Thursday, September 20, 2012

We're back...with a question...

Wow.  6 months go by fast.  Well, politics in general have turned me off so much I couldn't see any point in writing.  It seems to go into a great void and it wasn't making me feel any better.  But...I have managed to loose a bit of my hard won cynicism and am back.  Sorry about that.

Finally I have gotten far enough away from politics to look at the competing ideologies as a study of systems, questioning them from a bit of a distance.  And the basic question I have for anyone is this:


I would suggest that history proves that answer to be NO.

Democracy in one form or another...Greece in ancient times comes to mind...has not lasted, crumbling in the face of challenges from without the country's borders.

Communism, a world-conquering ideology, has never succeeded in sustaining itself.

Dictatorships have, likewise, only lasted for limited periods only to be destroyed...usually from within.

So, my own (and your) preferences aside, what does historical perspective say about governance?

It seems to me that the problem is not with ideologies, and it is not with the form of government. They all have much to offer various people with various points of view that seemingly make the existence of mankind either better or more organized.


Consider the dichotomies.  Man universally utters cries for justice, fairness and kindness.  But man's actions show a general disregard for justice, fairness and kindness unless it is directed at least in a constant sense and never when it involves self-deprivation.  We can be kind for awhile, but when push comes to shove, its number one, baby.

And different individuals have different genetic tendencies for defining what is "good" and "pleasurable."  A Mother Theresa sees helping others as "good" and "Pleasurable" and turns away from any other existence.  A Manson sees hurting and killing others as "good" and "pleasurable."  And the rest of us fall somewhere between these two extremes, but never settling on an enduring majority view of where we stand on those definitions.

And that leads us to the governmental choices we make, first as to form, then as to those that will act as the representatives of whatever form we settle on...for now.

So...with that in mind let's briefly consider the benefits and practicality of the various governmental ideologies from the standpoint of practicality and efficiency (I will hold for another time a discussion of the reasons for having government at all).

The two most practical and efficient would be the Dictatorship and the absolute Democracy.  Why? Because they can dispense with contrary arguments and problems immediately, providing a sense of responsiveness and eliminating strife.  A Dictatorship would eliminate (that means "kill") all opposition to his points of view, leaving a society and group in complete (at least outwardly) agreement.  The Democracy, unfettered by any concern for minority "rights", would respond to that majority by eliminating (yep...that means "kill" too) all non-conforming points of view.  These two approaches have the advantage of affecting a genetic disposition to a point of view, since those not in conformity would be killed, preventing any non-conforming progeny.

Well...if so efficient, why haven't any pure democracies or Dictatorships survived?  Well, Dictatorship is hard work and there is no vacation.  Putting someone else in charge while you take a vacation is libel to leave you out of a job when your return...and as I have always said, the best form of government is absolutely a Dictatorship...providing I am it.  So...dictators make enemies, fail to kill all those enemies, and one of them eventually takes over.  But that is short lived because by that time the masses have become disillusioned with the form of government since they are not universally happy;  they don't want a replacement, they want to try something new, so the replacement doesn't last long.

Absolute democracies fall to the same fate and for the same reason; unhappiness with the status quo leads to experiments, all of which weaken the government because of expanded an fractured direction...until it collapses under it's own weight.

How about Lenin/Marxist/Communism (world-wide ideology), or Socialism (nationalistic form of communism)?  These identify the dangers of individuals at the top and try to focus on universal "fairness" and "goodness."  The problem is that a majority of mankind is oriented only to those ideals when it applies directly to themselves.  Over time, all people see themselves as "fairly"deserving more than others.  That, of course means that ultimately all see themselves as being the recipient of unfair treatment.  That leads to working less and ultimately to everyone sinking to the lowest common denominator...which itself keeps sinking.  That is why the U.S.S.R. ultimately failed; it combined all the weaknesses of both the commune and the dictatorship with socialistic overtones.

Capitalism is not, strictly speaking, a governmental form, but it is an ideology of which government plays a resented and inefficient part.  It has always survived, even in communist regimes...although in badly kept secret while officially being prohibited.  Why?  Because it feeds on the human nature to benefit oneself.

Government in any form lasts...and, arguably, grows more acceptable and becomes stronger...when it honors and encourages Capitalism.  It allows man to strive, overcome others, and that results in kindness to those less avaricious, greedy or able which is then defined as "justice" and "good" by the majority.  It allows the appearance of moral virtue even as it acts in other directions.

Governments of all kind start their inevitable slide to destruction and oblivion when they lose sight of their secondary position in the existence of mankind; when they start thinking that they are in control instead of being supportive they interfere with the capitalistic nature of man and that leads man to destroy that government.

It has happened throughout history...and, absent some scientific discovery, and implementation,  of some genetic operation that can be done to all of will continue.

No comments: