Sunday, November 20, 2016

Chapter 29 - 'Omnia Sunt Communia'

Chapter 29 - 'Omnia Sunt Communia'


The observation given by Thomas Müntzer is accurate when describing the social relationship between the ruled and rulers. Thomas was a contemporary of Martin Luther and gave sermons throughout Germany during the time of the birth of the Christian Protestant movement. What were the conditions which forced his observations? It was the rebellion of the peasants because of their conditions of poverty which led to the social upheaval. In other words, the increased spectacle of poverty among the German Christian populace. Martin Luther addressed a problem which originated from social inequality and focused on the lack of justice among the Christian community. Thomas Müntzer touched, through sermons and the act of rebellion, the actual core of the problem. A problem which exposes the flaw of the Christian religion: the lack of material justice or equity in response of the influx of new technological social changes. Thomas Müntzer goes on to say before his death in Latin:

omnia sunt communia

– "all things are to be held in common and distribution should be to each according to his need".

In political science, the above showcase presents the invalidity of symbolic policy versus the validity of material policy. The strength of the previous has produced true and proven doctrines even in the academia of psychology. For instance, Abraham Maslow's 'hierarchy of needs' is the proven formula and doctrine based on the material realm. Karl Marx' observations are based and proven through the rebellion of the German peasants during the time of Thomas Müntzer. 

Why is the above so relevant and universal? 

All forms of technology deriving from various manifestations of the business firm entity creates the social ills and social disturbances. During this time of Martin Luther and Thomas Müntzer, it was the invention of the printing press which represented the "new technology". The business firms, potentially one or several lucky business firm(s) - through elastic dynamics, could create what is called - Creative Destruction - in the economic market sphere of a country and countries. "Creative Destruction" occurs when a new technology put out of business old technology therefore creating mass unemployment. The previous discussed by both Joseph A. Schumpeter and Karl Marx. The previous is the nature of capitalism and not just "crony" capitalism. This is why it is crucial that a stable, strong and reasonable state entity has to exist to prevent the opposite from manifesting - social rebellions and open violence against fellow citizens. It is the "Creative Destruction" of the economic market, eons or years of human historical production, which has made countries wealthy or poor. It has caused swings in the market and for the flow of wealth to be exchanged between competing countries. The invisible variable or factor is "religion". In fact, all forms of religion, deriving from the minds of human beings and humanity-at-large (social dynamics) are molded by economic markets. The previous is a thesis by Marxist academics and showing that materialism guides humanity's decisions and destiny. Furthermore, what is given as a solution, by Marxists, is the centralized control of society and government to curtail the effects of the various acts of the business firms. However, this early implementation, without the existence of high technology circulating in society, deriving from the competition of business firms, has resulted in disastrous totalitarian regimes or governments which have sacrificed civil liberties in the pursuit of centralized government and its objectives. One of its social objectives is the absence of money but without high technology such Marxistic communist ventures will not be successful. The outlook, or world-view by Marxists, is that the business firms represent decentralization and a departure of the early tribal centralized control by a single leader. In the next stage of development (in the current setting), Marxists envision themselves as the technological manifestation of the previous tribal leadership. The alternative, in the absence of high technology, is socialism where money still circulates and the business firms could still exist. The previous would also guarantee the preservation of civil liberties within a sensible social equilibrium between the existence of a larger "Leviathan" government versus social chaos (rebellions) until high technology is introduced by the business firms. What is "high technology"? Technology which could address the needs of humanity-at-large at a reasonable and equitable condition expressed through 'hierarchy of needs'.

What Martin Luther fails to realize is that the problem derives from the business firms themselves! The Christian religion, since its founding, has not really addressed the actual problem. The previous problem also exists within Islam and other belief systems. All forms of religions are conservative reactionary tools attempting to fix the new manifested liberal social trends deriving from the introduction of new technology into society. Martin Luther's reactions and acts towards the problem was to attack the Catholic Church's indulgences of "sins", through its pardons by acts of its followers, and to promote the primitivism stated within the Book of Acts. The Christian primitivism, discussed in earlier chapters, is to suggest that Christian followers are to surrender all their wealth and not engage in any form of violence. The previous two points are some of its pillars. The problem was exposed as a contradiction versus human behavior. In other words, to actually implement Christianity, in its pure form following the words of Jesus himself, would weaken "Christian" countries against their competitors. The previous is observed as such as Martin Luther's view against Islam was viewed as pacifism but actually expressed Jesus orders expressed in the New Testament. The other profound problem, rather the conservative reaction, has been the implementation of social regulation based on religious precepts. The previous episode proven to be a failure by my own English ancestors through the implementation of the Parliament of Saints by Oliver Cromwell's leadership. All the mentioned manifestations will eventually lead to some or most citizens of a country experiencing the removal of "unalienable Rights". These rights are imprinted overall as civil liberties which are natural rights reconstituted through a "Leviathan" government. The tragedy of the removal of civil liberties, showcased through English history, is an example of the improper implementation of religious precepts.

The irreversible flow diagram is presented as such:

Business firms output --> Technology--> Increased liberalism & the decrease of religions --> Constitutions of Countries expressing the changing social fabric --> Near communist utopia or condition.

The presented flow diagram is an irreversible process despite periods of social conservatism, war-in-response, or the temporary increase of religious observances, and the increase of religious sects. The power of technology has molded minds, and eventually governments, to its eventual human final destination - Near communist utopia. The previous predicted by Karl Marx himself (before my late additional input). No doubt, that some of his predictions were evidence for slow social evolutionary changes rather than immediate revolution. However, the political malpractice is focused on his remedies rather than his correct identification of the symptoms. The reason why business firms must exist is the same reason why eventually the people will call for near communist governments in the future despite periods of reactionary governments. The output of the business firms provide the needs of human beings but at the same time introduces new social liberal trends and reactionary dangers. These social liberal trends are a permanent feature of a counter-culture deriving from the competition of business firms establishing their own social regulations within the dynamics of workplace competition.

Increased globalization is a natural reaction to the introduction of increased new technologies which have created a global laboratory of creative destruction. The proper act is to have a responsive and sensible government to address the devaluation of important items. The previous economic paradigm suggests that a state entity (leviathan) has to exist to preserve civil liberties deriving from the social contract itself.

Of course, there will be temporary increased reactionary governments but these will either first destroy large segments of humanity or be removed by the people themselves initially or later. The end result being the creation of a near communist utopia. Social Alienation and the various epidemics of over-production, results of the influx of new technologies into the economic market and its interaction with the human race, has resulted in two opposing camps among the surviving human beings: revolutionary and reactionary. The former guided by the pursuit of inclusion through social justice and the later submitting to their near-sighted sole tribal exclusionary impulses.

My own observation, or theory, is that a third column is being created during the process. This third group later decides which two main groups to join when social and political tensions arise. This particular category of people are apolitical until a material benefit is removed by the winning political faction controlling public policy. They are by-products of consumer capitalism and express a type of selfishness deriving from the (neo)liberal condition. They are "market consumers" as Benjamin R. Barber suggested in Consumed. They are branded as such and because of their sole occupation in consumption are a third group by themselves. They are yet revolutionary conscious or reactionary infected. The differentiation between the two mentioned main groups is simple to distinguish because the former is far sighted and the later is near sighted. In other words, one is for the future of mankind and the other is limited by tribal impulsive selfish interests.

These market consumers, the holders of hyperconsumerism and Herbert Marcuse's One-Dimensional person, are ideally nihilistic towards all but themselves. In fact, they are exhibit A for the reason why there is no such thing as "postmodernism". These market consumers are such because they concentrate on one factor - consumption. The market consumers are one-dimensional because they do not vote and are not conscious of other issues around them. The previous is the definition of "Nihilism" in the so-called postmodern age. The theory is then put forward: In the absence of a so-called postmodern age, Nihilism is exhibited in the market consumer person who later would create the modern nihilistic crisis. On page 217 of Consumed, by Benjamin R. Barber, explains the problem of the formation and effects of the One-Dimensional person:
 " ...although not totalitarian, robs liberty of its civic meaning and threatens pluralism's civic vitality."

 No doubt, that the main two groups, involved in liberal democracy, dictates public policy. While the third group also assists the later. The main feature of liberal democracy is its weakness to purge out such elements. The reason for its weakness is its social laboratory settings in allowing such ideas to circulate so society-at-large could later decide in keeping or purging out, through voting, the weaker ideas. The weakness of liberal democracy, through pure innocence, is it allows the infected party to control public policy. This one time opportunity, the stage of pure innocence, is the chance where liberal democracy could be put to death until the people see it and stop the injustice.

The groups of social conscious are political parties expressing such awareness of the business cycles and the social affects of the business firms. Here, we identify that these groups are not necessarily communists or marxists. In fact, the communist party and marxists belong solely in the academia field rather than being openly involved in the political field. The reason is because their implementation, at this stage of human development, would be disastrous for us all. While their ideas, treated as futuristic visions, should be for later implementations.

The common constant being the survival of the human race. The pursuit of social justice, over the years or eons or eras, among human beings brings evidence of the previously mentioned constant. Social justice, and neither religion nor traditions, has been the guardian of the human race against the continuous onslaught of new technology.

The book by Thomas Hobbes - Leviathan - contributed to the idea of social contract. Another political philosopher by the name of Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote another treatise called On the Social Contract which also explains Social Contract Theory. The pursuit of social justice is the driving force of Social Contract Theory. The reasons are civil order and civil liberties derive from the Social Contract Theory. Social Contract Theory has drawn up borders between human beings in society expressing their own individualistic natural rights. The act of creating these borders, between the natural rights of human beings, is called civil liberties. Therefore, civil liberties are the remaining difference of natural rights left after being subtracted by a state entity. In the legal field, the mentioned remainders are called negative rights. When the government adds more definition to rights these later creations are called positive rights.

Today or presently (within the year of 2016), the fear of Tyrannaphobia has gripped most liberal democracies. The term was mentioned by Thomas Hobbes as he described the episode of the English puritan movement in their fear of being strongly governed or as today where the current fear is a strong centralized government ruling society. Of course, such mantra is championed by conservative persons and social reactionaries. I propose that such fear, of being strongly governed, will be a permanent feature in the future. It will be because of the power of the few which will be mentioned in a later chapter.

In fact, my theory is that Tyrannaphobia derives from liberalism or the liberalization of conservative cored power over years. It was bound to happen as the human race approached A.D. 1500 - the beginning of the modern era. During this time, in Germany or continental Europe, the phenomena of the Anabaptist movement was occurring in many areas. Through individuals like Melchior Hoffman and others, the Apocalyptic fervor claimed many victims. These individuals, without Melchior, took control of the German city called Münster. They claimed the city to be "New Jerusalem" and imposed social restrictions for the years A.D. 1534-1535.

The Münster Rebellion occurred after the Great Peasants' War (1524-1525). These Anabaptist social rebellions are rooted in the liberal spirit. However, under the meaning of preserving traditions or maintaining religious foundations. Of course, one of the participants of the Great Peasants' War was Thomas Müntzer. The problem of the Anabaptist rebellion created the Anabaptist impulse. The Anabaptist impulse, even though an internal Christian problem, has affected human society. The Anabaptist impulse is really an exhibit of the religion's failure to address modern technological questions within human society. This could be observed through the evolution of Dispensationalism to Millennialism explained in the earlier chapters.

Thomas Hobbes explains this problem directly concerning the failure of this traditional and conservative impulse to regain control of human society from the effects of technology. On page 183, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes provides the observation:

" ... Not considering the frequent Seditions, and Civil wars, produced by the imperfection of their Policy ..."

Thomas Hobbes properly addressed the problem because the puritans relied on ancient Greek philosophers like Plato to keep society traditional. Plato, and Greek philosophers like him, relying on the "unseen measure" to dictate and control society through the Parliament of Saints. Such measures created the spectacle of civil war against fellow Catholics and others. Thomas Hobbes later goes on to develop the Social Contract Theory and its importance to create civility through secularism.

If we look back at the Book of Revelation by John, he attacks "Nominal" Christians and separates them into a different category (Revelation 3:16). Such notions means that the problem originated early in Christian history. The previous would suggest that there is a pre-modern and modern era Anabaptist impulse.

No comments:

Post a Comment