Skip to content
August 20, 2013 / Dale Melchin

I Can’t Win

Or so it seems.
For the last several months a friend of mine from work and I had the ongoing discussion of our worldviews.  I’ve shared with him my vision for my future and what I think will fix the ills of society.  My friends name is Corey and I’ll leave it at that.
My view: Individualistic, Cooperative, Moral, Ethical Capitalism, with rigorous spirituality and personal development will be the thing that fixes societies woes.  That combined with rigorous spiritual, physical, classical and practical education.
Corey’s view: we need to get back to where everyone is doing everything for themselves.  No selling, no marketing.  We build our own houses, kill our own animals, and grow our own food.  That will reinstill morality into the masses.  Also all rich people are scumbags because they want to keep the masses from succeeding.
The problem with Corey’s idea it involves collapsing the existing system in our country.  My ideas only require long term modifications.  I agree with it in principle b/c it involves high amounts of self reliance with no medium of exchange but bartering.
The problem with my view, is that it can be subject to corruption as it has which causes problems for those who are playing fair.  But the potential for growth and change is nearly limitless. The system can be proved by adding reform to it.
The problem with Corey’s view is that it would stunt so much potential growth.  We’d effectively have to start all over again. 
I think a synthesis of these two positions would be the best option.  Teach people how to work, early.  Use farming, use building, and use anything.  My idea is to borrow from monastic orders to get my objectives done.
Nevertheless, it’s of the utmost importance to do what works and to use principle to get those things done.


  1. thoughtfullyprepping / Aug 20 2013 4:26 pm

    Corey has my vote.
    After all the worse of the world has been caused by money, religion, and politics.
    We need that hard reset Corey desires.
    It will be messy, hard, and may not work BUT the alternative is more of the same.

    • Dale Melchin / Sep 1 2013 10:06 am

      “A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, con a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” –Robert Heinlein

      I agree with this statement and it sums up the discussion of the post pretty nicely. The truth is since we are proactive creatures, we don’t have to wait for a disaster to become self-sufficient. Since we are proactive, we can prevent the “impending doom” that everyone talks about, and I question our net ability to stop it.

      My problem is while it may be eminent, we shouldn’t desire it. Its like trying to egg on the day of Christ’s return. It will be good when it happened, but it will be scarier than all get out when it does happen. We shouldn’t “want” it. Unlike Christ’s return, this eminent hard reset is going to cause problems for a lot of people including preppers. You are basically wishing a bunch of bad things to happen to a lot of people. To me, that is morally reprehensible.

      • thoughtfullyprepping / Sep 1 2013 12:56 pm

        Morals, Morality? Such quaint words often used to justify evil carried out by a few for someones version of good over evil.

        Wars, conflicts, interventions even, and the subsequent starvation or death of many are usually started by either politicians, RELIGION, greed or ideology.
        The antagonists nearly always claiming the moral high ground whilst they carry out their evil actions.

        When you next watch women and kids being slaughtered on TV for political gain RELIGION, greed or ideology or as a result of an intervention by “the good guys”, can anyone moral support the killers of such innocents even if it’s by the hand of your own government? I can’t.

        Is it immoral or moral to wish that evil is eliminated by the destruction of the evil doers?
        If it’s moral, you are approving an evil action to defeat evil.
        If its immoral you must be approving of the original evil.
        Stupid words are moral or immoral.

        To use Christ in the argument?
        His agents have a checkered history too.
        Dare I cite “Kill them all, God will know his own.”
        Words attributed to Arnold Amaury, a Cistercian Monk who in 1209 sanctioned the massacre of something like 20,000 men, women and children.

  2. Dale Melchin / Sep 1 2013 6:30 pm

    Each religion started off well, each religion has had a checkered history. Mostly because the people who have lead the religion on a political level have hijacked the leadership of said religion to their own ends. I think you and I would agree that’s morally reprehensible.

    The point of religion is not to impose a level of morality on everyone else while the leaders do whatever they wish. The point of religion, or ancient authentic traditions is to facilitate the transformation of the human person from something earthly into something God-like. There are elements of every religion that follow this charismatic construct more closely than everyone else. The reason why we don’t see them is the simple fact that they are too busy connecting with God and doing good deeds out of the sight of the public eye. I’m not proud of the checkered history of the Christian or any other faith, but that’s not going to make me walk away from it.

    While most of the Atheists in this country are decent people, I can site examples of atheists who had no sense of morality. Stalin and his successors. Mao Zedong and his successors, Hitler (although there is some debate as to Hitler’s sense of spirituality, but I digress.) Everyone is capable of doing bad things, we just don’t want to admit it so we point to something outside of ourselves to deflect that potentiality.

    As for a hard reset in this country, the politicians and people who contribute to the country’s problems may deserve to be on the business end of it, there would be millions more who would suffer or die as a result of said hard reset. Needlessly. Sure, they may have been irresponsible or may have unwittingly contributed to said problems for themselves and the public, by not being responsible, but that is different from someone who is selfish to the expense of others.

    My entire point is that we are still in a position where we could get things figured out and pull things back from the brink so to speak.

    Now, to get this blog back on track. I’m setting the expectation that I’m locking comments for this post. If you wish to engage in dialog please feel free to contact me at Thanks.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: