“What is meant by a Love of
the Republic in a Democracy. A love of the republic in a democracy is a love of
the democracy; as the latter is that of equality. A love of the democracy is
likewise that of frugality. Since every individual ought here to enjoy the same
happiness and the same advantages, they should consequently taste the same
pleasures and form the same hopes, which cannot be expected but from a general
frugality. The love of equality in a democracy limits ambition to the sole
desire, to the sole happiness, of doing greater services to our country than
the rest of our fellow-citizens. They cannot all render her equal services, but
they all ought to serve her with equal alacrity. At our coming into the world,
we contract an immense debt to our country, which we can never discharge. … The
love of frugality limits the desire of having to the study of procuring
necessaries to our family, and superfluities to our country. Riches give a
power which a citizen cannot use for himself, for then he would be no longer
equal. They likewise procure pleasures which he ought not to enjoy, because
these would be also repugnant to the equality.”
Charles de Secondat, Baron de
Montesquieu, On the Spirit of the Laws
(1748)
This book was one of the
common references of the Founders.
“How sweet to live before the
new barbarism! At this extreme point of fate that will continue to dawn for a
long time, there is a great temptation to make a bed of out of fallen things, a
heaven out of shattered dreams, and settle down to wait for the irreparable
wrong—surrender and abandonment before the procession of evil.”
Bernard-Henri Levy, Barbarism With A Human Face, p. 191,
(1977
As the 2012
election approaches I feel the urge to write a bit about the world
line of the United States. I do this
aware of my co-culpability for our lot, as a card carrying member of the worst
generation, the generation of swine.
I have never belonged to one
of these “pernicious factions”, (what the Founders called political parties). Living during the period I have, politics for
me has been a spectator sport, other than the periodic voting against (never
for) a candidate. I habitually vote, if for no other reason to honor the deaths
of those who fought for me to have that right, during our revolution.
Why never for a candidate? I
was lucky or tricked by, depending on your druthers, being a child during the
space race years. It gave me the vision of a world where the promise of our
revolution; science, rationality and liberty would circle the world.
You know, that seal on the money. The truncated pyramid (knowledge) with the
all seeing eye (reason). Novus Ordo Seclorum baby!
Being a good child of the
Founders, I thought that in matters political, I should weigh decisions as to how it affects
res publica, (the public thing, the meaning of “republic”), i.e., the public
good, as opposed to my benefit, a private good. Being born late in the 20th
Century, and having a basic understanding of the sciences, made voting for available
candidates really hard.
My exposure tolerance to national and state
level political theatre has decreased since Citizen’s United, and I have been avoiding election coverage for the most part. But, my
political theatre inflow is pretty much limited this fall to:
The American Transition, What Do I Mean?
It is the path of development
of the United States of America along the following world line;
- The first revolution grounded in the principles and thought of The Enlightenment /Age of Reason.
-
The initial shared liberal ideology of the polity.
-
-
- The decline of liberalism and the rise of Neoliberalism.
The rise to dominance after 1980 of Idiota Politics (a Greek word “An idiot in Athenian democracy was someone who was characterized by self-centeredness and concerned almost exclusively with private—as opposed to public—affairs. Idiocy was the natural state of ignorance into which all persons were born and its opposite, citizenship, was effected through formalized education.”).
Most recently, the alliance
in the Republican Party between Neoliberalism, Producerism, and Dominionism, and the apparent final abandonment of the philosophy
of the Enlightenment (except for the capitalism part).
This Election and the Transition
"Pessimism is of no value unless it brings forth at the end a slender
but solid ground of certainty and refusal.
...I say we must give in less than ever before to the insupportable. I say if we cannot raise him up, we must do everything in our power to prevent man from lowering himself."
Bernard-Henri Levy, Barbarism With A Human Face, p. 192, (1977)
The re-election of President
Obama will slow the transition, but the slowing will be very little. The Democrats are no longer the children of FDR. They are the children of Clinton. The
election of Governor Romney, especially in light of his Randian-Objectivism
VP pick, could significantly increase the rate of transition. I think the world line of the
American Transition is now difficult to predict very far ahead, because:
-
The path featuring a governance structure that is a fusion of Neoliberalism, Producerism, and Dominionism, has probabilities of a number of future states, including ; a mature plutocracy, Corporatocracy, Facism, and Theocracy or some mixed variant. Assuming Republican Party ideological dominance, much will depend on the power struggle within that alliance.
Similar transitions in history, while perhaps occurring in accompaniment with a Tainter Symplification, have not also been during a period of biogeophysical change/forcing on a planetary scale. This is a major wild card of multi-linear relationships and causalities.
- The rising of a great power that is fascist (China), especially with the spector of wide spread Tainter Symplification fueled by biogeophysical forcing adds to the predictive uncertainity.
- The United States is, as a mathematician might put it, a “strange attractor”. Consequently, the near total lack of dialogue again, this election year, about the current and future biogeophysical forcing amplifies that forcing, and how it will play out in human societies.
The Little Things That Count
The abandonment of
Enlightenment Philosophy by the Republican Party has made it easier to compete.
As that abandonment’s great prophet, President Reagan said, “Facts are such
stupid things.” This has allowed them to rhetorically break free from the bonds
of rationality, and sail the seas of fear and superstition. The message is keyed to the lowest common denominator. Most Democrats have not really started to grasp the enormity of this change in their
opponent, and that may be their doom.
Anti-intellectualism is In
U.S. politics is not new. Consider Democrat Andrew Jackson’s rise to power in
the 1820’s. But the alliance that is the Republican party has taken it, refined
it and bottled it into their anti-science brand. At the same time, their
consultants use the latest science to craft a communication/media strategy that
aims purely for the limbic/emotional
response. The Democrats appear to me to not doing this, or when trying, to
aim way to high. True, many Democrats I know, at times seem to be loath to leave the
sinking ship of the Age of Reason, and perhaps that contributes to their
communication problems. They seem slow in adapting to the post-factual
“marketplace” of ideas.
Who Woulda Thunk It
Ending on a positive note. How
many people one hundred years ago, in 1912, could imagine a presidential race
between an African American and a Mormon?
Posts
