Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The Grey Front (4th Position) Order of Governance and Dominion

The Grey Front (4th Position) Order of Governance and Dominion

Now, as we find ourselves in the world today as human beings seeking pleasure, enjoyment, fulfillment and meaning beyond the necessary requirements of survival, we see the breakdown of all systems of which we have designed to keep us afloat and beyond the state of nature and are forced to merely subsist and survive.

We see now can clearly see that the great game of life has been rigged. We now look, in jealousy and anger, at fruits of social engineering enacted slowly throughout the 20th century -- given solely to those whom, by chance and collusion, happened to occupy the seats of political and cultural power - primarily after the conclusion of the Second World War. They are given the benefits of astounding amounts of wealth, privilege, luxury, and idleness. This tiny oligarchical cabal holds these benefits and the common person is relegated to a state of degeneration, toil, and demoralization that can no longer be tolerated.

One is quick to ponder that, surely, as humans, with our gift of intellect and inventiveness, our purpose upon this planet is not to live as beasts but to live with grace and peaceful beneficence. These qualities now are quite lacking throughout the entirety of human civilization in all quarters; whether it be in the so called “first world,” in developing nations, or in chaotic ungoverned zones of conflict and neglect. 

Where once stood the mighty kingdom of Khmet there is now riots, starvation, and corrupt warlords conscripting children to fight their insane wars. Where there once flourished the deeply spiritual and enlightened land of the Mayans, we see a vicious police state. Where the Persian Empire was once the hub of culture and trade for all the world, it is now enslaved by a an ultra-zealous Priest Cast ruling with an iron fist by their twisted interpretation of a religion that once revered knowledge, gnosis and mysticism. The examples one could give are endless.

Upon reflection of this state we wonder if it is human nature to fail at all attempts to form order and governance from which to operate where dignity and meaning is afforded to all. Some systems of political formation fail for reasons of inherent inequality that doom it to be revolted against. Other systems are merely failures due to a sophistry of attempting to reach towards utopia.

We see now in the Western world a battle of corrupt oligarchs hiding behind false ideaology. What we find today is now a continuing thesis of global citizenship and the abolition of the nation-state concept, and the and antithesis of nationalism, regionalism and the basic tribal instinct that seems still bred into the beingness of humanity.

It is the position of some that tribalism is an artifact of culture and thus merely a social construct that can be deconstructed and “bred out” through education and training. If so, then through these ends we can begin a true global cooperation and create a one world State. However, this is predicated on all individuals accepting and “buying-in” to the principles of this supposed One World Utopia, whether this one world be socialist, communist, libertarian, technocratic, etc. That even the Utopians can not agree on the structure of a global state is quite damning to their arguments.

Now the anti-thesis of this, the nationalist viewpoint is that Nations are Tribes, borders are impermeable or semi-permeable at best, and that national sovereignty is a concept that must be upheld at all cost. This would be considered a traditionally conservative view of the nature of the body politic. Again, however, this presupposes that a nation consists of like-minded, fully-committed citizens, homogeneous in ethnicity, who agree with with zeal the political structure of the state and the culture in which they are born. With the continual existence of political dissidence and counter-culture we see this is not an accurate account of things as they are or can be.

It is now, you might suspect, that we come to some synthesis, where a new way comes forth to solve all the problems currently plaguing this world. It is unfortunate however, that such a synthesis will not be forthcoming, as in all practical and pragmatic overviews of history and current events we see that such syntheses are again merely sophistic attempts at utopia, and doomed to fail due, not to the tribal nature of humanity, but the individualistic nature of humanity.

What neither collectivists nor individualists seem to realize is the dual tendency within humans to be both collectivist and individualist. To base an entire system of governance upon either is folly, as the presumptions of the planners and political philosophers fail to spot the holes and gaps within their systems and orders.

It is quite clear that a global collectivism is not sustainable, and not achievable. Current attempts at “globalization” use rhetoric of the human species as one, as that nations merely divide us rather than provide us with structure, and that we can not advance as a species until we all come together as one in global citizenship. But this is a mask behind which sits powerful, corrupt moneyed cabals looking either to gain more power, more wealth, or both. The idealists on the ground are merely the pawns of the cynics in the halls of power - the useful idiots.

And, at the same time, the notion of a global free market economy where nations cooperate and compete to advance the human species is also based upon rhetoric and propaganda where a “free market” is not what is being promoted, but is rhetoric and propaganda designed by those who desire a corporatist totalitarianism, of transnational corporations supplanting the governments and cultures of the world. Those individuals who seek a true free market where monopolies and trusts cannot form and conspiracies and collusion cannot be concocted are also idealists reaching for a non-existent utopia.

One can simply look at how the rhetoric of free-market economics is used to prop up a multitude of corrupt and disturbing self-serving systems: such as the war on drugs used to pad the pockets and cells of private prisons and pharmaceutical corporations; where wars are waged simply to profit the engineers and producers of weapons, who then give kickbacks to those who concocted what is now called euphemistically, “police actions,” but are truly just vulgar displays of state-sponsored terrorism for capitalistic gain. These wars have far more in common with the purges of Stalin than with “humanitarian intervention,” as the psychopathic war criminals call them.

Vice is criminalized and fear is mongered simply so that the elite can continue to suck the life out of the nation they profess fealty towards, as well as any other nation that happens to stand in the way of their profit-making endeavors. 

So then, it seems that in our view, we must have to choose a side as no synthesis can be reached. Since a global world of peace and unity had no evidence of viability, we must side with the concept of the nation-state, as they exist in reality and have some semblance of order. Yet, we can advance this line of thinking towards a healthier and more egalitarian society. But again, there are many ways to carry on the administration and policy of a nation-state, and we are faced with considering the options so far handed down to us through history and political philosophy. We must consider both the collective and individual impulses of humans and what definition of equality is most appropriate for a pragmatic and sustainable order of governance, as well as the nature of its dominion.

Communism has failed, and its stepping-stone of pure Socialism seems to lead nations into economic disaster. Free-market Capitalism is a fantasy story written in dubious textbooks, and Mixed-market Capitalism leads ultimately to a corporatist oligarchical rule over the citizenry, who become dehumanized and turned into units of human resource -- assets that are disposable.

Then we come to Fascism, a product of the futurist ideologues of the early 20th century proposed to solve these problems. From the outset of its actual use to govern, however, we again see vulgar displays of state power, terror, marginalization of scapegoats blamed for the ills of society and a complete disregard for the individualistic nature of humanity.

Then finally we have a pure Technocracy, sometimes referred to as “Scientific Totalitarianism,” and there are many who propose that this is a good system and even one that, unlike Communism, is the system that the natural process of the historical dialectic will reach. We have seen the dystopias that have come from all previous orders of governance, and therefore we must conclude that eventually this system will become dystopic. We must laugh when presented with the idea that scientists and technicians will not be corrupted and use the power given to them for the betterment of themselves only and not the good of the nation as a whole.

Thus we reach the conclusion that any order of governance will eventually lead to tyranny and despotism. This fatalistic condition must be first and foremost in the mind of any construction of general order.

The pure Nationalist theory is one of localism and non-universality. It is based on the concept of the tribe. Tribes are different, thus all nations are unique in character and structure. All previous forms of governance we have examined thus far have claimed universality -- that they can be picked up and used within any population or group for the purpose of order. And yet we see old cancers still growing upon the concept of Nationalism -- religious division, racialist exclusion to the point of genocide, and yet again: the corruption of the political elite living above and not beholden to the order and laws set down for the citizenry.

Within the tribe we see collectivism: mutual cooperation, individuals identifying as part of a larger group, and the desire to commit action towards the greater good of that group. Yet we also see the urge for self-expression, self-advancement -- individualism. We even see dissent and quarreling. Most all forms of government seek to either squash dissent through violence or threat of violence, or the use of propaganda to mock and marginalize dissent. This is a reactionary impulse, a collectivist impulse against individualism that threatens to destabilize a perceived status quo.

So then, how could a Nationalist order of governance maintain both its stability and its integrity? Again, we must acknowledge the futility of utopia and the inevitability of despotism. This is where democracy fails; those in power are fully aware of how to manipulate the masses to stay in power and wield this power unjustly, becoming further entrenched and taking for themselves further power. When popular opinion can be so easily engineered it becomes a necessity to give voice to dissent. This is a difficult balancing act.

Therefore, a state-run media is also a necessity. Propaganda is necessary to ensure stability, to promote the unity of a nation and provide an edifying and informative alternative to a free press whose impulse is always towards banality and sensationalism. The citizenry must be educated, informed, and given the tools for critical and contextual analysis.

Therefore there must also be free public education. Yet the state must take a hands-off approach to education, for it is the impulse of the state is to indoctrinate rather than educate. We must be willing to trust educators to produce curricula and a rigorous, fully-rounded course of education. Yet educators must be accountable to the state, not for ideological or political reasons but merely for competence.

We must recognize that not all youth are suited to all things -- while all citizens are to be granted equal rights, liberties and freedom, it is a fallacy that all people are created equal. Some will excel at sports, some in arts, some in science, some in philosophy and some for skilled labour. These talents should be noticed and nurtured by the education system, this is essential for the advancement of the Nation and the human race in general. It will also instill a natural, true sense of self-worth and self-esteem in the student, rather than the fake “participation award” self-esteem nurtured within current Western education systems.

Soft power is the power of a benevolent Nation-State. State violence must be eschewed, yet national security must be reasonably assured. Standing armies and huge caches of artillery are a signal to the world that the Nation abides by a policy of aggression. This is not stable, this is not wise, as it provokes the very thing it attempts to prevent -- war. War is not a sport, it is not a tool to be brought out easily. It is the very last recourse to be used in the defense of the Nation from external aggression. It is best to not engage in the imperial impulse, as this leads to uncomfortable alliances to achieve that goal, alliances that can result in wars that have no bearing on the security of the Nation.

Within the Nation, crime and violent dissent is an issue for a police force. The culture of “the blue line of silence” must not be permitted: corruption within the police is a cancer that ultimately leads to dissolution and demoralization of the citizenry. Those who join the police force must have the right mindset for the job - it is not for the free exercise of power but the enforcement of law and order. They must shown to be as impervious to the impulse of greed and self-promotion as possible, as the police are an extension of the collective impulse of the Nation. Of course they should not be denied promotion for good police work, simply that their mindset is geared towards the good of the nation -- this mindset is especially important for police. When criminal misconduct occurs inside the police force, incentives should be given to whistleblowers. The goal of the police should not be to clear cases no matter what, according to the statistics and quotas of political construction, but to maintain the public order and the citizens' trust in the Nation.

It must be stated that the people are the Nation and the Nation is the people. When this social construct is in place and explicitly expressed, then there is no fear of revolution. If revolution comes, it will be to restore the order of governance set down by the Nation, not to install some alien system. Provocateurs and rabble-rousers will be seen for what they are, not dissenters but those who want the seat of power for themselves in order to install tyranny. Therefore, the government must be transparent to the citizens. It must broadcast in all media the reasons for its actions and its actions must be done for the good of the Nation -- for the good of the people.

We see then, that democracy is not essential to a productive, positive and beneficent Nation. While term limits are essential to ensure that those who hold the reins of government and wish to abuse them do not get long to enact their devious plans, it is not necessary to hold elections.

Perhaps though, we should have elections, referendums, and public polling. Yet all of these are subject to manipulation and coercion. Elections can be bought, referendums can be passed that are disastrous to the health of the Nation, and public polling can be intentionally misleading. The root of the problem is the connection between corporations and politicians. The Nation should not be run by politicians, it should be run by statesmen. A career politician is simply a con-man and a parasite. There should be no concept of corporate personhood and “campaigns” as such should not be run. There must be no political parties, not even a single party. Although this would, of course, create a de facto single party system, it should not be given a name or identity. The people should identify with the Nation, not a political party.

We suggest a system of nominations that come directly from the people. Nominations for cabinet members and other public offices should come from the grassroots. With a system in place, once a person reaches a certain number of nominations they will be put in the running for that position which they have been nominated. These nominees’ qualifications, positions, agendas and so on should be broadcast through the channels of the state-run media. Of course, it is inevitable that certain persons will receive attention, either condemnation or adulation, from the free press; this is healthy, as the citizens know that the state media will only put out the bare facts and that the free press will put out whatever it wants to.

Elections, when held, should be quick and easy. There should be no need to leave ones home in order to vote, they should be able to vote online, vote from phone, or be sent a ballot through the mail, easily and without bureaucratic entanglements. Voter fraud is a concern in any method of conducting elections, as state manipulation is always a possibility. Therefore a result that shocks and upsets the populace should be reexamined by some independent committee, allowing its dominion to supersede on these matters to ensure the public trust.

Or, perhaps, this complex and fallible system should be avoided altogether. The question is then, who speaks for the people, who is to be the embodiment of the Nation? A singular person is undesirable, a noble tyrant is just one more fiction of failed governments of the past.

Moving on, we find more concerns -- what social structures should be the dominion of the state and which should be left to private companies and corporations? A libertarian would say that, in their perfect world, all amenities and necessities can be provided by private entities. There is no real world evidence shown that this is the case, and whenever private entities are awarded contracts, graft and corruption and corner-cutting are sure to follow. The Nation, and the people’s, best interest is to be free from the concerns of mere survival. Food, shelter, clothing, and an opportunity for work is the responsibility of the Nation to the people. This principle of populist socialism should be embraced, not only to promote the well being and opportunity to pursue personal, individual excellence among the citizens, but also as a bulwark against the encroachment of corporatism.

So then, how should the Nation’s relationship be with private enterprise? In almost every form of governance this relationship is a contentious one. It seems unavoidable. Capitalists will always maintain that if not given enough breathing room they will not produce goods and services, there are other nations in the world more favorable. Yes, there are nations that allow slave labor, child labor, egregiously low tax rates for corporations and these nations are run by the corporations, the levers of state power pulled by these monsters who see humans as machines and wealth as the only measurement of success and well-being.

Then there are other nations that have nationalized nearly every industry and centrally plan their economy. Their bureaucrats desperately attempt to produce the goods and services desired by the people, and have historically always fallen short of the task. A centrally planned economy is inefficient and equally susceptible to waste, graft and corner-cutting as any other economy. There is no genius who has developed an economic system that works perfectly, except within though experiments and hypothetical scenarios.

We must ask, what is the dominion of the Nation? What do the people own? Certainly, the natural resources within the Nation are the common property of the people, therefore any industry that uses these resources should be nationalized. The profits of these national, public industries are then given to the state, reducing the tax burden on both the citizenry and private industry.

If the public trust is broken by any nationalized industry, those in charge of its operation must face criminal charges and their subordinates (who were not complicit in whatever racket they were pulling) should be promoted to take their spots.

It is unavoidable that stable Nation must allow private enterprise. But a corporate charter must be given only to an enterprise that understands its role is to provide for the public good, not merely collect profits. Strict regulation and accountability is a must: advertisements must be regulated, quality must be assured, bribery and corruption must be rooted out. Corporations that break the law must have their charter revoked, and they must be exposed within the state-run media - hoisted up and ridiculed for their greed, along with whatever judicial punishment they face. It is sad to say that a mixed-market economy is necessary, but all evidence points to this as fact.

But it is not the captains of industry that produce jobs for the people, it is the people’s desires for goods and services that create jobs. A company sees that a thing is wanted, so it moves to produce it, knowing that this will generate profit. To produce this thing, workers are needed. This is the chain of job creation. And limits on profit is not necessary, as corporations would wield no political power as it would be a crime to bribe or give “gifts” to public officials.

What then if this system is still seen as too harsh? Well then, the state can provide subsidies for entrepreneurs, who then go on to provide for the public the goods and services they want. When they start to turn enough profit, the subsidy will be discontinued. If they eventually fail in their endeavor, it is not in the interest of the state to bail them out - they were given the opportunity and, as neoliberals love to spout (but not follow): The government cannot pick winners and losers.

But now we get into the matter of money. Where would all the money come from to pay for the basic social services, the police, and a functioning military? Of course we must tax. But their are other ways to generate revenue beyond taxation. Scientific and technological research and development is a major component of this. A Nation that can produce new technology and applications can sell it to the world, and when the inventors of these advancements are hired by the government, it belongs to the government. Of course, it would not be fair, it would not be of high integrity to hold on to these patents permanently. Perhaps after a period of three or five years, the inventors are given full rights to these inventions and advancements and may do with them how they please.

A Nation, however, must always be wary of outside influence from the large, transnational conglomerates. Export tariffs can be low, but import tariffs should be set at a level that encourages the production of goods and services within the Nation, but perhaps not at a level too high to make it impossible for people to buy things exported from other places, as this causes unrest and displeasure with the government

And finally we must come again to the the nature of the Nation-state itself. The citizens must be committed to the Nation, they must have a profound sense of nationalism, a true and honest love for the Nation. This can only come from a united cause and a trust in the social construct. What then is a uniting cause? Some nations have chosen racial pride, religion, ideological purity, and others that are outdated, unruly, vulgar and non-egalitarian. A Nation with integrity must afford all citizens the same rights, liberties and freedoms. Whatever immigration policies a Nation adopts, it is unlikely they will find themselves in the current position of ethnic or religious homogeneity, and the true test of a citizen should not be dependent on factors beyond their control: what ethnicity, sex, gender, or sexual orientation. Nor should religion have any factor.

What is important is -- do they feel united? Do they appreciate the culture of the Nation? Are they willing participants in the social contract? Do they have love for the Nation? If not, this can pose a problem. If they are merely discontented and dissent to some degree, this is fine. But if they disagree with the fundamental principles of the Nation? What to do?

One possible answer is to establish an international confederacy which would make it easy for such a person to leave the Nation. This must be a confederacy however! Any sort of federation or union takes from the Nation its dominion, this can not be allowed. A Nation should not care about what goes on in other nations as long as it doesn't affect the national security. It can form an international confederacy with other nations which have differing principles or ideologies, and thus it can be easy for the truly malcontent to leave and go to another nation, or republic, or democracy, or whatever.

When some make the glib statement “if you don’t like it, then leave,” we must assume they don’t understand the difficulty of expatriation. If expatriation is made easy, then the Nation will not have problems with citizens unwilling to assimilate and participate. But we must maintain integrity - this must be a voluntary decision and deportation should not be used to dispose of someone perceived of as unwanted. Only serious crimes, significant disruption, conspiracies and collusion should result in the stripping of citizenship and subsequent exile.

So then we return to what unites a Nation? Simply put, it is tribalism. It is the belief that your way is the best way, that your nation is great, that you feel wanted and have something to give to make the nation even greater. And the opportunity to engage in the business of making the Nation greater is the most important opportunity that can be granted. In so many countries today, there is despair and alienation. There is no feeling of national spirit because the nations many live in do not care about them or want them to get involved. The world is twisted and backwards, the citizens are seen as a burden to the elite. The avenues of involvement and glorification are narrowed to let only a select, chosen few through. This is not healthy, this is not stable and it is not beneficent.

A great Nation finds out what a citizen is good at, and gives them opportunities to master whatever that is not only for their own individual pride but for the pride of being in a nation that upholds the social contract. Therefore it is essential to make it easy for people to excel at what they do best, whether it be the arts, science, literature, philosophy, engineering, design, etc. Even if they can only excel at skilled labour, this should be cherished, for any Nation, manufacturing must come from within. When we begin to import manufactured goods, we take a job away from someone who could have pride in perfecting a skill, in their resourcefulness and efficiency.

The promotion of national arts, of our scientists and technicians, of our great poets and writers, of our industry and agriculture, of our athletes and heroes, of our own culture, this is essential for the unity and strength of the Nation. It is what truly makes the people feel human, to feel important - and not through some false sense of invented exceptionalism. Because, for everything a Nation can showcase, some citizen has it in their mind that they can do even better. The personal individualistic impulse must be tied in with the collective connection to the Nation, and this is how it can be done.