It doesn't take a single tyrant to cause oppression; think of this as a similarity to a 'death by a thousand cuts' for a society. This author has previously commented on the impact of Social Media and the Main Stream Media (MSM) as these are just adding more and more cuts to the everyday lives of the general population.
It is currently fashionable for many self declared minority groups to assert that they are being oppressed by any non minority group(s). Any criticism towards the self declared minority groups is considered 'punching down' and yet those same groups are being paid attention to by society at large. How is it that the current darlings of society who are being propped up by the commercial and social institutions can be considered the oppressed thus allowing them to claim that any criticism is considered punching down.
This overall situation creates a fracturing of the society, because it effectively creates a teared class system and many people will get the impression they are second class citizens due to the fact they are not being recognized to the same level as others. This scenario has been exasperated by both Social Media companies and the MSM, which both provide pulpit and bullhorn to those who want to scream out about their cause(s).
A friend to this author has brought up the idea that the solution to the World's woes would be a single world government. This idea is flawed on it face, for when questioned on the style of government the response was - benevolent dictatorship, this may have been said in jest, though it was not obvious. There are two conditions where a benevolent dictatorship typically works: a) parenting and b) short term projects. Eventually in a government of such magnitude and diversity within the citizenry would abandon the benevolence and leave only the dictatorship.
It is said that 'politics is downstream from culture' and so what should be obvious to the reader and the friend is the question of, which culture is going to be used as the model for what it upstream of politics. For years in the Western World there has been a strong push of the message that 'diversity is our strength', of course there is no mention of who is in the club of 'our' as this has always been assumed.
A flag to be raised at this time is the Story of Babel, as a reminder, the city of Babel decided to build a tower to Heaven and God was not pleased and so He divided the citizens into groups and assigned to them diverse languages, the tower was never finished and there is still fundamentally only one way to reach Heaven.
The next consideration for this proposed global hegemony is how do politicians and staff get paid and at what rate; seeing as different area's of the world have diverse needs and can produce diverse outputs of value by both the means of production and agricultural output there might a plan put forth that payroll is going on a spectrum, will this New World Order make the Esperanto Dollar a crypto currency thing? Many people may consider that some political operators may simply construct and take advantage of whatever payment practices they put in place.
Circling back to the benevolent dictatorship idea another item to be raised is the consideration towards what tribe is this One World Government political apparatus going to be benevolent towards. While there is the potential of this being denied in principle, in practice the idea of human tribalism is quite well known and is considered the standard. This tribalism has been shown across many civilizations and conflicts over the long history of mankind. As migration has increased due to easier means of travel coupled with some having sought to erase boarders the shift in tribalism has moved from the obvious, to the sublime and forward on to the ridiculous.
There is strength in unity and it is within unity we find our strength, while this statement may sound fascistic, that is because it is based on the social principles of Fascism. So now it is time for the wrap-up smear as it were: a) consider the fact that many people do not consider themselves only as a member of mankind but a member of a smaller tribe, b) all people have some bigotry or prejudice in them else they would never make assumptions, c) people when given the chance will seek to improve their lives, their livelihoods and their accumulation of value to pass on to their children.
Returning to the title of this article, as this writing is approaching the limits this author is comfortable with. Plato did support the idea of critical thinking, thus he followed in the footsteps of Socrates and this is a fundamentally right wing act – TRADITION! If the reader doesn’t understand the full caps reference please look up Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof. It is the opinion of this author that it was never Plato’s intent to suggest a world king because his world was bound to the horizon and the little that he knew of what was beyond it. Additionally, up until the time of Machiavelli, many kingdoms and principalities were not inherited.
This author can wholeheartedly agree with Plato, at the village level the Philosopher King could be an ideal means of rule, for any ruler should always be only a stones throw away and anyone beyond that should be considered a tyrant. It is the understanding of this author that the Romans voted with stones by placing them in the pots for Yea or Nay.
No comments:
Post a Comment