Intequinist being

A word “being” can be a verb, or a noun. A term “human being”, therefore can refer to a way of being/Not-doing, or it can refer to the human “Self”, doing something evil. At all humans, being of a being, and Being of beings are relevant. I think i know why the people break things around them. The frustration can become too much; it is then either about “Self” or Not-self. This is when Intequinist being becomes relevant. The word Being, being a verb, can only be relevant in group form, but then Intequinist Being still refers to Not-doing evil.

Intequinism is a new philosophy against idolatry, prioritising the ideas Truth and Love above all. In the book, available at Amazon and iBooks, it is explained why these two ideas are important, with reference to philosophy, religion and history. It is also explained how idolatry works against the two ideas. Intequinist Being is group activity, whereby the two ideas are respected above all. Because of the respect, sustainability is attained through creativity and logical reasoning. The idea Truth causes the transfer of true information among minds, which can be used by the-group to form good new ideas, to be developed. The idea Love causes order via social contract theory, rooted in universal laws: Not-doing evil to all others like selves do not want evil done to. The order, makes necessary creativity, for survival, possible. Unfortunately Intequinist being, in the singular form is dangerous due to idolatry, therefore Intequinism promotes Being, acknowledging the dangers for an individual only to respect the ideas. Idolatry inhibits creativity and logical reasoning and leads to disaster.

This article addresses economic and political aspects of Intequinism.

Maximum prices versus minimum prices in business, has never been an issue as far as i know, except partly, when revolutions changed business practice a little bit each time. Minimum prices, then did not feature. The unsustainable difference between the rich and poor, caused by maximum profit, partly caused the revolutions. Intequinist being, promotes minimum prices.

When the asking of maximum prices was taught to me, it did not bother me, because i was paying it, whilst accepting it. At the time i did not realize how the greedy cheats society. During the first 9 years of my career, it also did not bother me, because i did not set prices. However in 1999, i started my own business, and pricing was one of the most important decisions. It was a trading business, therefore the potential, for it to grow large, existed. The previous three years, whilst traveling abroad, i realized, how much cheating was happening, because i became aware of international prices and living standards. The differences in prices and living standards observed, were too big to not have an influence. Later in my career, when the idea Truth led me to academia, i had to teach maximum-profit-per-individual (empipi-i) at university, because it was implied in the teachings of maximum profit economics (without any limitations on individuals’ wealth). It probably is one of the main reasons i left academia. Forces relevant in academia, have interests in the idolatrous system, related to maximum-profit-per-individual (empipi-i). New realizations dawn frequently about how wide the maximalist cult has spread, their tentacles into every sphere of life.

When a business does not have the potential to grow large, for example, a one man professional practice, there is little reason to accept the economic theory of Intequinism, with regard to self. Limiting maximum prices is usually not relevant when working on one’s own, because the Labor Theory of capital is then not relevant. Exploitation of others’ labor, according to the Labor Theory of capital, is only relevant in group form. The Labor Theory of capital explains, prices of goods and services should only include labor costs. The profit included in prices is, according to the Labor Theory, partly, exploitation of others’ labor. Intequinism opposes the Labor Theory of Communism and Socialism, because only physical labor is regarded in it. Profit is made possible, partly by good ideas. Marx opposed all profits and he opposed good ideas, which partly made profits possible. Intequinism opposes the current allocation of profits, existing because of good ideas, and argues, those profits should be paid to the employees who have the ideas, because the ideas come into being due to their honesty and good morals. Marx’s philosophy had value with regard to the exploitation of physical labor, where good ideas are not forthcoming. If a laborer does only physical work, making a product, the design of, he did not influence, no own ideas of the laborer influenced the product. Let’s say his employer pays him $10 for a complete unit. The employer did ‘nothing’, but sells the product for $15. The $5 profit is where Marx’s philosophy is relevant. He argued the capital cost of the employer, which the employer recoups with the $5 profit, should be the cost of the state. In Communism and Socialism, the state owns capital assets/costs, because private enterprise does not exist in pure Communism and Socialism. Employers thus, in Marx’s system would have no reason to add the $5 to recoup capital investment, because the state owns the capital infrastructure making production possible. Intequinist Being or Not-doing evil, becomes relevant when the laborer adds design value to the product and because of that the employer can sell the product for $20, whilst keeping $10 profit, not paying any of the extra $5, existing due to intequity (capital of ideas), to the employee. The $5 is the main problem addressed in Intequinist being. Intequinist Being was not considered by either current Capitalism, Socialism or Communism, as far as i know.

In a one man professional practice i.e., the above problems are not relevant because he generates the ideas, do the physical work and gets all the profit. His and his family’s living expenses are the costs. It is thus clear, theories of Capitalism, Communism and Socialism exist due to people working together in groups. The theories are basically about sharing, doing and Not-doing. A one man professional practice is not feasible though, because of the mob, who murder individuals in dysfunctional legal systems. The ideas Truth and Love are not respected. Singularity and Intequinist being is always weak. Even in the medical profession, my father’s life showed a single good doctor could not sustain a high living standard, because of the influence of local mobs, who suffer Caiaphas Syndrome. Good business, needs a force, like the law, behind it. Universal laws, properly applied, contain criminal offenses, for example statutory intimidation, which favors “the-group” against “the-individual”. The rule of law, primarily exists, for “the-individual” against “the-group”. Most people, only realize this when, those close to them become dysfunctional, and the system therefore close to them stop working.

Maximum costs (in the form of salaries) become relevant, when the supply and demand for workers or sports – and other celebrities, make it possible to earn enormous amounts. Mobs, making idols of humans, and modern broadcasting technology, cause exorbitant amounts paid to celebrities. Against idolatry, communist states, limited the influence and salaries of celebrities. This reality could be one of the most important indicators of relevant philosophy. According to ancient Greek philosophy two views about the nature of “the gods and goddesses” existed. The one view reflected in Christianity is, they were people with good ideas. Good ideas referred primarily to new technology. The other view was, idols were sports and arts celebrities. Currently, sports and arts celebrities do not limit their incomes self and therefore often form foundations, to do charity work. This second view, about sports and arts celebrities, shows the most logical societal short-term paradigm, because the praise, celebrities receive, happens whilst they are not being sacrificed. It is thus not contradictory praise, whilst sacrificing the praised, as in religions. The celebrity status of artists is often interlinked with religious sacrifice, because ideas developed by artists, often originate in the “intelligence” system. I don’t know enough about how it works, to explain succinctly. The saying, “It is not over till the fat lady sings” gives an indication. As far as i know, it means, the war between good and evil, eventually, ends in opera houses, or these days, a movie or book. From my point of view the saying implies how evil the system is, because it indicates how the outlawed honest become outlaws or die for their values. The lack of Intequinist Being, which causes isolation of the honest, favors evil. “Intelligence” about the circumstances then ends at the arts, where it is used to make empipi-i in the publication industry. It could thus indicate the worst type of exploitation of humans being.

Current politics can also become a celebrity stage, when politicians are changed into “the gods and goddesses” by their followers. At politics it is more a case of “the god” in the singular mythical form, due to presidential power, which indicates extreme spinning of the mob. The main reason, this state of affairs arose, is the weakness of singularity, whereby mob people, who regard themselves “above the law”, keep control with their mythical “God”, who forgives their sins. “He” is placed in “his” position primarily to not prosecute criminals.

Could it be, the current problems of the world will be fixed by cooperation between good politicians with good ideas, and good sports and arts celebrities. Celebrities have the status to influence, but not necessarily good ideas. If the two can be combined in Divided Party, necessary change could happen. I hope it will, whilst realizing, everyone does not enjoy celebrity status, and therefore removal out of the limelight happens. I did not enjoy limelight, and never will. At school i was relatively good at sport, which gave me a kind of ‘celebrity’ status in the little town i grew up. I did not continue to pursue that lifestyle after school, because i stopped playing competitive sport, focusing on my studies. It becomes too monotonous, when a person is known only for one thing. When he is met in the street, all discussion is usually about his doing. Life is more enjoyable, not being a ‘celebrity’, in my view.

In Intequinism a dichotomy exists with regard to the ideas Truth and Love on the one side, and Beauty on the other side. I promote the ideas Truth and Love with Intequinism, and that primarily made me a “pariah”. I won’t investigate this dichotomy further here, because if it can be explained, it warrants a separate article. Beauty, not Truth and not Love, is prominent at celebrity lives.

Deciding on maximum prices does not give pleasure. It is much more enjoyable to ask lower prices, because then it is not necessary to pity others with donations of foundations, and do the praise singing of contradictory Christianity. Asking minimum prices, leaves enough cash in the pockets of buyers to not be involved with charity. With Intequinist Being, charity will be left for the state, which probably will do a better job than non-profit charity organizations, which is clearly currently failing.

If Intequinist Being could become universal, asking minimum prices, will only affect the super rich, because practically the application can only become relevant after a business has grown to a large enough size where economies of scale warrant minimum prices. Most businesses never reach such a ‘stage’. Therefore the idea is more relevant for the emotive effect, than the actual practical application, of it. The practical effect looked for, is limiting individual wealth, in order for others to have more to do and deal with. If the super rich can be convinced to not ask maximum prices, the effects will be as follows. More cash will be in the hands of buyers. Cash deposits of big corporations and the super rich, at banks, will decrease. Banks will lend less. Priests and other non-profit employees will work for the state. They will not have to do the fundraising from the super rich ‘kings’, because the state, will fund, charity work. For millennia priests and kings were in an alliance. Kings paid charity to priests, who distributed the charity to the people. Intequinist Being does not include kings nor priests, because the idolatry of singular divinity does not exist in Intequinism.

The current system was created for empipi-i, therefore the major change, Intequinism promotes, can only happen without upheaval, if leaders of large corporations come together to devise a plan to accomplish it. Current capitalist economic theories are based on empipi-i. Valuation theory for example, discounts maximum dividends of a shareholder’s shares, to calculate the value of the shares. The system thus requires maximum prices. To be part of the system ones must also follow this maximalist lunacy. The shares of public listed companies are the carriers of the values, which make retirement possible currently. It is a big dilemma the Western World is in, and the fallacious theorizing moved to the East. Most stock exchanges function with the fallacious maximalist theory, with its roots in idolatry.

5 Replies to “Intequinist being”

  1. I抎 have to check with you here. Which is not something I normally do! I get pleasure from reading a post that will make individuals think. Additionally, thanks for permitting me to remark!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *