(SOURCE)
Otherwise known as the European Economic Recovery Plan, what came to be known as:
The Marshall Plan was a package loan of 12 billion (120 billion in Dec. 2016 fiat) to World War II torn nations across Western Europe. Its secondary goal – which was equally successful – was a “policy of containment” for the spread of communism into collapsed capitalist economies. Prior to, but in relation with the Marshall Plan was The Truman Doctrine – which was ultimately military (not economic) aid to Turkey and Greece as a state deterrent to the revolutionary idiosyncrasies of communism. As a result, European economies grew at a rapid rate; the consequential steel and coal industries and regulations gave rise to the rudimentary framework for today’s European Union.
What it has to do with Steemit:
I made this post on Steemit 8 months ago:
A bridge between CAPITALISM & blockchain technology! (Steemit Exclusive)
It's still relevant - actually more so, considering the American government's malfeasance and incumbency as the most armed people in history. I still think this is the best channel to build some semblance of decentralization around the concept.
What does the Marshall Plan set precedence for today?
The European Economic Recovery Plan establishes an objective precedence for a global economic recovery plan; 'humanitarian equity' to (counter-) balance today’s credit-driven hypercapitalist & militant attitudes with Marxist & social justice ideologies; in more reductive terms – a practical alliance between progressive and conservative, liberal and republican, left and right. This proposed “global economic recovery plan”, I sum up under the moniker – Concept Zero henceforth to elucidate the necessary absent cause* effects that would be critical in the achievement of the objectives entailed. These objectives may also be summed up in a slogan:
“Always working toward the larger picture – having all that we want and none of what others need.”
This may have a particularly Marxist tone to it in reflection of the slogan:
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
However, the Concept Zero slogan leaves more open the distribution factor – which is usually implemented by a socialized state apparatus. To that effect - the notion that: self-sustaining is an ultimate virtue; but it may only be taught & not enforced, replicated but not simulated - is a particularly useful analysis for autonomous societies.
Concept Zero Overview - Basic Objective Points
• A goodwill measure as well as a practical restructuring.
• Persuade an administration to do the right, wise, & just actions.
• Employ large and multiple sectors of U.S. populace and industry.
• Eliminate federal deficit spending and debt held by the public.
• Reduce the overall national debt.
• Alleviate the refugee crisis & mitigate economic migration.
• Intellectually combat radical extremist ideologies/terrorism.
• Maintain the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency (via complimentary cryptocoin.)
What's the point? (Addressing Nihilism)
America is on the edge of something unnamed - it's not quite fascism or totalitarianism, but something needing some serious metaphysical & categorical parsing (NOT PARROTING!).
America is the heir to legal realism - which is bothersome in light of the daily contradictions.
Marshall's commencement speech highlights them - exposing how off-course America (as a nation) is historically.
“. . .the world situation is very serious. That must be apparent to all intelligent people. I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. Furthermore, the people of this country are distant from the troubled areas of the earth and it is hard for them to comprehend the plight and consequent reactions of the long-suffering peoples, and the effect of those reactions on their governments in connection with our efforts to promote peace in the world. . .”
“. . . The remedy lies in breaking the vicious circle and restoring the confidence of the European people in the economic future of their own countries and of Europe as a whole. The manufacturer and the farmer throughout wide areas must be able and willing to exchange their products for currencies the continuing value of which is not open to question.
Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. Such assistance, I am convinced, must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative. Any government that is willing to assist in the task of recovery will find full co-operation I am sure, on the part of the United States Government. Any government which maneuvers to block the recovery of other countries cannot expect help from us. Furthermore, governments, political parties, or groups which seek to perpetuate human misery in order to profit therefrom politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States.
It is already evident that, before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government. It would be neither fitting nor efficacious for this Government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a program designed to place Europe on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so. The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all European nations. An essential part of any successful action on the part of the United States is an understanding on the part of the people of America of the character of the problem and the remedies to be applied. Political passion and prejudice should have no part. With foresight, and a willingness on the part of our people to face up to the vast responsibility which history has clearly placed upon our country, the difficulties I have outlined can and will be overcome.
I am sorry that on each occasion I have said something publicly in regard to our international situation, I've been forced by the necessities of the case to enter into rather technical discussions. But to my mind, it is of vast importance that our people reach some general understanding of what the complications really are, rather than react from a passion or a prejudice or an emotion of the moment. As I said more formally a moment ago, we are remote from the scene of these troubles. It is virtually impossible at this distance merely by reading, or listening, or even seeing photographs or motion pictures, to grasp at all the real significance of the situation. And yet the whole world of the future hangs on a proper judgment. It hangs, I think, to a large extent on the realization of the American people, of just what are the various dominant factors. What are the reactions of the people? What are the justifications of those reactions? What are the sufferings? What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?”
(SOURCE)