Revolutionary Notes #4 - The Undesirables

Who are the undesirables?

The efficacy of a government at its root depends on two factors, the system within which it operates, and the members who constitute it. This is true whether the governing body is a single person, group of people, or the collective society itself.

How to define governmental efficacy, or what features comprise a good system are outside the scope of this writing, and will be covered at a later date.

The aim here is to discuss who should form that government, and who are the undesirables.

Revolutioinary Notes #2 - What is a revolution?

Before going too far on this topic it is important to step back and clarify what this subject is about. To first ask 'What is a revolution?'

     Tseu-Leu asked: If the Prince of Mei appointed you head of government. to what wd. you first set your mind?
     Confucius: to call people and things by their names, that is by the correct denominations, to see that terminology was exact.
     "You mean that is the first?" Said Tseu-Leu. "Aren't you dodging the question? What's the use of that?"
     Confucius: You are a blank. An intelligent man hesitates to talk of what he does not understand, he feels embarrassed.
     If the terminology be not exact, if it fit not the thing, the governmental instructions will not be explicit, if the instructions aren't clear and the names don't fit, you cannot conduct business properly.
     If business is not properly run the rites and music will not be honored, if the rites and music be not honored, penalties and punishments will not achieve their intended effects, if penalties and punishments do not produce equity and justice, the people won't know where to out their feet or what to lay hold of or to whom they should stretch out their hands.
     That is why an intelligent man cares for his terminology.       

Some people in the past have recognized the importance of tending to their words. As the quote above illustrates Confucius saw definitions as an important factor in maintaining the stability and cohesion of a society. Something often lacking in his Greek counterparts. And where we see Confucian ideas taking root and going into action for 1000's of years, no one has ever set aside the smallest piece of land to try out Plato's republic.

Revolutionary Notes #3 - Revolutionaries are Liars

Revolutionary leaders do not exist, but their spokespeople are liars.

Don't misunderstand, this is not to say that the voices associated with the heads of revolutionary movements are not sincere in their intent - that is unknowable, can only make judgement based on a person's actions. Nor does it mean that there is any deceit in the promises of a new world they have made to their followers.

What it does mean is that there is an inherent (self) lie in assuming that any vision can fully encompass a new socio-economic system, fully formed, with all of its moving interconnected parts.

So why don't revolutionary leaders exist?

Revolutionary Notes #1 - An Open Letter

From Frobenius:

I am not firmly convinced that a revolution is coming, or for that matter that there is any kind of trend towards growing awareness or even discontent.

Our system is one with a built in pressure valve, and like any successful social system succeeds because of the majority who have something invested in seeing it continue to be perpetuated.

When I speak of a pressure valve I am referring to periodic elections, which, by design or not, are a system of minimal renewal whereby a low-resistance path is provided for people to have an outlet for their discontent. If I am not happy, and am not sure why or what to do about it, a ready answer is there in an election I can participate in, observe, or simply complain about after the fact.

And keep in mind 20-30% is a majority in a fractured society.

The stake that is put into this system? The long hours at university, the things sacrificed for that first down payment on a car or a house. The time spent envying another's possessions, or arguments spent convincing or being convinced to being on the right side of taste or common sense. All the energy expended caring in order to succeed at some job, or the real feeling of reward at seeing paychecks come in.

Who could face all that having meant nothing? Not when there is an easier route to take.

All of this creates a state of existence where even those who can point to things they would change - the politicians - the top 1% - would do so only to see all else remain the same, or merely improve along the existing scale.

Not possible.

Society is far too interconnected to pick and choose which pieces to keep or remove, not where there is something that is fundamentally wrong.

To overcome this sodden inertia is the real barrier to revolution.

If it is you who would wish to see a new world, then to you I would say find a way to bring things to a state where the easiest thing to do is for the average person to embrace anarchy. Feed the corruption, protect the hoarders, make all of those who you'd wish to see gone so proud and so safe that they couldn't help but flaunt it. Make them secure enough to do the things they wish for now, but wouldn't dare. Raise the pitch until there is no choice but find some way to turn it off.

Transcribed by Ans Wallonia

For more posts in this series see:

• What is a revolution? 
• Revolutionaries are liars