It is natural for human society to delegate governance to others. In the microcosm parents necessarily “rule” over their young children. Absent delegation, there is anarchy; not necessarily bad if following cruel rule.
The temptation of being delegated to includes the proclivity to acquire greater wealth for those ruling. While this seems natural for us to observe, as idealists we might like to reflect on why those charged with organising our affairs should be necessarily richer than those who they govern.
When centralised power “goes wrong” , as human history suggest it always will, the system may be called “communism”, “fascism” or whatever. It doesn’t matter what you call it, it is an abuse of trust. This abuse of trust is seen in the particulars of political economy including the undermining of money by private issue which has been a tool of those who have gathered power well beyond any remit to organise nations as genuine trustees of delegated power.
This abuse of power has been aided by the continual threat of the external enemy that gathers wealth in order to “defend the people”.
***
The opposite of centralised or statist rule is anarchism. Quite a popular philosophy among artists and YouTube financed people. It is easy to believe in this decentralised model when you are in a unique position.
The thing is, even in a corrupted system, there are still benefits of living within a structured system. Indeed, TPTB cannot push too far, as there is a need for MOST people to believe they are not treated as cattle. TPTB will only push so far. They push by gradually killing people off while still allowing for fire services for burning building and medical care for broken bones. That some discipline of motorway driving is necessary and aided by a police presence also demonstrates some need for order.
The skill of TPTB is to milk the system, steer the system, and deliver minimum requirements of acceptable governance. This acceptable governance is the intelligence test that is always presented to the populace. That acceptable governance close to mandating compulsory jabs is an intelligence test largely failed by most, shifts the centre of power even closer to the abusers of trust.
IMHO the real question is not between centralised and decentralised systems of governance, but making the centralised systems work. We are a long way from this, true. The other side of the coin of megalomania is the banality of everyday stupidity. The evil of the powerful finds natural counterpoint in the ignorance of the many.
SOVIETUNION REPEATING .
they never learn from history .
Join the A.A. (Army of Aiwass) The only hope left for Aryan man on this overpopulated planet of the apes, mongrels & scum.
It is natural for human society to delegate governance to others. In the microcosm parents necessarily “rule” over their young children. Absent delegation, there is anarchy; not necessarily bad if following cruel rule.
The temptation of being delegated to includes the proclivity to acquire greater wealth for those ruling. While this seems natural for us to observe, as idealists we might like to reflect on why those charged with organising our affairs should be necessarily richer than those who they govern.
When centralised power “goes wrong” , as human history suggest it always will, the system may be called “communism”, “fascism” or whatever. It doesn’t matter what you call it, it is an abuse of trust. This abuse of trust is seen in the particulars of political economy including the undermining of money by private issue which has been a tool of those who have gathered power well beyond any remit to organise nations as genuine trustees of delegated power.
This abuse of power has been aided by the continual threat of the external enemy that gathers wealth in order to “defend the people”.
***
The opposite of centralised or statist rule is anarchism. Quite a popular philosophy among artists and YouTube financed people. It is easy to believe in this decentralised model when you are in a unique position.
The thing is, even in a corrupted system, there are still benefits of living within a structured system. Indeed, TPTB cannot push too far, as there is a need for MOST people to believe they are not treated as cattle. TPTB will only push so far. They push by gradually killing people off while still allowing for fire services for burning building and medical care for broken bones. That some discipline of motorway driving is necessary and aided by a police presence also demonstrates some need for order.
The skill of TPTB is to milk the system, steer the system, and deliver minimum requirements of acceptable governance. This acceptable governance is the intelligence test that is always presented to the populace. That acceptable governance close to mandating compulsory jabs is an intelligence test largely failed by most, shifts the centre of power even closer to the abusers of trust.
IMHO the real question is not between centralised and decentralised systems of governance, but making the centralised systems work. We are a long way from this, true. The other side of the coin of megalomania is the banality of everyday stupidity. The evil of the powerful finds natural counterpoint in the ignorance of the many.