Every classical governing type claims that it is only after the best for its people. The distinction in their classifications is by the method they use to attempt their ideals, not the ideals.
You have to keep reminding yourself that with a SAM Co-op, your goal is not to go out and change the world, but rather to take very good care of your own co-op. Let others do as they wish as long as they are not attacking you in some way. So you are actually in a different market than globalists. SAM Co-ops are much more capitalistic in that sense. The difference from traditional capitalism is that SAM Co-ops are constitutionally confined so they cannot grow into money grubbing huge monopolies.
And even more, the manner in which SAM Co-ops function forces membership deliberation over their own lifestyle issues. By their own laws, an individual cannot simply start doing things in a divergent way from their own community decisions and if they did, the encroaching cancer would become pretty apparent very quickly. And that would immediately demand that compensating deliberation concerning how to handle the new influence begin. Perhaps the new divergence is a good thing, “Let’s rationally discuss it among ourselves in Resolution Debate”. New ways of doing things can spring up and be established very quickly because there is no huge dogmatic mass population to convince of new ways.
Of course if that one changing cell is seen by surrounding SAM Co-ops to be disobeying its own constitution, the entire cell would suddenly have a new enemy. It wouldn’t be wise to act counter to your own constitution. That is why they call it a “constitution” - it keeps things together. If they want to do things differently, it might take only an hour or two to amend their own rules in a proper manner and thus avoid being detected as a cancer and then go on doing things in that different way. What is critical is that the entire cell membership was considered and recorded before any changes were allowed.
Pressures are easily managed, diverted, and/or rationally compensated by such a manner and that makes it difficult to oppress or hypnotize people into anything else. It is not impossible to destroy a SAM Co-op, but it takes such excessive measures, extreme obfuscation and interference, that it gets very expensive for the oppressor, much more so than merely oppressing and controlling scattered individuals and even much more so than handling street gangs.
The much greater burden is upon the larger self-centered oppressor. It is far easier for a larger entity to simply spell out what it wants and rationally work with the Co-ops, who are themselves, not aggressively seeking control over anyone else and provably doing nothing regionally illegal.
I really didn’t mean to divert from the UBI discussion to this extent. But in the long run, if you want to raise the quality of life for ALL people, start by doing it for yourself by compartmentalizing in a rational manner, a Constitution for Rational Harmony:
I’m sure that it could be worded better, but the point is, stop trying to fix the world until you can fix/help your own friends - support that which supports you. That is exactly what "they" do. But keep it small. FC might even call it “Self-valuing”.
