to others.

Thus capitalism has produced a major miracle -- to make the average man more like an angel and less like the murderous monsters of our pre-industrial past.

For that even latte sipping socialists should give praise.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

In the early 20th century progressives thought they could enhance “democracy” -- and limit the influence of the elite -- by passing the 17th amendment that allowed for the direct election of Senators.

But what eventually happened made the government even less democratic than what it was before the passage of the 17th amendment.

When Franklin Roosevelt signed the New Deal into law in 1933, for instance, he did so with the help of newly and directly elected Democrat Senators that had retaken the majority for the first time since 1977.

And this passage of the New Deal resulted in codifying the power of the administrative state whereby the elite -- even more of them! -- would be in charge of substantial policy decisions by being appointed to serve on an obscure agency with vast powers.

So much for democracy and anti-elitism!

For at no time in US history were more elites empowered to make more consequential decisions without democratic oversight than when the administrative state came to be.

Perhaps, then, progressives should go back to the drawing board of democracy and let people make their own plans instead of unelected bureaucrats doing it for them.

But to do so they must acknowledge the inconvenient truth.

The elite will always find a way to prevail in politics.

Whether it’s in public under the watchful eye of the people.

Or in secret under the advice of their well connected inner circle.

The elite always win.

But for us -- philosophical republicans and market loving libertarians -- it’s how they win that matters.

Which should be done through competition and with accountability.

Not by fiat and hobnobbing with the elite to gain an appointment to an obscure governing board.

Perhaps, then, when the 17th amendment is finally repealed we can progress past this dip in democracy and restore power to the people by abolishing the administrative state.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

For normal middle class Americans, candid speech is a virtue.

It’s a virtue for at least five reasons.

First candid speech helps us get a sense of the world for what it is -- good, bad, or indifferent.

And when we have an idea of what the world currently is we can then gain the insight to know what improvements can and should be made in society.

Second candid speech also allows the various costs of life to be accurately assessed.

That way the various and costly stupidities of the world can be safely avoided and people can pursue more productive pleasures.

Third, listening to candid speech also has the virtue of making people more tolerant of views and people they disagree with.

Which prevents people from venting their violent frustrations on people or property.

Fourth, candid speech upholds the integrity of one’s culture. After all candor is the basis of trust -- and societies where trust is absent are hubs for crime and poverty.

Fifth candid speech is essential to making sound political judgments.

After all, you can’t solve a problem if people aren’t free to candidly discuss problems in the first place.

Candid speech, then, is a great virtue.

But for tyrants, and other enemies of liberty, candid speech is intolerable.

Tyrants hate candid speech because candid speech often reveals that no one can live up to their high minded rhetoric and utopian expectations.

Or, in other words, tyrants hate candid speech because it reveals ugly truths that destroy the beautiful lies tyrants tell themselves and others.

Which shatters tyrants’ glass egos.

So speak candidly -- and topple tyranny through honesty and integrity!

The Ideas of the Marketplace substack is the only place for original thinking about the philosophy of open markets, personal liberty, and individual rights. Support our contribution to the marketplace of ideas by donating here.

Open markets is a better term to describe the elimination of barriers that prevent the cheap and easy exchange of knowledge, goods, and services than globalism because it best describes what people are actually after.

What people think globalism is, for example, is the convergence of global markets into a mega-sized trading ground that only benefits tyrannical elites.

But proponents of open markets don’t want that.

Nor is that what open markets usually result in.

What proponents of open markets want is more commerce and business to take place everywhere.

Which results in more people being more productive and making more money so that more people can do more of the things they want to do.

Which, by most accounts, is mutually beneficial to everyone.

Even the nationalists who besmirch supporters of open markets as “globalists.”

Because open markets create prosperity around the globe and this affords those living under corrupt regimes the opportunity to legally migrate to better governed nations.

Like the United States.

And upon arrival those that have been graciously enriched by global market forces are supremely grateful -- and make for good, dutiful citizens who are eager to further enrich their lives and the new country they live in by following the law, paying taxes, working hard, and being polite.

Which is a win-win for good government and open markets everywhere.

And actually reinforces the economic, technological, and hence military strength of a nation.

Like when immigrants fled to the US and developed the bomb that ended World War II and many other wars since then.

The lesson, then, is this: when prosperity and people prevail so too does the fate of great nations. And maybe, one day, this idea will too in the mental marketplace of the American mind.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government by day.

You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

The Ideas of the Marketplace substack is the only place for original thoughts about the philosophy of open markets, personal liberty, and individual rights. Support this work through donations by clicking here.

Alternatively show your support by pressing the like button and sharing it with interested friends!

For progressives wealth is an instrument of oppression.

In their view wealth creates power and status that is then used to keep people down and deprive them of their dignity. For this they blame capitalism.

But, to borrow from the left’s parlance, that’s just like an opinion man.

And a mostly wrong one at that.

The majority of the middle class and below don’t believe rich people are using their wealth to keep them down.

Nor do they resent others on the basis of power, status, or money.

They’re too busy living their lives to hate people they don’t know.

Members of the middle class do, however, resent incompetent people they’ve been forced to come into contact with.

Or they resent the government -- that they sometimes have to rely on -- for being poor stewards of the resources they were entrusted with.

The same is true for most wealthy people. They don’t have an interest in keeping people down.

They just want to keep making money without the government getting in their business. Literally.

But for wealthy progressives who hate business and commerce it’s a different story.

Maintaining power and status over others is important to them.

After all it’s the one thing they believe they're allowed to enjoy -- since they're inherently superior due to the righteousness of their convictions and since money is evil then they figure they might as well enjoy power.

Which they then use to sink those above them in the status hierarchy with government regulations, additional taxes, fines, fees, and other mandates.

Likewise wealthy progressives feel they must stay away from the poor just as much as they must sink others whom are wealthy.

Not only because they believe hanging around poverty jeopardizes their fragile social status, but because they believe the poor are fundamentally repulsive for having bad taste and crude manners.

So progressives are right in thinking that some wealthy people do want to keep others down.

But that’s not the fault of capitalism.

It’s the fault of oppressive progressives who pledge to launch crusades against wealth, while eventually becoming wealthy, only to be miserable and dissatisfied.

Maybe then instead of decrying money while making it progressives should form communes and convents. There their contempt for wealth and religious sentiments about the perfect equality of all people could be better appreciated.

The market -- for both goods and services and religion in general -- would appreciate it.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government by day.

You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

Humans are, by nature, fickle creatures who don’t know what they want.

When people do think they know what they want they can barely articulate what it is.

And when they can get it, whatever it is, they eventually decide they no longer want it.

Or what they want is something they can never get.

This is how people are.

People can never just make up their minds and be satisfied.

Which highlights why liberal political theorists are wrong about human nature.

And why the political implications they draw from their flawed theory are wrong too.

In their understanding of human nature there is a common good that all people secretly want but can’t articulate.

And whatever this common good is is something that can only be made intelligible to the masses by enlightened politicians by way of their inherent superiority and paeans to ideas like equality.

Politicians call their enlightened understanding of the common good “representing the will of the people.”

Which they then argue entitles them to pass any legislation they want regardless of the consequences because only they can know what people really want.

But the problem is is that people don’t know what they really want.

So naturally even enlightened politicians can’t figure out what someone else wants.

Which means appealing to “the will of the people” as a justification for more “democracy” is illegitimate. The will of the people can’t be surmised no matter how many catechisms about equality one rehearses and recites.

But if it could be surmised maybe we’d guess people want this -- to be left to enjoy their prosperous and private lives away from self serving politicians.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

Starting a business, running it well, and sustaining its operations is a greater benefit to humanity than running a non-profit, volunteering, or becoming an academic for the following reasons.

First a well run business teaches its operators and customers invaluable lessons about costs, labor, production, and the economy that could not be learned otherwise. Without businesses most would remain ignorant about how money and markets work.

Second, a well run business requires critical thinking skills that usually aren’t developed in other settings including college.

Third, a well run business literally enriches humanity with valuable goods and services while the value of the efforts of a non-profit organization, volunteer, or academic are not immediately apparent if there is any at all.

Fourth owners of a well run business better appreciate people and things because they’re more familiar with the costs and struggles to sustain and maintain them.

Fifth, the efforts of business leaders have been unequivocally more successful in eradicating global poverty than similar efforts from non profits, volunteers, or academics.

Sixth, the societal prosperity that results from well run businesses gives people more -- in terms of goods and services -- to live for and thus disincentivizes destruction and violence.

Seventh, successfully maintaining a regular customer base requires a high degree of tolerance that can’t be taught unless one is in business themselves.

Eighth, the technologies that are produced by businesses are used to expand the world’s knowledge base so people can better know and love the world they live in.

So if you love humanity join the cause — start a business and provide humanity with pride of purchasing power and the pleasure of profit!

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

The ubiquity of waste in capitalist economies is a sign of great progress.

After all, ubiquitous waste is the natural byproduct of a greater and life enhancing abundance.

And this abundance is the proud product of productive people in great nations.

For which everyone should be appreciative of, even if it means life won’t always be tidy, neat, and trash free.

Compare this to communist countries.

In some communist countries there is no waste because cunning politicians are constantly coming up with new ways to keep their populations dumb, dependent, and desperate.

Accordingly, not only are ordinary citizens deprived of the power and pleasure of productivity, but they’re also unable to make enough stuff to have anything to waste.

In other communist countries, like China, only bureaucrats reserve the right to be wasteful.

There, for instance, bureaucrats mandated the construction of millions of ghost homes.

Which haunt the otherwise bustling country with a ghastly emptiness that is symbolic of communism’s underling and despairing futility.

Even then, ubiquity of such waste in a communist country is a sign of great competence.

Competence in intentionally wasting human potential through deprivation, miscalculation, and willful naivete.

And this is the difference.

In great countries like America waste is visible to everyone because it’s a result of competent efforts to produce for a market that everyone frequents and benefits from.

In communist countries waste is hidden because of the government’s competence in censoring its citizens and hiding its mistakes.

Maybe then in communist countries what’s needed is a strong and healthy recycling program — one where bad dictators can be converted into free market leaders.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

Open markets run by enterprising entrepreneurs best facilitate happiness because they give people the best chance to get what they want.

Meaning more people can live their best lives -- even if people can’t really decide what exactly makes them happy.

Markets solve this problem of indecision by ensuring that there are always ample opportunities, goods, and services.

So that way people can afford to experiment if nothing initially satisfies their wants and needs.

Likewise markets lower costs which makes life more affordable and hence opportunity more accessible.

That way if people encounter hardship they can quickly rebound and get back on track to financial success.

Thus markets make people happy by affording them the opportunity of self discovery without much threat of costly harm.

In the history of humanity such an affordance is unprecedented.

And contrary to how economically illiterate politicians describe happiness.

Politicians make it seem like only they can provide happiness to their constituents, which they usually associate with some glib political boilerplate like “freedom.”

But freedom, and hence happiness, without money and opportunity is like a plant without water. Eventually it just withers away into nothing -- like the over regulated economies they oversee.

Clearly politicians can do better just by getting out of the way.

Because happiness is not dependent on government mandates, decrees, or laws.

Instead happiness is the organic by-product of entrepreneurial independence, the belief in upward mobility, and open markets.

And happiness pays off -- and pays well.

But too many politicians and their misled constituents aren’t in the market for happiness -- which is why they’ll always be poor no matter how much money they make.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work athttps://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

The economics of progressivism — socialism — is inherently imperialistic.

Hitler, for instance, plundered other nations and stole from his political targets to finance extensive domestic redistribution.

This is because looting is a political necessity under socialism. People can only have so much taken from them before they quit trying to create businesses and make money.

And when people give up like this then there’s no room for economic growth.

Socialist countries must then take from another country in order to continue to subsidize their complacent populations.

Second, socialists’ unwavering commitment to universal equality leads them to launch crusades against other nations that don’t share the same commitment.

Which has the predictable outcome of producing global resentment towards progressives who insist that they know what’s best for people in foreign countries.

So much for tolerance!

Compare this to capitalism -- i.e. open markets, voluntary exchange, and entrepreneurialism that -- Americans have helped spread world wide.

In China the spread of capitalism liberalized an otherwise communist regime and brought millions out of global poverty -- at least when capitalism was allowed to flourish sans Mao’s country side genocide.

Likewise across the globe capitalism increased the length and quality of millions of lives. Now people of the world live more comfortable lives without fear of ubiquitous disease.

But most importantly capitalism has created a big middle class full of people who permanently retired oppressive monarchs and aristocratic snobs from the world stage.

All of which was done without imperialistic violence.

So socialists let it be known -- prosperity is peace made through the magic of markets!

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

For normal middle class Americans, candid speech is a virtue.

It’s a virtue for at least five reasons.

First candid speech helps us get a sense of the world for what it is -- good, bad, or indifferent.

And when we have an idea of what the world currently is we can then gain the insight to know what improvements can and should be made in society.

Second candid speech also allows the various costs of life to be accurately assessed.

That way the various and costly stupidities of the world can be safely avoided so one can pursue more productive pleasures.

Third, listening to candid speech also has the virtue of making people more tolerant of views and people they disagree with.

Which prevents people from acting on their hostility towards others with violence, property destruction, or resentment.

Fourth, candid speech upholds the integrity of one’s culture. After all candor is the basis of trust -- and societies where trust is absent are hubs for crime and poverty.

Fifth candid speech is essential to making sound political judgments.

After all, you can’t solve a problem if people aren’t free to candidly discuss problems in the first place.

Candid speech, then, is a great virtue.

But for tyrants, and other enemies of liberty, candid speech is intolerable.

Tyrants hate candid speech because candid speech often reveals that no one can live up to their high minded rhetoric and utopian expectations.

Or, in other words, tyrants hate candid speech because it reveals ugly truths that destroy the beautiful lies tyrants tell themselves and others.

Which shatters tyrants’ glass egos.

So speak candidly -- and topple tyranny through honesty and integrity!

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government. You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

Upward mobility is a greater virtue than equality because it encourages people to act on their aspirations and to achieve their dreams.

Meanwhile the idea of equality -- when taken literally by communists -- encourages people to beg politicians to use the levers of government to kneecap the wealthy.

Which is why politicians rarely talk about upward mobility.

It’s easier for politicians to pacify the masses by using government power than it is to get people to believe in upward mobility.

After all, the idea of upward mobility seems contrary to human nature.

Humans, for instance, are naturally less concerned with living their best life and moreso concerned with protecting what they already have.

This loss aversion has been a defining characteristic of humanity from the beginning.

And in the beginning this innate protectionism was necessary.

The human species, with its long childhoods that require substantial resources, came into the world especially vulnerable and always on the precipice of extinction.

After all humans are not as innately vicious as other flesh eating mammals.

Nor were they as numerous as the other various threats to human survival including bacteria, disease, and other animals vigorously competing for the right to life.

This fear of being under constant attack, then, makes the human tendency toward protectionism understandable.

But as we continue to develop and improve economically and politically we should be encouraged to abandon our protectist ways.

Because we’re not under the threat of constant danger, no matter what fear mongering politicians say.

Instead these politicians could, and should, inspire us to get more for ourselves by ourselves.

When we do, perhaps we can finally progress past the poverty of our once protectionist nature.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government.  You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1!

Respect for others is a moral obligation we all share.

It is also a safeguard against the petty frustrations that lead people to call for tyrannical government.

Because when people aren’t respected in society -- for whatever reason -- they will take their grievances to politicians who will cash them into easy votes.

Which then amounts to politicians creating heavy handed provisions for their favored, albeit aggrieved, constituencies.

These are euphemistically called “protections.”

The same is true for self respect.

When people don’t respect the need to take care of themselves they go to politicians who will promise to in exchange for easy votes.

Which then amounts to politicians giving away tax dollars in the false name of “charity.”

This is also euphemistically called “welfare” or “assistance.”

A nation of people who had higher regard for themselves and others then would not provide cause for this gradual encroachment on speech and economic liberty.

Toward this end, then, concerned citizens should curb rampant disrespect in society in the following ways.

Limit the incentive political parties have to manufacture public outrage.  This can be done in large part by utilizing ranked choice voting, 

Limit the incentives people have to aggrieve one another in civil society including on the internet.  This could easily be done by having higher standards for those we give our attention to.

Only then when we respect each other as citizens of a great nation, regardless of our background, may we then have a government that respects all citizens’ speech and the expenditure of their tax dollars.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government.  You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1

As recently as the dark ages humanity suffered from a lack of general education.

During the dark ages, for instance, curriculums were intentionally limited to grammar, logic, and rhetoric and arithmetic. 

Later during the enlightenment, when access to knowledge and information was still relatively restricted, the university would eventually expand to include broader domains of knowledge including science. 

And eventually the university would become the institution humanity relied on to create flourishing through an abundance of ideas and knowledge.

But the world has changed since the Dark Ages and the Enlightenment.

The university is now no longer a place where humanity gets its best knowledge or ideas from.

It’s a place that settles for brainwashing the masses instead of training the future generations of thinkers.

The university, then, is no longer the center of human education.

Instead it’s a student loan funded graveyard where deadhead professors and other zombies of knowledge feast on the wallets of the unaware including parents and students.

To give life to our education system -- and its many paying customers --  we should make the following changes.

First it should seek to be “provincial” instead of” universal”  

That is instead of having courses for everything and activities that cater to everyone -- with the exception of the taxpayer --  the scope should be much more narrow.

Future provincial schools, for example, should exist to meet regional needs. This emphasis  would stop the all encompassing bloat that’s implied in the name “university,” and incentivize regional stakeholders to closely monitor how the intuition is doing.

Second, these provincial schools should be professional -- that is deliberate rigor must be made part of the faculty’s ethos and protected at all costs.  This is in contrast to the current ethos of the university that prioritizes appeasing different constituencies through  loose grading and resort style amenities. 

Third, the provincial school should reject government funds in an effort to keep the institution affordable. If anything these schools should be subsidized by employers, philanthropists, businesses, to keep prices low for  local populations.  This differs from the university system where resentful socialists happily burden new students with eternal debt, and whose donors’ main interest is in funding sportsball mega stadiums, dorms that bear their name while housing students who live a 24/7 party lifestyle,  and plush golf courses that most taxpayers never use. 

When these changes happen, instead of living through a second dark age, America may experience a renaissance.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government by day.  You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1

Collectivists insist that there is a class struggle.

But what it is really is going on is class cognitive dissonance. 

After all collectivists usually do not enjoy the freedom and rewards of being wealthy.

Nor are they a recipient of tender treatment therapeutically applied to the underclass.  

They’re normally right in the middle -- with most of America.

Yet because they’re unwilling to accept this fact they insist there’s a forever war between two allegedly opposing social classes.

For them the battle is between the rich and the poor, both of which they’d like to join but can’t or won’t.

And because this schizophrenia -- which literally means “split mind”  -- never resolves itself and then manifests itself as the will to destroy civilization.

Thus the socialist struggle is not real -- at least not in the materialist sense.

And it proves that the contradiction isn’t inherent to capitalism, but it is inherent in the minds of collectivist reactionaries.

For Marxists there are then three options to address this schizophrenia.

Renounce one’s belongings -- like the great Christian St. Francis of Assisi -- and become proudly poor.

Gain wealth and be proud of it like any normal successful person would do.

Accept being in the middle like the rest of us and enjoy the cosmopolitan nature of widespread commonality that spread through capitalism.

Then, instead of implicating the rest of the world in their imaginary battles, more people could live more freely.  And we’d be one step closer to utopia -- for each person who lives without cognitive dissonance makes the world a better place.

Zigmund Reichenbach has an M.A. in Philosophy from West Chester University and works as an advocate for less government by day.  You can help him combat bad ideas in politics and philosophy by donating to his work at https://ko-fi.com/zigmundreichenbach .

Follow him on X at @zreichenbach1