Not really keeping up with the thread; more dipping in and out, so apologies if this is entirely tangential, but something struck me as interesting wrt the current events when I was doing some reading over the Christmas period. This is not directly related to the current campaign but more of a general musing, mulling over and thinking into the future. This is from 'Guns, Germs and Steel':
All known societies have developed as follows:
Bands, then tribes, then chiefdoms, then states. Bands and tribes are the only two societal organisations which have a more or less egalitarian system of government (information and decision making are both communal). They lack bureaucracy, police force and taxes. As population size increase, societies move to chiefdoms and states. As chiefdoms and states arise, people have to learn for the first time in history, how to encounter strangers regularly without attempting to kill them. Part of the solution adopted by many such societies is to designate one person, the chief, to exercise a monopoly on a right to use force, who also had access to critical information, and makes significant decisions. The chief, in all known societies, was/is distinguished by elite standing (elaborate clothing, larger hut. The terminology used here- 'elite', 'masses', 'commoner', etc. is non-pejorative but scientific). The rest are assigned to ranks of commoner (not necessarily the same usage of the word as we know today, but conceptually very similar). A chiefdom creates food surpluses, which frees up people to develop other skills, luxury goods, specialised crafts, hence leading to the development of civil servants, police, etc.. "By now, it should be obvious that chiefdoms introduced the dilemma fundamental to all centrally governed, nonegalitarian societies. At best they do good by providing expensive services impossible to contract for on an individual basis. At worst, they function unabashedly as kleptocracies, transferring net wealth from commoners to the upper classes. These noble and selfish functions are inextricably linked" although some governments obviously emphasise one function more than the other.
How do you get the population to accept this state of affairs?
- Disarm the populace and arm the elite
- Make the masses happy by redistributing much of the tribute, in popular ways.
- Use force to promote happiness by maintaining public order and curbing violence.
- Construct an ideology or religion
In answer to some points I've skimmed through on the thread:
- We enter into a 'deal' with our governments to keep us safe. All societies that we know about do this, so it is our right to demand that our government does keep us safe in exchange for the elitist payback that they receive from us.
- If the 'elite' can make up religions and other beliefs, they can make up plenty else. This is why I feel that it's so important to keep digging to find out what the real reasons are for the current events (as mentioned above, although I am not suggesting this in relation to the current campaign, which I think is brilliant to date). Someone mentioned that interpreting events straightforwardly is sometimes better than searching for a 'conspiracy' - well, not if the 'conspiracy' is actually part of a normal pact that we make with our 'ruling class'. I'm actually quite keen on finding ways to press our MPs (but not in this campaign - this is more of a long-term thought piece to think about and mull over. I think that's enough provisos now in case someone suggest that I am derailing
) into being more open and clarifying their decision making. Like others, I am deeply worried about the silencing and obfuscation of information in our society.