Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Giordano Bruno: World Government: Impractical, Unnecessary, Insane!

World Government: Impractical, Unnecessary, Insane!
By Giordano Bruno article link
05/23/2010 | Neithercorp Press

Every culture in history has had innumerable difficulties and imbalances, some of them due to a lack of understanding amongst the populace, and many others due to corruption in government. Human beings have been dragging themselves out of the muck over and over again for centuries. The struggle for a better world, a world that meets the standards of our inherent conscience, has always demanded overwhelming labor, bravery, sacrifice, logic, wisdom, and sometimes even genius. And through it all, it has been those men who sought to be truly free that were able to contribute most to the betterment of the human condition. Not just those who are politically free, but also psychologically free.

For many of us, the need to honor and even surpass the accomplishments of those who came before is absolutely tantamount to our success as a species. However, there are many who see the concept of ‘hard work’ as an anathema, a mental “disease” that has left our society running in circles towards a hazy and undefined future. These people believe that there must be a simple solution to all our ills, and if the majority of us weren’t so “stupid”, we would see it as plain as the wide blue sky.

For the ancient Romans, it was assumed that an ever expanding empire and the subjugation of all peoples would cement their legacy, creating a perfect society. For the medieval feudal kingdoms, religious centralization and dominance was the answer. For the British Empire, the forced insinuation of Western culture into “barbaric lands” was meant to “enlighten” the planet. For Soviet Russia, the purging of free thought and the repression of individualism in exchange for collectivism and the advancement of a vaguely defined “greater good” was going to radically progress mankind. For Nazi Germany, it was the purging of those seen as a “hindrance” to biological success, the idea of racial purity, which was going to revolutionize our species. In every case, civilization turned from the ‘great work’ of understanding, individual awareness, and personal liberty, towards offers of what they saw at that time as the easy way out, the secret that would save us all the trouble of coming to terms with ourselves.

Today, we face the broad promotion of yet another “magic solution”, one that some claim is, of course, the only way out of our dire circumstances. The supposedly inspired stratagem I speak of is ‘World Government’.

Members of the elitist class and their cheerleaders have been calling openly for global governance (what they sometimes call the “New World Order”) for the past century. Adolph Hitler, H.G. Wells, Trotsky, James Warburg, Senator William Fulbright, Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, British PM Gordon Brown, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Brazilian President Luis Silva, are only a few of the prominent world figures who have openly supported the end of national sovereignty and the formation of a centralized financial and political global governing body.

Only in the past few weeks the Director of the IMF, Dominique Kahn, has called for global oversight and control of all economic activity and even the institution of a global currency as a way to stop financial instability: Business Insider article, IMF Speeches.

And Barack Obama has called for the formation of a new “International Order” to deal with the threat of “extremism”: Washington Post article.

In this article, we will examine the propaganda and ‘group think’ responsible for the prominence of the World Government concept in the general populace, as well as the many reasons why the notion is implausible as a solution to ANY problem whatsoever. When placed under an objective microscope, the effective practicality of the globalist ideal disappears, and this begs an important question; with the obvious flaws and destructive nature of extreme centralization, why would anyone sane support it?

More Government Makes Us “Safer”?

Ever since the Code of Hammurabi, structured society has believed faithfully in the necessity of law. In those days, laws were assumed to be passed down from the heavens, and the Gods were the ultimate arbitrators. Governments asserted themselves as the “conduits” of divine judgment, and thus publicly accepted moral determination became centralized into the hands of an elite few. Very little has changed in the thousands of years since. People today still see written law as absolutely essential to maintaining civilized behavior, and government as the irreplaceable “creator” and steward of order. In this twisted sort of world view, the idea of continually expanding the power and influence of government is almost an obligation. If the government is the engineer of law, and law is the binding force of a stable civilization, then wouldn’t more government and more law make all of us safer and more ethical?

The error in this way of thinking lay in the fact that “law” is ultimately NOT a determinant of moral judgment, nor is government. Law is an afterthought. Words scribbled on paper, and nothing more. True morality is inborn, universal, determined by the force of conscience, and tempered by the even hand of rationality. It is conscience that resolves what we as individuals are willing to tolerate as law, and what we are not. No law can stop a man from doing something he deeply believes is right. And, no law can constrain a man from ignoring his conscience and committing terrible acts. In the end, government has little to no power over decisions that lay in the hands of individuals, and therefore serves little to no role in the day to day balance of society. In truth, a world of fully self aware and free thinking men and women would render the very notion of centralized government mute.

The only real use of government is not to lord over citizens’ choices, but to safeguard an atmosphere in which individuals are able to make decisions for themselves without the obstacles of despotic or collectivist totalitarianism. This is why the Constitution as a “legal” document is so ingenious and as an event, so vital. It was really the first time in history that government was not the primary arbitrator of law. The common man became judge and jury, mediating what was right and honorable, from that which was course and unethical. The Constitution was the first document to hold government itself to a moral standard of conduct, making it subservient to the demands of the people. For the first time ever, the Western establishment was decentralized, and personal liberty was given primacy over the mechanizations of bureaucracy. This accomplishment cost years of war, blood, and sacrifice.

However, even the Constitution as written law is not eternal without the fortitude of the American conscience. It is not the Constitution that safeguards each of us, but we who safeguard the Constitution. Yet again, law does not make man, man makes, or breaks, law. This fact is lost on many people today. Centralization seems to be the answer to everything. Global governance is touted as the cure for war, terrorism, economic volatility, environmental catastrophe, overpopulation, religious “conflict”, even unhappiness and menial labor! But rarely do we hear any explanation as to how world government would actually solve these issues.

World government is in itself a GOAL, not a SOLUTION. Solutions involve a reasoned and well thought out process, a schematic for the achievement of a goal. I have yet to see anyone outline the methods by which world government is supposed to save us from the imbalances and injustices of society, I have only seen elitists and useful idiots make promises they have no intention of keeping.

People are easily duped by such promises for reasons that are rooted deep in our collective psyches. Human beings tend to search for the path of least resistance, and if the opportunity arises to defer personal responsibility to an imposed authority, they often jump at the chance. This is especially true in cultures infantized by the elevation of superficial desire over practical necessity, or cultures that confuse self-centered behavior with self-aware behavior. Essentially, certain segments of the population have an inclination towards mental and emotional laziness. Surrendering the responsibility of their own destiny and their own development to government gives them comfort, much like a well fed house pet. This feeling of safety, though, is entirely an illusion…

There is no example in the history of human endeavor which supports the theory that more dominant government makes us safer, or allows us greater freedom. No ancient empire ever placed the concerns of the common man over the concerns of the establishment aristocracy unless the common man became a threat to their immediate power. Greek city states such as Athens had only the semblance of democratic self-rule, which was controlled by a minority of those lucky enough to be designated “citizens”.

Modern examples of government expansion are no better. The British Empire enslaved entire civilizations in the search for centralized global power. The Soviets under Stalin murdered tens of millions in an effort to centralize. Hitler did the same. Communist China under the collectivist fervor of Mao Tse Tung engineered the deaths of 15 to 20 million innocents, and endeavored to use the ‘Cultural Revolution’ as a tool for erasing the very history of the Chinese people. To this day, China is a cesspool of authoritarianism which oppresses and murders citizens to maintain government ascendancy. The European Union, supposedly the model for global governance, has attempted to control numerous personal aspects of daily life, including surveillance of all web and phone traffic in some countries, and even what vitamins people are allowed to take! It is also in the midst of economic collapse, with their common currency, the Euro, hanging by a thin thread; hardly an example of the effectiveness of globalist philosophy.

The United States itself is on the edge of implosion due to unprecedented growth of government. George W. Bush tripled the size of the Federal Government during his tenure, and constructed legislation which if activated allows the Executive Branch to assume de facto administrative control (martial law) without any oversight from Congress or the citizenry. Barack Obama has fully supported these measures and has now indebted the American taxpayer by more than all other presidents combined! Our debts are so great that the private Federal Reserve now continuously prints money out of thin air just to keep the infrastructure of this country breathing. Never have I been confronted with anyone who could give me a well reasoned and logical illustration of how America is better off because of expanded government. For every self proscribed advantage, there are a dozen disgraces.

Misleading terms like “harmonization” are thrown about by globalists as a way to rename old and failed strategies and promote further centralization. Economic equality especially is a favorite pledge of world government proponents, but what does this really mean? If the EU is any indication, harmonization means that everyone must become equally poor. Even in a grand futurist pleasure dome, someone is always going to have more than you. Someone is always going to have something that you want but can’t get. Artificial financial equality is not possible. The drive for it has done nothing but erase the middle class and make all nations similarly unstable, which may have been the goal all along.

If focusing authority into fewer and fewer hands deals us such dreadful results on a national scale, why would anyone believe that our plight would be any better on a global scale? Giving government extreme oversight into personal lives has made no society safer. Freely handing over civil liberties has made no society safer. Handing over individual responsibilities to authoritative bodies has made no society safer. If anything, these strategies have only placed humanity in the most acute peril.

Utopianism, Idealism, And Cartoonland

The “perfect world” is a delusion driven by hubris and naivety. Those who promote Utopianism often presume that their version of social edifice is somehow unique and that the vast majority are too ignorant to grasp the “brilliance” of their methodology. I can’t count how many times I have confronted a Utopian and asked them to outline the specifics of how their perfect world would actually function in a practical way. In every case they cite goals instead of solutions, like “we will end war, get rid of money, no one will have to work hard, everyone will be fed, and energy will be infinitely abundant.” This all sounds quite marvelous, and certainly a world such as the one they describe would be a never-ending Disney vacation, but where is the plan? How does one get from point A to point Z? When asked to actually describe the manner in which globalists and Utopians hope to achieve the world they fantasize over, they usually respond indignantly, accusing you of being “too narrow minded” to understand their idea. Basically, they are implying that they know better for you than you do for yourself.

It is one thing to be passionate over an ideal, and another thing to be blindly obsessed. Imagination is one of the primary keys to progress, but so is sensible application of imagination in the real world, which does not always operate in the way we want it to. Life has its own rhythm, culture its own current, and this must always be taken into consideration when trying to assert our view upon our surroundings. Human beings operate most effectively in an atmosphere of diverse thought. In a centralized system with a single minded philosophy, our principal development becomes stifled and we suffocate. In most circumstances, forcing the issue of centralization creates unnecessary and severe conflict that poisons every aspect of a population. That is to say, an ideal cannot function unless it adapts suitably to our nature.

Globalists brazenly ignore the issue of human nature, sometimes claiming that such a thing does not even exist. The reason being that inherent human nature is a factor they cannot control, an inconvenient monkey wrench caught in the gears of their flawless machine, grinding everything to a halt. Our inborn desire for sovereignty in all things is one good example of an instinctive quality that defies “management”. We as individuals do not want freedom, we DEMAND freedom, or risk losing our very sanity. In the world of Global Government, however, instincts and intuition must be suppressed and the masses must be molded towards principles that defy our character. In order for overt centralization to succeed in any way, the integrity of the people would have to be eradicated and replaced with fabricated and submissive ethics; passive swarms following a hive mind, all in our best interests of course.

For elitists or anyone else to even consider that this is an acceptable future for our species is wildly and inspiringly absurd. The level of idiocy and arrogance that could drive a man or a group of men to believe they can bend not only society but the human spirit to their will must surely be astonishing. Not only is it not possible, it is also grotesquely bizarre and cartoonish. The decidedly insane often fancy themselves as godlike, and the Elites are prime examples; Mad Hatters parading as intellectually superior ideologues.

Leaders And Followers

All men begin life searching for a path. Some never find their own. Some desperately cling to the paths blazed by others, even when those paths become dangerously wretched. In the absence of foresight, we look for leaders. Leaders provide the advantage of direction, and for some this is enough, but at the cost of individual experience. Once again, we try to avoid the struggle of finding our own direction, and the hardship and pain of making our own decisions. Some of us find the thought of personal failure unbearable. Better to follow someone else and blame them for any shortcomings in ones environment or ones existence. Some of us project those qualities we think we lack onto others and elevate them, turning them from imperfect people into faultless symbols. Some of us simply lose interest and stamina for the fight, roll up into a ball, and become numb to our own weaknesses.

There are indeed great people in this world that cut through the fog and give us a glimpse of a wiser tomorrow, but the efforts of these teachers are in vain if we do not push forward on our own strength. We must become the leaders we once searched for and idolized. We must stop waiting for others to define us, and begin defining ourselves. Each and every man must become his own guide.

The concept of world government plays heavily on our fear of taking responsibility for our own providence. It seduces us with assurances of ease, security, and luxury; things that no government regardless of its size can guarantee. Government in general is only an organization of mere citizens, many of which see themselves as vastly competent and righteous compared to the rest of us, but in contrast are usually rather frail, inept, or downright vile. When we follow the mandates of government without question or conscience, these are the men we are bowing to. It is difficult enough to counter this stupidity and corruption in a single nation, let alone the entire planet. Global Government would act only to insulate the Elite further from accountability and justice, as increased bureaucracy is designed to do. Sovereign states may not be the picture of social health, but they do have the advantage of disconnecting world cultures from adopting a singular and destructive mindset. Diversity in societies helps promote diversity in ideas. Not to mention, helps to protect the world from systematic failures and calamitous chain reactions.

This is why borders and nations are necessary. Not so much to keep peoples separate, but to give possible sanctuary to vibrant ideas and values. To prevent a single overpowering entity from shaping or squashing those who disagree with its self-serving directive. To provide nurturing ground for a new way of living without having to ask permission from the rest of the world before hand. For the possibility that we may finally reach the definitive state of sovereignty, a world in which every individual takes his destiny into his own hands and lives fully, becoming aware, honest, and courageous, and in the process, improving humanity as a whole.

Copyleft 2010 Neither Corporation

Neithercorp Press home page


No comments:

Post a Comment

Mammon or Messiah research contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is presented without profit for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.