Nascence to End Work

•  
• Home
• About Us
• Waking Up
• Blog
• Tools
• Contact Us

 

This is the 'Reference' Page for: “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.7): From Marx to Alice

 

This page hosts our Waking Up Radio discussions for the "3.7" page that examine the intersection of Marx with Alice Miller from the archives: April 5, May 3, June 7, and August 9, 2015 shows. Please visit the "3.7" Page for our August 23, 2015 - current: "Segue From Antisystemic Movements to Alice" shows, please visit: “Embracing Global Goals (Part 3.6): Segue to Alice". For a complete set of the pre-August 23, 2015 "Segue From Antisystemic Movements to Alice" shows, please visit: “Embracing Global Goals (Part 3.6): Segue to Alice"

–––

 

Please review (they are listed in the side-table) the January 11, 2015 through the February 8, 2015 shows in preparation for our subsequent shows. For our February 29, 2015 show there is a reading assignment:

 

Excerpts from “Hegemony and Antisystemic Movements,” by Giovanni Arrighi and “Prison Notebooks,” by Antonio Gramsci to be discussed in our (projected) April, 2015 “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3) Shows

 

–––

 

Please check out our “anti-coercion commercials” posted on YouTube. Art by Wassily Kandinsky (except in “Future Freedom” which presents “Freedom Sun” by David Sterenberg) and original music and beats by Thandiwe Satterwhite. The entire collection (including the most recent) can be found at: “Nascence Anti-coercion Commercials”:

 

–––

 

* “WUR of April 5th, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 2):

[The spoken word of the following wordbeat is from the March 29, 2015 show:

 

““Can there be a broad… popular… movement for 'soul-sufficiency'? But there must be… for us to achieve our freedom. What would it look like? How would we know it?… if not by its goals… if not by its representing for all the world?… i.e., 'soul-sufficiency' necessarily means a design tied to others all over the world… necessarily has a global cast… taking on the challenge of consciously composing… a 'global symphony'… of all our voices…” “Laws for creations, For strong artists and leaders, for fresh broods of teachers and perfect literats for America, For noble savans and coming musicians. All must have reference to the ensemble of the world, and the compact truth of the world, There shall be no subject too pronounced – all works shall illustrate the divine law of indirections. What do you suppose creation is? What do you suppose will satisfy the soul, except to walk free and own no superior? What do you suppose I would intimate to you in a hundred ways, but that man or woman is as good as God? And that there is no God any more divine than Yourself? And that that is what the oldest and newest myths finally mean? And that you or any one must approach creations through such laws?.…” [Walt Whitman is quoted in the spoken word… which is from our March 29, 2015 radio broadcast.]

–––

 

Today’s show: “'Longing' Is the Taproot”

[“150405hiddenpower.mp3”:]

 

In abandoning our – we-the-people's – original understanding of the concept of 'the class struggle' as global social transformation… the professional Left abandoned us.… So we see from this… the importance of basing action on analysis… and of factoring into it… “hidden 'power'”. Because all our clear-headed theory otherwise… leading… as our Good Three do… to the global theater… will… time after time… get ship-wrecked on the rocky shoals of this strategic weapon…

 

[Sisters and Brothers… because edits to the "Embracing Global Goals (Part 2)" page no longer 'save'… I am posting the html text for this show on the: Excerpts from Arrighi and Gramsci page… but please also download the pdf form… available on the main 'Blog' section of the website… – P.S.]

–––

 

March 31, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: In abandoning our – we-the-people's – original understanding of the concept of 'the class struggle' as global social transformation… the professional Left abandoned us.

 

As for 'reason'… before… before my own up-close-and-personal experience with the shadow-global-state… I would have lain the cause at either Ignorance's or Intentional Misdirection's door… and it can fall to either… sure…

 

…but… now… I'd say… the cause should be placed… mainly… at the door of 'power's secret possession of… let's call it their 'EMF-strategy'… possession of a secret weapon – key to their need to stay hidden – so they may dispense with overt repression…

 

…for these things… and more… they want to keep their weapon (or family of weapons…) and keep it (and… particularly… the fact that it is being used against 'citizens'…)

 

…hidden…

 

…and their resources are effectively limitless.

 

So we see from this… the importance of basing action on analysis… and of factoring into it… “hidden 'power'”. Because all our clear-headed theory otherwise… leading… as our Good Three do… to the global theater… will… time after time… get ship-wrecked on the rocky shoals of this strategic weapon…

 

…time after time… will our clear-headed theorists… simply disappear from amongst us… while the false voices of the political pundits get pumped into our ears… ad infinitum…

(And… an aside: we are talking here about a massive secret played out in plain sight… as Shakespeare said: “seen in thought”… I don't know how many hundreds of folks are involved in just my tracking and monitoring alone… and one thing I've seen about this… is… 'power' uses a lot of the low-income… 'disposable'… I'm sure they consider them… I suspect 'power' keeps an accurate list and that its plans for them are not pleasant. We must never forget Miklos' lessons from Auschwitz.)

 

And another… as I've been forced to confront… perhaps more consciously than most… these 'assets' of the global-state… for over six years now: at the start of this journey into darkness – in which I nonetheless found love… and light – I would never have guessed the depths to which these 'power'-guys will go… the resources (which are infinite…) they will apply… to stop we-the-people from simply thinking. It is astonishing… no wonder it would never occur to us (and of course they count on this…) – they will put together teams just to study a subject's psychology… ferret out her vulnerabilities… plant agents in their way to fuel them… these perceived weaknesses… try to find whatever could be twisted into a false-skeleton with which they can construct a myth to say was closeted…

 

…point being: to say we are out-gunned is ludicrous understatement and we need each other to establish more clearly what is being done to us… and how to… not just move in it… but beyond it…

 

…and… what I've learned… is that we have to stay present… because it is when we lose consciousness (i.e. are asleep…) that they turn up the EMF-heat… and we have to be able to hear what our bodies are saying when they are experiencing that distress…

 

…please… let's talk about this.)

 

–––

 

[“150405passion.mp3”:]

 

Can we fall in love with ourselves as we discover each other's voices?… we asked in a recent show… longing for what we are… longing to see it live… …and what we are… is passionate… deeply… expansively… voraciously… passionate: we want our passion – and real passion 'power' fears as it can't be predicted or controlled… real passion… which is but our full human capacity rising in us – to live… Longing… hope… and of course determination… these are the qualities that fuel our movement. Aren't they the taproot of solidarity?

This World is not Conclusion.

A Species stands beyond –

Invisible, as Music –

But positive, as Sound –

It beckons, and it baffles –

Philosophy – don’t know –

And through a Riddle, at the last –

Sagacity, must go – …

Emily Dickinson)

(# 501)

This is Shakespeare's (and Whitman's… and all our “for-this-moment-of-'class'-dissolution-ancestors-of-heart's”…) point: “the heart has reasons that Reason knows not of…”

 

…which returns us… ever returns us… to this question of passion… and longing……

[Isn't this a perfect expression of 'longing'?:

Wynton Marsalis' and Eric Clapton's “Layla”.

Can we fall in love with ourselves as we discover each other's voices?… we asked in a recent show… longing for what we are… longing to see it live…

 

……and what we are… is passionate… deeply… expansively… voraciously… passionate: we want our passion – and real passion 'power' fears as it can't be predicted or controlled… real passion… which is but our full human capacity rising in us – to live.

 

It is a powerful force… It's called 'the earth': “life's longing for itself…” (this reaction to suppression is also what Alice Miller talks about in Prisoners of Childhood…)

 

…and I can speak on this first-hand. I was at risk of losing my love… I know this by the contrast… as it builds… as it grows… because I've never felt such longing as this… so weak you can barely speak… longing comes from the core of our being… longing for our voices to meet… to see ourselves – our passion – reflected back…

 

Walt Whitman expresses this with these lines: “The untold want by life and land ne'er granted, Now voyager sail thou forth to seek and find.”

 

And Zora… with these: “She had been getting ready for her great journey to the horizons in search of people; it was important to all the world that she should find them and they find her…” (Their Eyes Were Watching God)

 

Longing… hope… and of course determination… these are the qualities that fuel our movement. Aren't they the taproot of solidarity?

 

–––

[“150405mothertongue.mp3”:]

 

We are in the moment of “coming to terms” with the mission of fulfilling our ancestors' vision… in realizing this transition to a world established consciously… by all of us. Our Good Three have been arguing that we need a new way of conceptualizing and describing this challenge… but we've had that language… held in trust for us… by the earth-connected: it is the language of truth and beauty… the language of our Grandmother Earth… our mother-tongue… which we have been systematically kept from seeing… or trusting… when we do. Our great ones of heart who speak it… are there for us to turn to now… when we need unshakeable authority… for mutually inter-linking our efforts globally.

 

Wild Nights – Wild Nights!

Were I with thee

Wild Nights should be

Our luxury!

 

Futile – the Winds –

To a Heart in port –

Done with the Compass –

Done with the Chart!

 

Rowing in Eden –

Ah, the Sea!

Might I but moor – Tonight –

In Thee!

 

(# 249)

…longing returns us…

 

…to that which is given to us… not by 'systems' – invented to convert passion into units of exchange… units of energy (never forget… it is our creative energy behind everything…) – but by… and from… the earth itself… the source of our inherent freedom…

 

It is this inherent freedom… this earth beneath our feet… and in our bodies – earth-given and -driven… what we're calling the quality of being 'soul-sufficient' – for which we long…

 

…and to achieve it… as a species… we have to work together… globally…

 

…and to work together we must agree on the meanings of things… have common definitions… possess a lingua franca…

 

…which we have… in our mother-tongue…

This is my letter to the World

That never wrote to Me –

The simple News that Nature told –

With tender Majesty

 

Her Message is committed

To Hands I cannot see –

For love of Her – Sweet – countrymen

Judge tenderly – of Me

 

(# 441)

…and so… circularly… destination is also means:

 

…we have to re-greet… explore… play with… become free with… our mother-tongue of freedom.

 

How do we re-learn it? Who speaks it?… if not our ancestors-of-heart… our living earth-connected… the indigenous… and the artists… those on the path of continuous growth… committed to its re-learning – despite state-suppression – through this project of becoming 'soul-sufficient'.

Much Madness is divinest Sense –

To a discerning Eye –

Much Sense – the starkest Madness –

'Tis the Majority

In this, as All, prevail –

Assent – and you are sane –

Demur – you're straightway dangerous –

And handled with a Chain –

 

(# 435)

We are in the moment of “coming to terms” with the mission of fulfilling our ancestors' vision… in realizing this transition to a world established consciously… by all of us. Our Good Three have been arguing that we need a new way of conceptualizing and describing this challenge… but we've had that language… held in trust for us… by the earth-connected: it is the language of truth and beauty… the language of our Grandmother Earth… our mother-tongue… which we have been systematically kept from seeing… or trusting… when we do. Our great ones of heart who speak it… are there for us to turn to now… when we need unshakeable authority… for mutually inter-linking our efforts globally.

 

[“150405whosetsterms.mp3”:]

 

…the issue they are really calling our attention to… with this question… is Bentham's… it's all about language: who controls the lexicon… the definitions… So… what does it look like… this freedom?… and the forms by which we achieve it?… And what are its dimensions? What does it mean to be 'antisystemic'?

 

Later on in the program we will read that:

In brief, in question is – assuming we're collectively and actively concerned with furthering the transformation of the capitalist world-system into a socialist world-system – 'whose' socialism? That, it seems to us, is the query posed by the growing if still muted 'anti-Westernism'. It addresses directly the assumption that the coming socialist world-system is of Western manufacture, so to speak.

Stated (to my mind) more helpfully… the issue they are really calling our attention to… with this question… is Bentham's… it's all about language: who controls the lexicon… the definitions… So… what does it look like… this freedom?… and the forms by which we achieve it?… And what are its dimensions? What does it mean to be 'antisystemic'?

[“150405theaxis.mp3”:]

 

…'truth' and 'beauty' must be the axis that regulates the wheel of the world we want… Presently it is the soulless who make the decisions for us… This cannot be… if we are to honor our full humanity…

 

I died for Beauty – but was scarce

Adjusted in the Tomb –

When One who died for Truth, was lain

In an adjoining Room –

 

He questioned softly “Why I failed”?

“For Beauty”, I replied –

“And I – for Truth – Themself are One –

We Brethren are”, He said –

 

And so, as Kinsmen, met a Night –

We talked between the Rooms –

Until the Moss had reached our lips –

And covered up – our names –

 

(# 449)

You see… 'truth' and 'beauty' must be the axis that regulates the wheel of the world we want… Presently it is the soulless who make the decisions for us… This cannot be… if we are to honor our full humanity…

Perhaps the central question is this: how, and to what extent, can the well-organized arms of progressive movements in Western Europe, framed as they are by their current forms and immediate concerns, recompose themselves into agencies, not of national realization but of world-historical transformation? This recomposition would mean they became in the future as subversive of the interstate system per se as they have in the past been its products and proponents.

 

[Of the processes that stem… from 'capital's ongoing centralization…] the second and third… entail the redefinition of trajectories. For the de-nationalization of domestic labor forces suggests a fundamental change, on the part of the left, as to what “national” means…. To accomplish the reconception will entail a degree and kind of substantive and rhetorical inventiveness not presently in ascendance within prominent movements. And the third, the increasing salience of the gender question, entails… the further generalization, from the pauperization of women to the pauperization of people on a world-scale, that is precisely the change in consciousness the very effectiveness of the organizations in core zones may help to bring about, as part of world-scale movements that bypass and so subvert interstate arrangements.…

(We're going to be thinking more about this… the suggestion that you can 'bypass and so subvert interstate arrangements…' and still keep intact the overall centralization of capital processes that are going on – or… in the terms being developed here… maintain the global-state-statesmen… the 'power'-guys… hidden 'power'. And we're also going to be pondering this whole issue of: How do we create a global consciousness of our shared purpose and objectives…)

 

The Outer – from the Inner

Derives its Magnitude –

'Tis Duke, or Dwarf, according

As is the Central Mood –

[I like the way she puts that… that sort of covers it all… 'the central mood': be that 'dangerous… unhealthy obsession…' or be that… 'life's longing for itself…' (nothing healthier than that…) – P.S.]

The fine – unvarying Axis

That regulates the Wheel –

Though Spokes – spin – more conspicuous

And fling a dust – the while.

 

The Inner paints the Outer –

The Brush without the Hand –

Its Picture publishes – precise –

As is the inner Brand

 

On fine – Arterial Canvas –

A Cheek – perchance a Brow –

The Star's whole Secret – in the Lake –

Eyes were not meant to know.

 

(# 451)

She's describing the micro that applies equally to the macro… of this deadly… dangerous… system of 'class' we've been stuck in.

 

[“150405thingwithfeathers.mp3”:]

 

“Hope” is the thing with feathers –That perches in the soul – And sings the tune without the words – And never stops – at all –

 

'Truth' and 'beauty' must be the axis that regulates the wheel of the world we want… they are… as we speak… being disinterred by Emily… and Bob… and all the Karls… and Zora… – the ancestors of heart who have probed this millennia-long madness called 'class' and left their precious Hope:

“Hope” is the thing with feathers –

That perches in the soul –

And sings the tune without the words –

And never stops – at all –

 

And sweetest – in the Gale – is heard –

And sore must be the storm –

That could abash the little Bird

That kept so many warm –

 

I've heard it in the chillest land –

And on the strangest Sea –

Yet, never, in Extremity,

It asked a crumb – of Me.

 

(# 254)

–––

 

[Today’s reading: the conclusion of Chapter 4, “Beyond Haymarket?”… and resumption of Chapter 5 of Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein’s Antisystemic Movements…, “1968: The Great Rehearsal”… – P.S.]

 

–––

 

* April 5th, 2015 reading: finishing Chapter 4, “Beyond Haymarket?”… before returning to Chapter 5 of Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein’s Antisystemic Movements…

 

[“[“150405ruleproduction.mp3”:]”:]

 

In our last show we questioned whether relations of 'rule' – the crafted 'legitimacy' (the internalized mental states that ensure 'citizens' obey…) nation-states use to compel our obedience – were… in fact… contradicted by relations of production… the rules for consuming the earth global statesmen invent to establish the material conditions that reinforce their rule… We could perhaps think of these two broad arenas as two locks on our ability to move… with the chain being our obedience…

 

Second [of three “subordinate 'directional' changes for the 'capitalist development' of capital” attendant upon “the growing contradiction between relations of rule… and relations of production.” The first was the challenge states face by increasing 'constituencies of welfare”… and the state's inability to meet popular expectations… – P.S.] is the seemingly contradictory growth – contradictory to the capitalist development of capital – of “human rights” as an organizing concern of growing numbers of intellectuals and popular leaders, of various persuasions, throughout the world. To a large extent – framed, as the issue has been, almost solely in terms of relations of rule (its immediate locus of course, as “issue”) – the comprehension of its emergence as reflecting the contradictions between relations of rule and relations of production (including relations of appropriation) has been slow to form.…

[In our last show we questioned whether relations of 'rule' – the crafted 'legitimacy' (the internalized mental states that ensure 'citizens' obey…) nation-states use to compel our obedience – were… in fact… contradicted by relations of production… the rules for consuming the earth global statesmen invent to establish the material conditions that reinforce their rule… We could perhaps think of these two broad arenas as two locks on our ability to move… with the chain being our obedience… – P.S.]

[“150405civildepth.mp3”:]

 

“The tendency shows more fundamentally, if less clearly theoretically, in the question of how relations of rule relate to relations of production. We reach here matters of very considerable civilizational depth, where even the distinction which we have been working with disappears. For the challenge, in process of realization, is to the 'Westernism' of our ways of thinking – and, to short-circuit much – to our ways of conceiving of the 'socialism' of a socialist world-system and so derivatively to our ways of identifying what is or is not 'progressive'…”

 

…The rights of workers in the end underpin all others. Without the former, such “rights” as others may have are but certificates issued; annullable by the particular apparatus of “stateness” that forms the confrontational relation. As elsewhere in our conditions of existence, so here too does the capital – labor relation organize the terrain of confrontation and discourse.

 

A third tendential development is the growing “anti-Westernism” of the peoples of the peripheralized and semiperipheralized zone of the world-economy's operations. Primarily channelled in and through the interstate system, the impetus for the sentiment lies not in mere “anti-imperialist” (positively put, “nationalist”) movements but rather in elemental challenges to the “Westernism,” as encompassing civilization, that the capitalist development of the modern world as historical social system has entailed. This is a domain of inquiry fraught with difficulties, both theoretical and historical, for the once colonized and the once colonizing alike (specifically presuming good faith on the part of each, however central the historical divide perforce remains).

[The points being made here are really worth exploring in greater depth… they're talking about an “anti-Westernism” that encompasses 'civilization' more so than representing simply 'anti-imperialism'… – P.S.]

The tendency shows more fundamentally, if less clearly theoretically, in the question of how relations of rule relate to relations of production. We reach here matters of very considerable civilizational depth, where even the distinction which we have been working with disappears. For the challenge, in process of realization, is to the 'Westernism' of our ways of thinking – and, to short-circuit much – to our ways of conceiving of the 'socialism' of a socialist world-system and so derivatively to our ways of identifying what is or is not 'progressive'.

[Our Good Three are wrestling with the real problems those of us who want a global social transformation to freedom… face… I haven't heard this since: what is the nature of the future we want?… if it is 'anti-civilizational'… what does that mean? And this is not to criticize Immanuel Wallerstein… at all… particularly now that I am seeing… what likely happened to his brethren… – P.S.]

[“150405denational.mp3”:]

 

“The further processes… entail the redefinition of trajectories. For the de-nationalization of domestic labor forces suggests a fundamental change, on the part of the left, as to what “national” means…” [I'm still wanting… at some point… to address the 'Black Lives Matter' issue – although it is “fraught with difficulties…” to use our Good Three's language… There was a photo in the local student paper in which was shown those words – “Black Lives Matter” – lit up in neon lights on the City Hall Lawn… and I couldn't help but think… what if all the resources (because there's money there…) had been put behind the Occupy Movement?… and all the media coverage?… Beaucoup… beaucoup… on this issue of how racism is supposedly still dividing us… discussion-time much better 'spent'… coming together and deciding what we want… instead of constantly reacting to what the media tells us is what we're supposed to be doing… We need our 'own things'… as Ntozake told us… back in the day… – P.S.]

 

In brief, in question is – assuming we're collectively and actively concerned with furthering the transformation of the capitalist world-system into a socialist world-system – 'whose' socialism? That, it seems to us, is the query posed by the growing if still muted 'anti-Westernism'. It addresses directly the assumption that the coming socialist world-system is of Western manufacture, so to speak.

 

Perhaps the central question is this: how, and to what extent, can the well-organized arms of progressive movements in Western Europe, framed as they are by their current forms and immediate concerns, recompose themselves into agencies, not of national realization but of world-historical transformation? This recomposition would mean they became in the future as subversive of the interstate system per se as they have in the past been its products and proponents.

 

The centralization of capital per se can be neither factually nor strategically a legitimate concern of movements, it as process being for them formative merely of terrain, not of objective.…

[The 'logic of capital' working against us again? Because if the privatization of our common earth is in fact part of the 'global-state-statesmen's conscious plan… it does indeed speak to our need to see the 'opposite' of that… come to pass… and that… reclaiming our human energy – which is the only meaningful expression of 'de-nationalization' is… by definition de-centralizing 'capital'… – P.S.]

…The further processes it entails, however, produce the very politics of movement formation and growth. The first observation above, about the relocating of the epicenter of overt “classical” class struggle, implies merely a refocusing of Western European movements. The second and third, in contrast, entail the redefinition of trajectories. For the de-nationalization of domestic labor forces suggests a fundamental change, on the part of the left, as to what “national” means (thus leaving to the right the systemically formed residues of “primordial” sentiments). To accomplish the reconception will entail a degree and kind of substantive and rhetorical inventiveness not presently in ascendance within prominent movements. And the third, the increasing salience of the gender question, entails; (1) the elimination from the movements of yet another (and in a different sense) “primordial” sentiment, and (2) the world-scale generality of – hence organizational subordination to – what is essentially a reforming movement (“capitalism” being quite able “to develop” under conditions of legal and substantive gender equality).…

[…and we see this too with… a lot of different things… I'm still wanting… at some point… to address the 'Black Lives Matter' issue – although it is “fraught with difficulties…” to use our Good Three's language… There was a photo in the local student paper in which was shown those words – “Black Lives Matter” – lit up in neon lights on the City Hall Lawn… and I couldn't help but think… what if all the resources (because there's money there…) had been put behind the Occupy Movement?… and all the media coverage?… Beaucoup… beaucoup… on this issue of how racism is supposedly still dividing us… discussion-time much better 'spent'… coming together and deciding what we want… instead of constantly reacting to what the media tells us is what we're supposed to be doing… We need our 'own things'… as Ntozake told us… back in the day… – P.S.]

[“150405vonwerlhof.mp3”:]

 

“An alternative is possible only if we, men and women, succeed in getting back forever not simply the wage, but much more – namely the means of production: our bodies and our children, our houses and our land, our knowledge and our creativity, and the results of our labor. We want all this without continuing to depend on “central powers” like puppets, so that we can work for our own, autonomous existence…” [What happens to all the hard work that is done by our good-hearted folks from academia?… – P.S.]

 

…It is the further generalization, from the pauperization of women to the pauperization of people on a world-scale, that is precisely the change in consciousness the very effectiveness of the organizations in core zones may help to bring about, as part of world-scale movements that bypass and so subvert interstate arrangements.… [And… again… notice the strategic thinking… what challenges the 'logic'… the premises… of the interstate-system (i.e., the 'power'-guys…) and what doesn't… – P.S.]

Claudia von Werlhof puts it like this:

 

The production of human beings in a society like ours [i.e. in a global 'class' system… – P.S.] is, however, not only the most important, permanently necessary, and the most difficult task; it is also particularly frustrating… That is why women have developed a specifically feminine capacity for work; they had to develop it. It gets its orientation from the fertility of their bodies. Creating a new life (through childbirth) is the principle that women apply also to all other activities – earlier for the common benefit of all people, today for the benefit of the system.

[…although really 'slave work capacity' works equally well… I don't think it's helpful at this point to make too much of female generative capacities… As our Good Three are saying… the point is to generalize our movement focus… and I think von Werlhof would agree… as generalized – and ever-growing – immiseration is a structural requirement of 'class'… – P.S.]

Everything that women do must bear fruit and it must be gratis, like the air we breathe.… All these duties and qualities make up the feminine work capacity.… Not the generalization of wage labor, but the generalization of housework is therefore the dream of all capitalists. There is no cheaper, more productive or more fruitful human labor, and one can also enforce it without the whip. I believe that the restructuring of our economy will involve the effort to re-educate the men and force upon them, as far as possible, the feminine work capacity.…

 

An alternative is possible only if we, men and women, succeed in getting back forever not simply the wage, but much more – namely the means of production: our bodies and our children, our houses and our land, our knowledge and our creativity, and the results of our labor. We want all this without continuing to depend on “central powers” like puppets, so that we can work for our own, autonomous existence. [What happens to all the hard work that is done by our good-hearted folks from academia?… – P.S.] (“The Proletarian Is Dead; Long Live the Housewife?” by Claudia von Werlhof, published in Households and the World-Economy [edited by Joan Smith, Immanuel Wallerstein, and Hans-Dieter Evers; published in 1984)

…The growing contradictions between relations of rule and relations of production will in all likelihood occasion a plethora of radical nationalist expressions and “movements”. But world-scale movements, with emanations in various national arenas, may prove world historically even more consequential. At least, this is the major positive direction in which to move.

[And this of course explains why Empire was commissioned. Negri and Hardt being (or were to be…) the 'Hegel' of this current 'post-capital' full-scale strut of the 'global-state': i.e. the Republic. We continue now our reading of Chapter 5 of Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein’s Antisystemic Movements…, “1968: The Great Rehearsal”… – P.S.]

–––

 

[April 4, 2015 show ends here.]

 

–––

 

* “WUR of May 3rd, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3):

Here's a song to celebrate our Flyin' High Day: Freedom… Leisure… Independence… Happiness Is Global Humans… Day… this May 1st:

 

“Let the good times roll…” [B.B. King]

–––

 

[“150503redemption.mp3”:]

 

…and part of the process of creating these 'safe' spaces… part of that 'safety' is this process of helping each other get 'big'… and that's how I define 'healing'… because it's reclaiming the lost 'self'…

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency” (Part 3)

 

…and part of the process of creating these 'safe' spaces… part of that 'safety' is this process of helping each other get 'big'… and that's how I define 'healing'… because it's reclaiming the lost 'self'…

I was looking at a photo of Mingus near the end…

and saw my swollen face in his…

…how many of the ones who love us most…

…have they taken from our midst…

…how many of the most courageous…

(…and I'm not talking me…)

…have they 'saved' us from…

How much longer…

…will we let it go on?

…simply to hold back the day…

…when we finally live free…

…and be each other's bedazzling…

[“150503abilitytoexpresslove.mp3”:]

 

…because that's really what this is about… truly… the ability to express our love… 'power' has intentionally made our world hazardous on every level… in order to suppress our love… and our ability to express it… it's much deeper than I realized going in… six years ago… “Leisure IS Happiness…” …and our bodies know this… and when we trust ourselves enough to listen… we hear that… we know that… that we can't begin to be happy if we're being rushed around… compelled… coerced… to implement the objectives… the orders… of others… we have to own ourselves to be happy… no living thing wants to be in a cage… and we have not discussed the fact that we are living in a cage… in a class system… where our human energy is compelled…

 

April 28, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: As you know… how we can express our love… the importance of this…

(…because that's really what this is about… truly… the ability to express our love… 'power' has intentionally made our world hazardous on every level… in order to suppress our love… and our ability to express it…

 

…we're going to continue to delve into this issue… it's much deeper than I realized going in… six years ago…)

As you know… how we can express our love… the importance of this… has recently been brought to my attention (to my soul's salvation…) and… in that context…

(…and it must be said: the fact that I have put good-hearted folks – and one in particular who sets me aflame… my whole world rocking… a far greater heart than mine… as I walked in blind… – at risk… is my only regret…

 

– it's such an odd feeling… to be so simultaneously happy… and so worried… it almost makes you feel guilty… to be so happy… feel so light… at such a price…)

…I've been pondering this notion… of 'power' (and we-the-people… until we talk about it… and reconceive our allegiance…) believing that it 'develops us' as it uses us… as it makes us cogs in their machine…

 

There are (at least) two sides to this that we'll be considering today… the first we've discussed before… and I've written about on the page, Founding & Realizing A Test Site – not modeled on ‘democracy’… but on freedom – Premised On “Leisure IS Happiness… –

(…and our bodies know this… and when we trust ourselves enough to listen… we hear that… we know that… that we can't begin to be happy if we're being rushed around… compelled… coerced… to implement the objectives… the orders… of others… we have to own ourselves to be happy… no living thing wants to be in a cage… and we have not discussed the fact that we are living in a cage… in a class system… where our human energy is compelled…)

[“150503leveltowhat.mp3”:]

 

I've been pondering this notion of how we could imagine ourselves being 'developed' as we're being 'made-use-of'… made 'cogs' in their machine… in our earlier discussions of this issue… when we discussed De Tocqueville's contribution to global-'power's self-concept and definition of their objectives… their goals… we discussed this in the context of what De Tocqueville thought of as 'the leveling effect of commerce'… – that it tends toward an 'equality of conditions'.… “Men are not corrupted by the exercise of power or debased by the habit of obedience; but by the exercise of a power which they believe to be illegal and by obedience to a rule which they consider to be usurped and oppressive…” How is it that folks can be 'happy' to be obedient?… Are we born that way?… No. We've discussed for a while how what feels happy is 'self-definition'… being 'big'… claiming ourselves… naming ourselves… that's what makes us happy… and energized… So how is it that someone can be 'happy' to be obedient?… which… De Tocqueville says… in that state they are not debased… Really? Just the opposite. I guess the point here is: what 'power' makes us to be is 'reality'… that's essentially what he's saying…

 

So I've been pondering this notion of how we could imagine ourselves being 'developed' as we're being 'made-use-of'… made 'cogs' in their machine… in our earlier discussions of this issue… when we discussed De Tocqueville's contribution to global-'power's self-concept and definition of their objectives… their goals… we discussed this in the context of what De Tocqueville thought of as 'the leveling effect of commerce'… – that it tends toward an 'equality of conditions'. But we should keep in mind as we read… that he is rooted in the notion that this process is 'civilizing'… he doesn't see within the scope of his notion of 'humanity'… the earth-connected indigenous… has no notion of the earth itself being the source… the fuel for… a broadening to a universal beauty and truth… of each individual one of us:

Men are not corrupted by the exercise of power or debased by the habit of obedience; but by the exercise of a power which they believe to be illegal and by obedience to a rule which they consider to be usurped and oppressive… [This is a good expression of C.L.R. James' point that “…passive obedience is precisely the basis of bourgeois (I would say 'class'…) society… They want us to be 'happy' with whatever is our assigned 'place'…” and we've had… in this space… elaborated discussions of that point… because it's never discussed over the airwaves and it's a really important discussion: How is it that folks can be 'happy' to be obedient?… Are we born that way?… No. We've discussed for a while how what feels happy is 'self-definition'… being 'big'… claiming ourselves… naming ourselves… that's what makes us happy… and energized… So how is it that someone can be 'happy' to be obedient?… which… De Tocqueville says… in that state they are not debased… Really? Just the opposite. I guess the point here is: what 'power' makes us to be is 'reality'… that's essentially what he's saying… – P.S]

 

[“150503debasedbywage.mp3”:]

 

…and by 'universal level' we should hear 'a single pattern of thought'… the definition of 'totalitarianism'… Voice names what exists – that's why it's so critical we stop mis-naming reality to our children – if no one names totalitarianism for what it is… it can't be discussed. It's all around us… covered by 'the wage'… 'the price'… of a human being… wearing the face of normality. Notice – not even 'the Left' over the airwaves will say this… that we are debased by the wage… …Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America – this is a book I am absolutely certain 'power' uses as propaganda with our young people… because his words can be so mis-understood… and encouraged to be so mis-understood… like Plato's… it's a perfect propaganda tool for 'power'… We must not mistake his argument… he is wedded utterly to 'class'… Rather… he believes in the inevitability of 'social equality' between the 'classes'. And I think we're seeing indications of the influence of his thinking here in the US right now… we could include in that category the granting of legal equality to 'sexual minorities'… gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered… to all formerly discriminated-against groups… that in granting 'legal equality' (which begins the process of conferring 'social equality'…) we are seeing an expression of what De Tocqueville is talking about in terms of everybody becoming 'equal'… he is not talking about the elimination of 'class'… Just the opposite… he's saying that “to preserve 'class' we have to ensure there is 'social equality between the 'classes' and the various social groups…”

 

As soon as land was held on any other than a feudal tenure, and personal property began in its turn to confer influence and power, every improvement which was introduced in commerce or manufacture was a fresh element of the equality of conditions. Henceforward every new discovery, every new want which it engendered, and every new desire which craved satisfaction, was a step towards the universal level. […and by 'universal level' we should hear 'a single pattern of thought'… the definition of 'totalitarianism'… Voice names what exists – that's why it's so critical we stop mis-naming reality to our children – if no one names totalitarianism for what it is… it can't be discussed. It's all around us… covered by 'the wage'… 'the price'… of a human being… wearing the face of normality. Notice – not even 'the Left' over the airwaves will say this… that we are debased by the wage… – P.S] The taste for luxury, the love of war, the sway of fashion, and the most superficial as well as the deepest passions of the human heart, co-operated to enrich the poor and to impoverish the rich. [And by 'impoverish the rich'… he's talking about the destruction of the old feudal order… inherited wealth based in a connection to the possession of land… and not in the restless drive for 'Perfection' that bedevils the Plato's Tribesmen… P.S.]

 

From the time when the exercise of the intellect became the source of strength and of wealth, it is impossible not to consider every addition to science, every fresh truth, and every new idea as a germ of power placed within the reach of the people. Poetry, eloquence, and memory, the grace of wit, the glow of imagination, the depth of thought, and all the gifts which are bestowed by Providence with an equal hand, turned to the advantage of the democracy; and even when they were in the possession of its adversaries, they still served its cause by throwing into relief the natural greatness of man; its conquests spread, therefore, with those of civilization and knowledge; and literature became an arsenal, where the poorest and the weakest could always find weapons to their hand.

 

In perusing the pages of our history, we shall scarcely meet with a single great event, in the lapse of seven hundred years, which has not turned to the advantage of equality. (Alexis de Tocqueville, “Author's Preface”, Democracy in America)

And this is a book I am absolutely certain 'power' uses as propaganda with our young people… because his words can be so mis-understood… and encouraged to be so mis-understood… like Plato's… it's a perfect propaganda tool for 'power' (and I use the word 'propaganda' exclusively to mean “'power's attempts to manipulate our thinking”…)

 

We must not mistake his argument… he is wedded utterly to 'class'… Rather… he believes in the inevitability of 'social equality' between the 'classes'. And I think we're seeing indications of the influence of his thinking here in the US right now… we could include in that category the granting of legal equality to 'sexual minorities'… gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered… to all formerly discriminated-against groups… that in granting 'legal equality' (which begins the process of conferring 'social equality'…) we are seeing an expression of what De Tocqueville is talking about in terms of everybody becoming 'equal'… he is not talking about the elimination of 'class'… Just the opposite… he's saying that “to preserve 'class' we have to ensure there is 'social equality between the 'classes' and the various social groups…”

 

The issue for us to consider today is this: as we grow bigger… we global humans… as our knowledge of the world… our Brothers and Sisters… and how our imprisonment 'works'… as all this increases… 'power' wants to halt that process.

 

[Please listen again to some of our earlier thoughts on 'education'…. As the global-economy collapses… as the resources of the planet get consumed… or have been… 'power' has to figure out… since they can no longer buy off enough people with the wage… how they're going to buy us off… those who are left… and we're going to be talking about that…:]

 

Practical solutions… guidance – guidance that reflects the actual circumstances of our lives – is precisely what we’ve been denied… and this is what makes our Good Three’s contribution so important… and no less so Kropotkin’s… whose words… built on here suggests this: that ‘power’ uses ‘education’ (under ‘class’) to provide the ‘objective evidence’ of ‘natural inequality’… and ‘science’ (including Marxist theory…) as the legitimating ideology (full-spectrum propaganda-coverage…) ‘Vetting’ of the media is made automatic by the “‘class’ education project”… and that the ‘education process’ alone ensures that only the thought-parameters established by ‘power’ are allowed to see the light of day… the airwaves… [From our February 22, 2015 show.]

 

–––

 

…the ‘class’-system is based on the assumption of ‘scarcity’ (…because… if we think about it… if ‘knowledge’ is scarce… belongs to only a few… that can easily form the mental frame for ‘scarcity’ overall… because if we don't know what to do to preserve our own lives… reproduce ourselves… we are condemned to be slaves to Necessity…) – the belief that ‘there isn’t enough… stuff…’ and that we-the-people are not sufficient… and that we believe this… contrary to reality… because this is the substance of our ‘education’, both official and the unspoken ‘education’ embedded in our social relations… utterly dependent… And so… therefore… we also said… the flip-side of the story “The Elevation of The Few”… is our diminishment… in our own eyes. And truly… with this lens in our possession… the media-display becomes one long parade of illustration… of our conditioning to not see our own abundance. [From our January 25, 2015 show.]

 

–––

 

[“150503theystackthedeck.mp3”:]

 

Of course De Tocqueville did not really believe in an 'equality of conditions'… because that would mean… if he's honest… 'equality of education'… and this 'men who exercise power' would never allow. It seems to me De Tocqueville is right… that 'commerce' does tend toward a 'universal level' – if not an 'equality of conditions' – recalling our earlier point that 'universal level' implies 'single pattern of thought'… i.e. totalitarianism. This has ever been the direction Plato's Tribe intends to take all of us… globally… while telling us… per Bentham… that as long as we're all 'happy'… our particular place in their 'grand scheme' is 'objectively' fine… being 'objectively' defined… by the 'system' of 'education'… they will ever and always while they exist… stack the deck – always have… always will… while class exists – so… as we said during the February 22, 2015 show… it is on this – the 'system of education' – on which they intend to rely… which is why those they intend for 'low-slotted' positions… are slaughtered by 'terrorists' (across the ideological spectrum… and continents…) when they aspire (against this planned assignment…) higher… and… what has 'power' done in the past when there were 'too many people' – when we started talking to each other globally… getting rowdy… what has 'power' done: starved… crushed… blown our bodies up… in all the 'crises' made especially just for us…

 

…because I do believe that a lot of the apparent 'natural disasters' are not… and certainly the manufactured crises of 'under-the-table-paid-for-terrorist-groups' that cause havoc and destroy our hope – try to… let's don't let that work…

 

It seems to me De Tocqueville is right… that 'commerce' does tend toward a 'universal level' – if not an 'equality of conditions' – recalling our earlier point that 'universal level' implies 'single pattern of thought'… i.e. totalitarianism. This has ever been the direction Plato's Tribe intends to take all of us… globally… while telling us… per Bentham… that as long as we're all 'happy'… our particular place in their 'grand scheme' is 'objectively' fine… being 'objectively' defined… by the 'system' of 'education'… they will ever and always while they exist… stack the deck… so… as we said during the February 22, 2015 show… it is on this – the 'system of education' – on which they intend to rely… which is why those they intend for 'low-slotted' positions… are slaughtered by 'terrorists' (across the ideological spectrum… and continents…) when they aspire (against this planned assignment…) higher…

 

Of course De Tocqueville did not really believe in an 'equality of conditions'… because that would mean… if he's honest… 'equality of education'… and this 'men who exercise power' would never allow.

 

So as existing crises deepen… and in particular as more folks are cut loose from employment – or forced into accepting less-and-less… of everything… and those who accept 'less-and-less'-jobs… and find themselves patching them together… and rushing… rushing… rushing: even in those situations… the legitimacy of 'the state' breaks down – and those kicked to the curb for real… find they have more time… more time to think… more and more folks will be thinking about bigger things… even the biggest things. What has 'power' done in the past when there were 'too many people' – when we started talking to each other globally… getting rowdy… what has 'power' done: starved… crushed… blown our bodies up… in all the 'crises' made especially just for us…

 

…all the while… the supposed more 'realistic' (than 'democracy'…) model of 'China' is shoved at us. Haven't we been hearing this for some time now?… 'power's appreciation of how Chinese global-statesmen 'successfully' 'control' billions of commoner-Chinese… and so… “isn't there a need”… they say disingenuously… “to 'rethink' 'democracy'?…”

 

Last week we noted Karl Popper's point that Marx insufficiently credited the influence of 'the big fist'… the 'power'-guys'… who resist (refuse) all constraints upon their movements… and… (and this is my point…) operate behind scenes to create the 'reality' they need.

 

We can now add to this… that he didn't credit sufficiently the influence of “global 'power'”…

 

…or the degree to which it lives in each and every one of us under 'class': its ranking system… its 'productivity-emphasis'… its 'mind'-deification… all of which nullify our love for our Brothers and Sisters…

 

So as we said in that wordbeat… that the 'scarcity'-mindset is reinforced by the notion of 'knowledge' being scarce… in other show we've said that it's also reinforced… undergirded… by the 'wage work system' in many senses but in particular by the fact that parents have to go out and sell their human energy… and so children are left alone… when they need the tribe… full time… so because appreciation of our children… and love… and time… and attention… has been made a scarce commodity… our children are taught… with no words spoken about it… that love… attention… is something they have to 'earn'… and they grow up with this hunger for it… this need to be 'seen'… to be acknowledged… to be 'of use'… making them… ready soil for 'power' to plant its seeds in.

 

–––

 

[“150503economicruse.mp3”:]

 

…their creation 'capitalism' is sinking… that ship of Compelled Silence… which is the wage-work system… into which we've all been driven… with all our safe harbors inundated… washed into their sea of blood… They of course – those global-state-statesmen – knew all along it was meant to take on water… to bloat… to sink… to cast we hapless-many in the drink… but this 'economic ruse' is but one among their 'High Tech Tools'… …add to that: controlling discourse – our communications – on the Internet… and over the airwaves… and the physical elimination of dissent… by means of their development of EMF weaponry… …all of which they're doing now. Do any of us doubt their objective… is to install hardcore totalitarianism? So what can counter all this? What do we do about it?

 

So how do we seize this moment? How do we take back our lives?

 

It seems to me that with this question our Good Three posed: “[is]… the world-scale centralizing of capital… historically far enough advanced (as suggested by 'the absolute general law') to replace the interstate system's market-regulation via hegemony?…” they are asking if concentrated wealth in the hands of the Miniscule Few can wield an 'authority' equivalent to the 'authority of the market'… 'market-authority' – an equivalent authority based in the undisputed superiority of one set of global-state statesmen –

 

…to squash us… beat us down…

 

…and what I've learned… is that that – this squeeze on us materially…

(…which is what the market is about… and what it's for… what the concentration of all the resources of the planet into tiny… Miniscule Few… hands is for [to get us to do their bidding: “hunger will tame the fiercest animals…” – that's been their m.o. for a long time … thousands and thousands of years… it has served them well… and now 'power' is geared up to fix this class system in place permanently…] so this is a critical juncture… we don't want them to figure out how to snatch from our hands the advantage of… as our Good Three put it… 'electronification'…)

…but this 'economic ruse' is but one among their 'High Tech Tools'…

 

…add to that: controlling discourse – our communications – on the Internet… and over the airwaves… and the physical elimination of dissent… by means of their development of EMF weaponry…

 

…all of which they're doing now. Do any of us doubt their objective… is to install hardcore totalitarianism?

 

So what can counter all this? What do we do about it?

 

As to this matter of the loss of the 'martial-capability' of states… which we questioned during the April 19, 2015 show… our Good Three may only mean this in the sense they profess: that there are no hegemons (hegemonic states) left…

 

…nor can there ever be again…

 

…and in truth… 'hegemons' are but tools… the hidden and bidden global-state-statesmen have ever pulled the strings since they created the global-economy…

 

…and the true 'competition' has always been… since then… to identify the truly 'great' 'men'… of 'world-historic' proportions'…

 

…in truth but abandoned children.

 

These then… are the two ends of our dilemma… the harsh reality that must be faced: our strings are pulled by a Tiny Few… for no other reason than to see… their ignoble vision become reality… to determine who… in their competition for 'Most Misanthropic'… will reign 'supreme'…

 

…and the other side of this ignoble-ness… we-the-people mirror it internally… our mindset has been shaped to reflect… the priorities of 'power' perfectly…

 

…until now…

 

…as we finally see…

 

…their ship is sinking.

 

Friendly amendment: their creation 'capitalism' is sinking… that ship of Compelled Silence… which is the wage-work system… into which we've all been driven… with all our safe harbors inundated… washed into their sea of blood.

 

They of course – those global-state-statesmen – knew all along it was meant to take on water… to bloat… to sink… to cast we hapless-many in the drink…

 

But before then they'd fully intended to winnow our numbers such… that the survivors would be grateful much (a state of mind encouraged and supported – reinforced – by all the apocalyptic… 'fear-your-neighbors' propaganda…

…and have they ever been rolling that out thick and heavy… and the opposite is true… I must say… particularly as lots of good-hearted folks [including my son… addicted to this show I forget the name of… some vampire show…] the opposite happens when we have a crisis like an earthquake or whatever… we pull together… we help each other… the love we have within us is finally able to be expressed – that's the truth… not their so-called 'apocalypse'… please… let's remember that… don't be duped… even if you're hooked in the stories… because it's about forming a crew… 'power' knows what stories will hook us… we have to provide the counter-balance to that… with our discussions…

[“150503habitofobedience.mp3”:]

 

De Tocqueville's notion: 'leveling effect of commerce'… requiring the general imposition of 'the habit of obedience…' is… no less than Marx's 'general law of capitalist accumulation'… attempting to capture an extremely destructive process……in which… we're told… we 'develop' because that which is stolen from us… and from the earth overall… increases in quantity. De Tocqueville of course doesn't think about the depredations upon the earth required to force the globe into a common habit of obedience.

 

It's been difficult for us to come to grips with the reality that there are folks with this level of… essentially self-hate… because “I am thee… thee are me…” we are each other… and you cannot commit genocide… you cannot commit murder of any kind… without there being an element of self-loss in it… because we're all connected…

 

So… before they rolled out 'next-level' 'governance… they'd fully intended to winnow our numbers such… that the survivors would be grateful much (a state of mind encouraged and supported – reinforced – by all the apocalyptic… 'fear-your-neighbors' propaganda…) thankful for the wondrous 'science'… the 'magic' of which was used to 'save' our lives…

 

…so grateful we'd gladly accept… whatever crumbs they'd generously give us.

 

De Tocqueville's notion: 'leveling effect of commerce'… requiring the general imposition of 'the habit of obedience…' is… no less than Marx's 'general law of capitalist accumulation'… attempting to capture an extremely destructive process…

 

…in which… we're told we 'develop' because that which is stolen from us… and from the earth overall… increases in quantity. De Tocqueville of course doesn't think about the depredations upon the earth required to force the globe into a common habit of obedience.

(And this is of course Bentham's obsession as well: all these guys around the same time processing heads-rolling after the French Revolution and trying to figure out how to instill 'discipline'… how to have us do it for them – internalize discipline – and Bentham said… “have the parents do it… duh…” and they did.)

Marx… on the other hand… who does acknowledge this earth-impact… and our – we-the-people's – resulting general immiseration…

 

…doesn't think about the common imposition of 'the habit of obedience' as the necessary concomitant to the devastation of the earth…

 

…i.e.… we have to go along… with what is clearly insane.

 

[“150503seeyadontneedya.mp3”:]

 

But here's the catch that caught Marx's eye: that because there's a 'relative surplus' of us… this surplus of us grows “proportionately to the advances made by capitalist production not because the productiveness of social labour decreases, but because it increases…” […automation… 'electronification' of processes… instantaneous communication and flow of information… which to acquire converted huge amounts of the earth into physical things and money (financialization)… – and as all that 'social labor' increases… 'power' don't need us no more… it stole our substance and now it's time ('power' believes…) to say “bye… see ya… don't need ya…” Alright… so what does 'power' do? Now… Marx could see far but he couldn't see as far as into the diseased souls of these guys… plug in the technology… and you have a lot of room for a lot of misanthropy… a lot of genocide… a lot of blood-flow… a lot of phony-crises… and 'natural disasters'…

 

Let's consider… as we read… the full implications of Marx's “absolute general law of capitalist accumulation”:

We again meet here the previously defined law [in Capital, Vol. 1, p. 644: the tendency of the rate of profit to fall as “the capitalist mode of production develops and an ever larger quantity of capital is required to employ the same amount of labour-power…”] the previously defined law that the relative decrease of the variable capital, […'variable'… and this refers to us… we-the-people… 'variable' meaning: “how low can we make them go?” – 'power' is asking right this second… – P.S.] hence the development of the social productiveness of labour, […see… while we're driven low… we're supposed to be happy because 'we're' being 'developed' – our 'social existence'… i.e. our collective… concretized… capitalized selves… our 'stolen-human-energy-vested-in-objects' form… is growing… (yea!…) now… us individually… not so much… Now that's crazy. Why do we accept that deal? We should be talking about that… – P.S.] involves an increasingly large mass of total capital to set in motion the same quantity of labour-power and squeeze out the same quantity of surplus-labour. Consequently, the possibility of a relative surplus of labouring people […you feel me… it's time for 'heart'… phony 'Reason' and phony 'Rationality' has had its day – it's time for 'heart' to reclaim the intellectual discourse… because we are not happy with this deal… we do not want to see ourselves referred to as 'laboring people who are a “relative surplus”… meaning… that 'the economy' is all that matters… and not us… and 'the economy' being but the tool of global-'power' to privatize all the resources of the globe… and roll out its installed totalitarian state… But here's the catch that caught Marx's eye: that because there's a 'relative surplus' of us… this surplus of us grows “proportionately to the advances made by capitalist production…” – P.S..] develops proportionately to the advances made by capitalist production not because the productiveness of social labour decreases, but because it increases […automation… 'electronification' of processes… instantaneous communication and flow of information… which to acquire converted huge amounts of the earth into physical things and money (financialization)… – and as all that 'social labor' increases… 'power' don't need us no more… it stole our substance and now it's time ('power' believes…) to say “bye… see ya… don't need ya…” Alright… so what does 'power' do? Now… Marx could see far but he couldn't see as far as into the diseased souls of these guys… plug in the technology… and you have a lot of room for a lot of misanthropy… a lot of genocide… a lot of blood-flow… a lot of phony-crises… and 'natural disasters'… – P.S.] It does not therefore arise out of an absolute disproportion between labour and the means of subsistence, or the means for the production of these means of subsistence, but out of a disproportion occasioned by capitalist exploitation of labour, a disproportion between the progressive growth of capital and its relatively shrinking need for an increasing population. (Capital, Vol. 3, p. 222)

[“150503talkaboutpower.mp3”:]

 

…so 'capitalism' is doomed (was doomed from its onset…) – Immanuel Wallerstein was simply telling the obvious truth… …can we please start talking about 'power'?… We are at that point. Marx is right… this is the most important thing for us to be thinking about: as our social… collective… concretized… existence… stands in vast quantity hierarchically over us… and runs us via automation and electronification… we ain't needed anymore… And… no more 'capitalism'… This is why I'm focusing on this issue of 'obedience' right now… it seems like 'the point'… this issue of 'obedience'… that Marx did not devote enough time to… the point we just made: that you cannot have the accumulation of the entire resources of the planet into this Tiny Few's hands… unless you've had… prior to this… the broad imposition of the habit of obedience… and Marx didn't have time to get to this… So we have to finish that work… Right? We have to talk about the other side of our twin-dilemma: the fact that we've internalized this mess…

 

The rate of profit falls – and ever-expanding growth in the 'rate of profit' is what defines 'capitalism' – as the 'rate of profit' falls as 'capitalism' 'develops'…

 

…so 'capitalism' is doomed (was doomed from its onset…) – Immanuel Wallerstein was simply telling the obvious truth…

 

…can we please start talking about 'power'?

 

…'capitalism' is done… 'power' ain't… is the point… that we have to start discussing…

 

So as the rate of profit falls as 'capitalism' 'develops'…

 

…in earth-terms: the more of the earth (the physical resources of the planet…) are converted to 'capital'… (i.e. quantified and put in private hands…) – which… as crises deepen… ever-tends to its money-form ('financialization'… no more 'earth' to buy… plus… they know some difficult times are arriving and so it's good to have your stash…) whence conveyed to fewer and fewer hands…

 

…as this happens… there is less and less earth to do anything with… i.e. 'employ' us… we… the source of everything… we… the ones who make everything…

 

…nothing needs to be 'produced'… there is too much 'stuff' as it is (and they've already automated our humble tasks…) and so there's 'too many' of us (by their lights…) 'too many' stomachs… and we become 'superfluous'.

Marx concludes by saying that the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall is “in every respect the most important law of modern political economy… It is from the historical standpoint the most important law.” [Capital, III] It implies “that the material productive power already present, already worked out, existing in the form of fixed capital, together with the scientific power, population etc., in short all conditions… for the reproduction of wealth, i.e. the abundant development of the social individual – that the development of the productive forces brought about by the historical development of the productive forces brought about by the historical development of capital itself, when it reaches a certain historical development of capital itself, when it reaches a certain point, suspends the self-valorization of capital, instead of positing it.… (Roman Rosdolsky, The Making of Marx's 'Capital', 1968, p. 381 – 382)

We are at that point. Marx is right… this is the most important thing for us to be thinking about: as our social… collective… concretized… existence… stands in vast quantity hierarchically over us… and runs us via automation and electronification… we ain't needed anymore… And… no more 'capitalism'… This is why I'm focusing on this issue of 'obedience' right now… it seems like 'the point'… this issue of 'obedience'… that Marx did not devote enough time to… the point we just made: that you cannot have the accumulation of the entire resources of the planet into this Tiny Few's hands… unless you've had… prior to this… the broad imposition of the habit of obedience… and Marx didn't have time to get to this… So we have to finish that work… Right? We have to talk about the other side of our twin-dilemma: the fact that we've internalized this mess…

 

Apologies… for ending the show early… but these days I find… each day it seems like they 'up' the level of intensity on me… in every sense… I can't go for a walk these days… and I try to go every day… without it suddenly turning into Grand Central Station or something… Point being: not feeling able to continue at this moment… so we're going to continue this next week.

–––

 

[May 3, 2015 show ends here.]

 

–––

 

* “WUR of June 7, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

–––

 

“Why Can't We Live Together?…” [Sade]

 

–––

 

[“150607tosooth.mp3”:]

 

The vampire metaphor fits “hidden 'power'” because these behind-scenes 'power'-mad statesmen can only persist in darkness. Openness about our aims… drawing as much attention to what is… after all… our only possible future – unless we accept totalitarianism as the legacy we leave our children… and the earth… to struggle with – is the only way to get the world we want. They are bullies… they pick off people one by one… but two who work together (and if soul-mates… all the better…) moves life forward ('compassion' may come too late… but love… arrives right on time…)

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 8)

 

June 1, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: The vampire metaphor fits “hidden 'power'” because these behind-scenes 'power'-mad statesmen can only persist in darkness. Openness about our aims… drawing as much attention to what is… after all… our only possible future – unless we accept totalitarianism as the legacy we leave our children… and the earth… to struggle with – is the only way to get the world we want. They are bullies… they pick off people one by one… but two who work together (and if soul-mates… all the better…) moves life forward ('compassion' may come too late… but love… arrives right on time…)

A room… a space… a rendezvous…

…freedom can start with two… willing to plan to seize it…

…to say “I am done with duckin' and dodgin'…”

With just a little means… and a lot of love…

…we can have…

…the future we want…

As you know… because each day I must walk a gauntlet – not to sound overly-dramatic – and then try to heal from it… each day more times than the day before… I am more motivated than most… I want to realize the dream… and I've come… thanks to these play-pretend-double-o-seven-slash-minions of 'power'… to appreciate more than most the gift of a new day… hearing the pleas of the earth… and having one more chance to reply.

 

Have you ever wanted… more than anything… to sooth another person… in every possible way?… to sooth with moon a wind-ruffled water… That's the earth calling… take that feeling… and lay it across the world… To listen… to love… to long… On just such wings… our freedom comes…

 

–––

 

[“150607emfweapons.mp3”:]

 

Because I want these discussions of how we go about reclaiming our human energy to be useful… I've… as I found myself targeted and punished (with EMF: electro-magnetic force… weapons…) for my publication and trumpeting (to the best of my ability…) of our process of thinking this challenge through… I have incorporated my experience of being targeted and punished (with EMF weapons…) into our analysis and discussions… because if it is happening to me… it has happened… is happening… and will continue to happen to many many others… unless we talk about it… and make it a practice for 'power' that is no longer tenable… for the reason that they cannot run the risk of widespread de-legitimization.

 

Because I want these discussions of how we go about reclaiming our human energy to be useful… I've… as I found myself targeted and punished (with EMF: electro-magnetic force… weapons…) for my publication and trumpeting (to the best of my ability…) of our process of thinking this challenge through… I have incorporated my experience of being targeted and punished (with EMF weapons…) into our analysis and discussions… because if it is happening to me… it has happened… is happening… and will continue to happen to many many others…

 

…unless we talk about it… and make it a practice for 'power' that is no longer tenable… for the reason that they cannot run the risk of widespread de-legitimization.

 

[“150607emfweapons2.mp3”:]

 

We've said that what's missing from the theory and analysis of the Left is a theory of why we obey… Alice for the most part provides it… but it has never been incorporated… And never has it been more needed than in this moment… in which… as Alice warned (and many before her…) the power of our collective thought… amassed and hoarded in the hands of a Tiny Few misanthropists… is wreaking incalculable havoc…

 

The fact that some huge sum has been sunk into the development… and marketing… and sale… of these weapons – to global-statesmen and their functionaries of every stripe of authoritarian ideology… across the globe – means they will stretch the limits of legitimization… which provides to us an opening… which we must seize… to push our collective lives forward… by loosening 'power's grip on our heads.

 

We've said that what's missing from the theory and analysis of the Left is a theory of why we obey… Alice for the most part provides it… but it has never been incorporated…

 

And never has it been more needed than in this moment… in which… as Alice warned (and many before her…) the power of our collective thought… amassed and hoarded in the hands of a Tiny Few misanthropists… is wreaking incalculable havoc…

 

–––

 

[“150607streamdown.mp3”:]

 

The stream was down this week…

 

[“150607whyweobey.mp3”:]

 

So this is very straight-forward… we obey because 'power' has studied… plotted… and planned… for millennia how to get us to obey – how to compel our obedience – as… without it… unless we internalize these limits… 'power' does not exist… Now… this 'theory' of 'why we obey' has been proven… by its successful implementation… generation after generation… is not in dispute… So why does the Left not incorporate it into its strategic planning? The answer… partly… is that 'Marxist theory' seemed to supersede the need to… seemed to render it moot…. There is an 'historicist' (to use Karl Popper's word…) bend in it… that says… 'society' develops in 'stages'… inevitably… and once 'the people' have sufficiently grown into their 'historical mission'… then comes our freedom… But… as Karl Popper shows… 'power' will always ensure this never happens… and… instead… we-the-people ourselves… must take our lives into our own hands…That being the case… what are the strategic implications of the theory of 'why we obey?…

 

And while we on the Left need a theory of 'why we obey'… and to integrate this understanding into our strategic planning…

 

…the 'global-state-statesmen' have known for quite some time… at least since Bentham (if they forgot their Plato…) that such a theory was needed. Their agenda… of course… is control… so they devise the levers to apply… to force us to implement their designs…

 

By contrast… the thought of the left has been reactive in the extreme… and by ceding this question of our 'obedience' to them determined to compel it… they imply agreement… provide tacit support… to 'rule'… covert and overt.

 

Minimally… the Left… assuming a grasp of the centrality of 'obedience'… and the crafting of it in every human under 'class'… could have presented to us all a practical unmasking of Bentham… a translation into plain language and a framing of it in terms of a clear allegiance with our Sisters and Brothers… thereby furthering the discussion… and placing on center stage the most critical understanding we need… to get free.

 

In a previous show we discussed one of Bentham's key gifts to the global-state-statesmen: showing them how to craft popular acceptance of one's 'class' position by controlling the thoughts we are allowed to think (in order to make permanent our subservient position.) But in what follows we'll be examining the theory behind the strategy.

Obligation. – Obligations may exist without rights; – rights cannot exist without obligations.

 

Obligation – a fictitious entity, is the product of a law – a real entity.

 

A law, when entire, is a command; but a command supposes eventual punishment; for without eventual punishment, or the apprehension of it, obedience would be an effect without a cause.… [To obey unquestioningly is not our nature… so force must be applied by those who want to compel our tacit consent… to the terms of our enslavement… – P.S.]

 

The word right, is the name of a fictitious entity: one of those objects, the existence of which is feigned for the purpose of discourse… [I.e, 'rights' begin with the state… is what he's saying… By 'right' he means simply coercion. 'Scarcity'… and a harsh 'nature'… comprise the opening premises of his thought… – P.S.]

 

Law supposes government: to establish a law, is to exercise an act of government. A law is a declaration of will – of a will conceived and manifested by an individual, or individuals, to whom the other individuals in the society to which such will has respect are generally disposed to obey.

[So this is very straight-forward… we obey because 'power' has studied… plotted… and planned… for millennia how to get us to obey – how to compel our obedience – as… without it… unless we internalize these limits… 'power' does not exist…

 

[“150607bentham.mp3”:]

 

“Now government supposes the disposition to obedience: – the faculty of governing on the one part has for its sole efficient cause, and for its sole measure, the disposition to obey on the other part.” Bentham was very clear about his allegiance… We need to be as clear and focused in the opposite direction… Let's get the mind-locks off and start thinking…

 

Now… this 'theory' of 'why we obey' has been proven… by its successful implementation… generation after generation… is not in dispute… So why does the Left not incorporate it into its strategic planning? The answer… partly… is that 'Marxist theory' seemed to supersede the need to… seemed to render it moot…. There is an 'historicist' (to use Karl Popper's word…) bend in it… that says… 'society' develops in 'stages'… inevitably… and once 'the people' have sufficiently grown into their 'historical mission'… then comes our freedom… But… as Karl Popper shows… 'power' will always ensure this never happens… and… instead… we-the-people ourselves… must take our lives into our own hands…

 

That being the case… what are the strategic implications of the theory of 'why we obey?… – P.S.]

Now government supposes the disposition to obedience: – the faculty of governing on the one part has for its sole efficient cause, and for its sole measure, the disposition to obey on the other part.

 

This disposition may have had for its cause either habit or convention: a convention announces the will of one moment, which the will of any other may revoke; – habit is the result of a system of conduct of which the commencement is lost in the abyss of time. A convention, whether it have ever yet been realized or not, is at least a conceivable and possible cause of this disposition to obedience, from which government, and what is called political society, and the only real laws, result. Habit of obedience is the cause, a little less sure – the foundation, a little less solid, of this useful, social, disposition, and happily the most common.

 

[“150607lakeshorelockdown.mp3”:]

 

“Shall this habit of obedience be continued unbroken, or shall it be discontinued upon a certain occasion? Is there more to be gained than to be lost in point of happiness, by its discontinuance? Of the two masses of evil – intensity, duration, certainty, all included – which appears to be the greatest, that to which one believes one's self exposed from continued obedience, or that to which one believes one's self exposed by its discontinuance?….” Yes… by all means… let's talk about it… all of us… not just the global-state-statesmen… Bentham believed that for 'rule' to succeed 'rulers' must work behind scenes… and stay continuously focused on their vision… 'Indirect legislation' means… everything we're given to see… is crafted… E.g.… yesterday's 'Lakeshore Lockdown…' If we are turned against the police… we are effectively turned from our future… we have to begin working with the police around these messages that the issue is a coerced work system… that a coerced work system is inherently totalitarian…

 

The true rampart, the only rampart against a tyrannical government has always been, and still is, the faculty of allowing this disposition to obedience – without which there is no government – either to subsist or to cease. The existence of this faculty is as notorious as its power is efficacious.

 

Shall this habit of obedience be continued unbroken, or shall it be discontinued upon a certain occasion? Is there more to be gained than to be lost in point of happiness, by its discontinuance? Of the two masses of evil – intensity, duration, certainty, all included – which appears to be the greatest, that to which one believes one's self exposed from continued obedience, or that to which one believes one's self exposed by its discontinuance?…

 

But this calculation is not sufficiently rapid for those who choose for their amusement the destruction and reconstruction of governments. (Pannomial Fragments, p. 253 – 6)

[In what follows… consider the global-state-statesmen's obsession with regulation… control… predictability… and 'order'… Given those ends – and therefore the need to 'institutionalize' – throw in Machiavelli in service to Plato… put Plato on a pedestal – and out of this mix… one result you will get… inevitably… necessarily… is 'power'-driven child-rearing methods… Now this is obvious… once we think about it… yet it is never discussed on the Left… Most of us miss this because we're not accustomed or encouraged to look at the big picture when we think about the world… – P.S.]

[“150607whycantwebefree.mp3”:]

 

I hope folks will re-read the essay: The Limits of Jurisprudence Defined… If we are going to be successful we have to develop 'counters' to this that speak to our inherent truth… that speak to that child… as Alice Miller tells us… who wants to be honest… who wants those answers to those questions that never got answered as to “why is everything so false?”… “why are there things people don't talk about?”… “why can't we be happy?”… “why can't we be as free as the birds?… are they 'smarter' than we?”… I guess so. Let's start being like the birds…

[I hope folks will re-read the essay (below) from Bentham: (The Limits of Jurisprudence Defined… because I want to delve more into this in future shows: the implications of the fact that we live in a world in which what we're presented with is false… is a construction… the media… the entertainment… is crafted by means of the 'money-lever'. 'Money' determines what gets done… So we need to think about it: what are the exceptions to this?… what are the ways around this?… what are the 'counters' to this?… Because our children are being brought into this world which is a construction… in order to capture their brains… and hearts… early… This is why Alice Miller's work is so important…

 

If we are going to be successful we have to develop 'counters' to this that speak to our inherent truth… that speak to that child… as Alice Miller tells us… who wants to be honest… who wants those answers to those questions that never got answered as to “why is everything so false?”… “why are there things people don't talk about?”… “why can't we be happy?”… “why can't we be as free as the birds?… are they 'smarter' than we?”… I guess so. Let's start being like the birds… – P.S.]

–––

 

[End of the June 7, 2015 show.]

–––

 

* “WUR of August 9, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

[“150809rulesthoughterosion.mp3”:]

 

Last week we said that the most significant implication of the fact that we're stuck in a story called 'class'… is the atrophy of thought – certainly in those would-be 'gods'… the global-state-statesmen… but also in us… to the degree that we let them lead… and that without an authentic 'self'… thought can't develop. Today we'll look at another aspect of this… essential weakness of constitution in the 'leaders'… which has infected the body of 'the people'… with its 'atrophy of thought': the dismantlement of the authentic… of truth itself… as 'power' suppresses all but what legitimates its existence… while feeding us for 'history'… a story that is its invention.

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 17)

 

August 4, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: On some level… don't we all want to face the truth with our lives?… want to know what are the true motive forces shaping our lives… our world?

 

Even the 'power'-guys?

 

Last week we said that the most significant implication of the fact that we're stuck in a story called 'class'… is the atrophy of thought – certainly in those would-be 'gods'… the global-state-statesmen… but also in us… to the degree that we let them lead… and that without an authentic 'self'… thought can't develop.

 

And in another recent show… John Stuart Mill corroborated this… saying that any society which disallows dissent inevitably descends to debasement…

 

…and we've discussed how the 'class'-system… which impresses a single pattern of thought across all social institutions… is necessarily totalitarian [see the quote from Lester Crocker near the beginning of Unpacking Democracy…]

 

Today we'll look at another aspect of this… essential weakness of constitution in the 'leaders'… which has infected the body of 'the people'… with its 'atrophy of thought': the dismantlement of the authentic… of truth itself… as 'power' suppresses all but what legitimates its existence… while feeding us for 'history'… a story that is its invention.

 

When humans have no access to the actual circumstances that shape them… thought erodes… not just in us… because we're given our thought by the 'rulers'… but even more profoundly in them… because even in their most private musings… they cannot look truthfully at their beginnings… which makes them incapable of honest introspection… of sincere self-examination.

 

And it is into the hands of these most-emotionally-stunted-few that we have conveyed our children and youth… the dearest hopes of our lives… the health of the planet… all the priceless gifts the earth has given us. (In an early blog I wrote that in many ways the word that started me down this path of speaking out about the unethical practice of putting our unique… earth-given… gifts… on the market… was 'waste' – we'll be examining in more depth this aspect of the horror of 'class' as we discuss Kropotkin's meaning when he says how 'economical' is freedom.)

 

Where would we be… without Alice?

 

–––

 

[“150809differenceabookmakes.mp3”:]

 

…Kropotkin (whose voracious and fertile mind captured all the rich conditions which furthered the planting of decentralization (what… in Waking Up… I thought of as 'distributed generation'… a different way of saying the same thing… or at least… definitely complementary…) allowing us to … finally… pursue happiness – as a people… because we cannot pursue happiness as a people without the land… our conditions of existence…) Karl Popper (so critical on so many levels…) Miklos Nyiszli (ditto… but let me add… he shows us in 'power's m.o. their desperate need to keep their killing secret… and provides that necessary reminder that there are physical traces of theses things… these weapons they're using: iron in bodily fluids… swelling throughout the body… e.g.… that we need to be documenting…) Martin Luther King (who demonstrated the power of public 'voicing'… in… or along with… a global-frame – took 'the word' to the pulpit-in-the-streets… and did so globally…) and Terence K. Hopkins (to represent for our Good Three… who did attain and push forward unrelentingly that truly global-vantage… that we need to get free…) Martin Bernal (his Black Athena… that exposes the facts behind the invented 'classical heritage' that the would-be gods use to convince their children they harbor an 'historic mission'…

 

Alice is just so chillingly important – when I encounter one of these brave souls that we… in this moment… literally can not do without – William Shakespeare… Petr Kropotkin…

(…and I include Petr despite his use of such words as 'civilized' and 'savages'… reproducing the very mindset he's trying to smash… in his abolishment of the distinction between 'mind' and 'hand'… And it is not fair to say… that he was a product of his day… though obviously so… others of his day were fortunate to not be misled in that respect – only that… he was himself a product of 'class'… and of the geographic segregation… and systematic atomization… that made a truly global-vantage difficult to attain…)

…Kropotkin (whose voracious and fertile mind captured all the rich conditions which furthered the planting of decentralization (what… in Waking Up… I thought of as 'distributed generation'… a different way of saying the same thing… or at least… definitely complementary…) allowing us to … finally… pursue happiness – as a people… because we cannot pursue happiness as a people without the land… our conditions of existence…) Karl Popper (so critical on so many levels…) Miklos Nyiszli (ditto… but let me add… he shows us in 'power's m.o. their desperate need to keep their killing secret… and provides that necessary reminder that there are physical traces of these things… these weapons they're using: iron in bodily fluids… swelling throughout the body… e.g.… that we need to be documenting… [this is one of the things that really stood out for me in our reading of his Auschwitz: his very careful documentation of their killing methods…]) Martin Luther King (who demonstrated the power of public 'voicing'… in… or along with… a global-frame – took 'the word' to the pulpit-in-the-streets… and did so globally…) and Terence K. Hopkins (to represent for our Good Three… who did attain and push forward unrelentingly that truly global-vantage… that we need to get free…) Martin Bernal (his Black Athena… that exposes the facts behind the invented 'classical heritage' that the would-be gods use to convince their children they harbor an 'historic mission'… In a sense… this book is the link between Karl Popper and Alice…)

 

…I recall one of my early questions as I started writing Waking Up: “what difference does a book make?”…

 

Now I understand the question better… thanks to Alice (and Karl… with his exegesis of Plato… who first pulled 'power's coat to this… along with his Uncle Critias…) that the thoughts we think… are everything…

 

…we are indeed 'creatures of illusion'… as Virginia Woolf said so succinctly…

 

The entire 'class'-system… is like one big exhibit… of the 'Stockholm Syndrome'… in which coercion… and abuse-made-systematic… and identification with 'the Master'… and the sacrifice of our children… are so normalized… they don't exist – so far as being noticed in speech goes…

 

…we live in insanity as if it's not… but this myopia comes at tremendous cost.

 

–––

 

[“150809taskofsocialists.mp3”:]

 

In our 'voicings' of suppressed thoughts – our putting out into the world… using whatever form of self-expression we are moved to use … thoughts that have been… with intent… kept hidden from we-the-people… by the 'power'-guys… the global-state-statesmen – both 'outer' and 'inner' expressions are reflected… …that is… both the 'public' (collective) and 'private' (individual) forms of suppressed (necessarily-) political speech – recognizing that that distinction blurs in a totalitarian system: everything under this system of 'class' is necessarily political because the world is crafted to keep us from seeing our containment – are needed to be returned to us… for our thought's development… as a people… [Gustav Landauer] defined as the task of the socialists and their movement: “to loosen the hardening of hearts so that what lies buried may rise to the surface: so that what truly lives yet now seems dead may emerge and grow light.”

 

In our 'voicings' of suppressed thoughts – our putting out into the world… using whatever form of self-expression we are moved to use … thoughts that have been… with intent… kept hidden from we-the-people… by the 'power'-guys… the global-state-statesmen – both 'outer' and 'inner' expressions are reflected…

 

…that is… both the 'public' (collective) and 'private' (individual) forms of suppressed (necessarily-) political speech – recognizing that that distinction blurs in a totalitarian system: everything under this system of 'class' is necessarily political because the world is crafted to keep us from seeing our containment – are needed to be returned to us… for our thought's development… as a people…

 

It's generally in the expressions from the 'artists' (a concept which… as George Sand suggested… will make little sense once our lives are once again in our own possession…) that we find the understanding of this unity of 'outer' and 'inner'…

 

Here's a notable exception (and we're learning that the 'social anarchists' in general were the notable exceptions…) and a telling example of suppressed speech… from our July 28, 2013 show… telling in its being completely ignored on 'the (official) Left': the gift of his words… anticipating Alice… and therefore their power to set us on the right path… lost to us for several generations (I say “lost to us” even though I know that the 'official Left' is not representative of us… we who consider ourselves progressives… because we don't have a movement representing it and therefore there's no way to 'institutionalize '[to use a word I don't like – if anybody can give me a less mechanical alternative I'd be grateful… something that means “to plant in our psyches… in our souls… in some organic way… that it continues on… across the generations…]:

[“130728tendernessfor.mp3”:]

 

“So what would the authentic conversations about ‘race… about ‘socialism’ be?… the ones that do lead to a true road?… They would... as Gustav Landauer told us… [Gustav Landauer] defined as the task of the socialists and their movement: “to loosen the hardening of hearts so that what lies buried may rise to the surface: so that what truly lives yet now seems dead may emerge and grow light.” (quoted in Erich Fromm’s The Sane Society…) as Fry told us… as Alice Miller told us… as all the ancestors who see that we must be the opposite of what we have been made to be… under 'class'… have said… …they must lead to tenderness. What else but this could our future be… if its opposed to the frozen misery of centuries… breaking… now… finally… at long last.” (From the July 28, 2013 Waking Up Radio show.)

([Gustav Landauer] defined as the task of the socialists and their movement: “to loosen the hardening of hearts so that what lies buried may rise to the surface: so that what truly lives yet now seems dead may emerge and grow light.” (quoted in Erich Fromm’s The Sane Society)

[The July 28, 2013 show is also included in the pdf: “Reclaiming Our Leadership… Our Stolen Gifts… to Establish a Future Based on Distributed Generation (Vol. 1)”]

–––

 

[“150809powerguyslietochildren.mp3”:]

 

“My pedagogy is hard. What is weak must be hammered away.… There must be nothing weak […and of course these guys see tenderness… love… as 'weak' – their mistake… – P.S.] or gentle about them.…” [All those children sacrificed on the altar of this man's misguided notions… – P.S.] We must consider in more depth the lies the 'power'-guys tell their children… as part of our strategy… for getting free… “Lenin's policy was not a product of the moment, it was the logical consequence of his political thinking, conceived many years before the outbreak of the Russian revolution…” Is this not extraordinary… as we stop now to ponder it (it reminds me of Mao saying that he had “20 million at his beck and call…”) – and here let's not forget what Karl Popper tagged this: he called this phenomenon 'historicist'… to which we appended the shorthand: “thought leading reality…” i.e. we have been along for the ride… while these 'power'-guys… these 'power'-hungry 'historicists'… determined to be 'world-historic'… or else to just sink their 'thought' in that which is… use us as the raw material for “creating something new…” as Hitler said.

 

There is a complete consonance… between Gustav Landauer and Alice. What if… in those decades of horror since… since he put out that challenge… 'tenderness' had absorbed the Left… rather than 'power's agenda of raping the planet ('production'… 'development'… 'growth'… and 'progress' – of course always their definitions… as they are in the driver's seat…)

 

It might be useful to consider the political significance of 'tenderness' in light of the Hitler quote we read last week.

“My pedagogy is hard. What is weak must be hammered away. In my fortresses of the Teutonic Order a young generation will grow up before which the world will tremble. I want the young to be violent, domineering, undismayed, cruel. The young must be all these things. They must be able to bear pain. There must be nothing weak […and of course these guys see tenderness… love… as 'weak' – their mistake… – P.S.] or gentle about them. The free, splendid beast of prey must once again flash from their eyes. I want my young people strong and beautiful. That way I can create something new.” [All those children sacrificed on the altar of this man's misguided notions… – P.S.]

We must consider in more depth the lies the 'power'-guys tell their children… as part of our strategy… for getting free…

 

“What would an “authentic road to 'socialism' be?”… we asked in that show two years ago… a question which… after having read Antisystemic Movements… and a bit of Kropotkin… and now Alice… can be seen in an even richer context.

 

But did we really need to go through that process of analysis… proceeding methodically… step by step… in order to establish that what we've been told is the only other option to uncontrolled 'power' – this variously defined but usually 'statist' concept of 'socialism' – isn't?… that… rather… we simply need to flesh out… globally… our picture of 'freedom'…

 

…or have critical thoughts for establishing our freedom been suppressed? (…and… granted… we needed Nikola Tesla… i.e. our global vantage…)

 

For instance… consider this from Erich Fromm's The Sane Society:

Russia was the exact opposite of Germany [in 1917…] She was industrially the most backward of all the European great powers, just emerging from a semifeudal state, even though her industrial sector in itself was highly developed and centralized. The sudden collapse of the Czarist system had created a vacuum, so that Lenin, disbanding the only other force which could have filled this vacuum, the Constituent Assembly, hoped to be able to jump directly from the semifeudal phase into that of an industrialized socialist system. However, Lenin's policy was not a product of the moment, it was the logical consequence of his political thinking, conceived many years before the outbreak of the Russian revolution. He, like Marx, believed in the historic mission of the working class to emancipate society, but he had little faith in the will and ability of the working class to achieve this aim spontaneously.…

 

[Is this not extraordinary… as we stop now to ponder it (it reminds me of Mao saying that he had “20 million at his beck and call…”) – and here let's not forget what Karl Popper tagged this: he called this phenomenon 'historicist'… to which we appended the shorthand: “thought leading reality…” i.e. we have been along for the ride… while these 'power'-guys… these 'power'-hungry 'historicists'… determined to be 'world-historic'… or else to just sink their 'thought' in that which is… use us as the raw material for “creating something new…” as Hitler said.

 

…let's let Popper speak for himself… – P.S.]:

 

[“150809dualisminmarx.mp3”:]

 

“It is [in Marx…] a practical dualism… The passages quoted indicate that although our feet have to be kept, as it were, on the firm ground of the material world, our heads – and Marx thought highly of human heads – are concerned with thoughts or ideas. In my opinion, Marxism and its influence cannot be appreciated unless we recognize this dualism.” – …this point of Popper's… as… were it thoroughly discussed… clarity around it could help unify us… given the large number of sincere Marxist-Socialists around the globe who could… and should… be providing leadership on the question of whether it is a rank-rooted 'science'… or 'ethics' – the ethical stance of our inherent human freedom… and our freedom alone… as we will hear Bakunin say… that must be “the sole creative principle and basis…” of our global human society…

 

“There is a well-known passage in Capital, where Marx says that 'in Hegel's writing, dialectics stands on its head; one must turn it the right way up again…' Its tendency is clear. Marx wished to show that the 'head', i.e. human thought, is not itself the basis of human life but rather a kind of superstructure, on a physical basis. A similar tendency is expressed in the passage: 'The ideal is nothing other than the material when it has been transposed and translated inside the human head.' But it has not, perhaps, been sufficiently recognized that these passages do not exhibit a radical form of materialism; rather, they indicate a certain leaning towards a dualism of body and mind. It is, so to speak, a practical dualism. Although, theoretically, mind was to Marx apparently only another form (or another aspect, or perhaps an epi-phenomenon) of matter, in practice is it different from matter, since it is another form of it. The passages quoted indicate that although our feet have to be kept, as it were, on the firm ground of the material world, our heads – and Marx thought highly of human heads – are concerned with thoughts or ideas. In my opinion, Marxism and its influence cannot be appreciated unless we recognize this dualism.

 

[…the Left that says it represents for we-the-people has been sadly remiss in not following up on this point of Popper's… as… were it thoroughly discussed… clarity around it could help unify us… given the large number of sincere Marxist-Socialists around the globe who could… and should… be providing leadership on the question of whether it is a rank-rooted 'science'… or 'ethics' – the ethical stance of our inherent human freedom… and our freedom alone… as we will hear Bakunin say… that must be “the sole creative principle and basis…” of our global human society…

 

…a large number of Marxist-Socialists who could… and should… be providing leadership to the path that can… in fact… end the system of 'class'…

 

…using some of the strategies that we've been identifying in our analysis of how 'power' reproduces itself… and this one is key: it reproduces itself by using that strategy we've been calling 'the Pied Piper'… by drawing those youth of heart down useless paths of dissent… when we should all be working together on this…

 

And there's another sense in which these mistaken notions of Marx… or perhaps mistaken interpretations of Marx – the degree to which these mistaken interpretations reinforce the key underpinnings of 'power'… of 'class'… in not being discussed among us – and it's not by accident that this aspect of Marxism has not been elucidated in Academia… along with the sense – and our Good Three did try to push this discussion forward – that we do need a new strategy… – P.S.]

 

[“150809tendernesspath.mp3”:]

 

“Marx loved freedom, real freedom (not Hegel's 'real freedom'). And as far as I am able to see he followed Hegel's famous equation of freedom with spirit, in so far as he believed that we can be free only as spiritual beings. At the same time he recognized in practice (as a practical dualist) that we are spirit and flesh, and, realistically enough, that the flesh is the fundamental one of these two.… But although he recognized that the material world and its necessities are fundamental, he did not feel any love for the 'kingdom of necessity', as he called a society which is in bondage to its material needs…” – […interrupting Popper for a moment… I cannot see anything to dispute in this… do you agree with it?… this 'Marx-assessment'?… that there is this fundamental dualism in Marx… and the fact of its existence… to my mind… works against the stance of 'tenderness'… calls instead (potentially… and historically did…) for a stance of ruthless suppression of anything that (potentially…) interferes with the task of 'conquering' 'necessity'… which necessarily means an over-valuation of the so-called 'economy'… 'production'… (and ultimately…) 'development'… Fromm calls the opposite mindset “faith in man…” – we've been calling it “longing for each other…” which is also “trusting the earth…”: “Consider the ravens; for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; [the earth] feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?”… – P.S.]

 

“Marx loved freedom, real freedom (not Hegel's 'real freedom'). And as far as I am able to see he followed Hegel's famous equation of freedom with spirit, in so far as he believed that we can be free only as spiritual beings. At the same time he recognized in practice (as a practical dualist) that we are spirit and flesh, and, realistically enough, that the flesh is the fundamental one of these two.… But although he recognized that the material world and its necessities are fundamental, he did not feel any love for the 'kingdom of necessity', as he called a society which is in bondage to its material needs…”

 

[…interrupting Popper for a moment… I cannot see anything to dispute in this… do you agree with it?… this 'Marx-assessment'?… that there is this fundamental dualism in Marx… and the fact of its existence… to my mind… works against the stance of 'tenderness'… calls instead (potentially… and historically did…) for a stance of ruthless suppression of anything that (potentially…) interferes with the task of 'conquering' 'necessity'… which necessarily means an over-valuation of the so-called 'economy'… 'production'… (and ultimately…) 'development'… Fromm calls the opposite mindset “faith in man…” – we've been calling it “longing for each other…” which is also “trusting the earth…”: “Consider the ravens; for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; [the earth] feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?” (St. Luke 12, 24) Continuing with Popper… – P.S.]:

 

“…He cherished the spiritual world, the 'kingdom of freedom', and the spiritual side of 'human nature', as much as any Christian dualist; and in his writings there are even traces of hatred and contempt for the material.…

 

“…With Hegel he identifies the realm of freedom with that of man's mental life. But he recognizes that we are not purely spiritual beings; that we are not fully free, nor capable of ever achieving full freedom, unable as we shall always be to emancipate ourselves entirely from the necessities of our metabolism, and thus from productive toil. All we can achieve is to improve upon the exhausting and undignified conditions of labour, to make them more worthy of man, to equalize them, and to reduce drudgery to such an extent that all of us can be free for some part of our lives. This, I believe, is the central idea of Marx's 'view of life'; central also in so far as it seems to me to be the most influential of his doctrines. (The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vol. 2, p. 102 – 104)

 

Remember Thomas Dekker (1575 – 1641): “Work apace, apace, apace, apace; Honest labour bears a lovely face; then Hey nonny-nonny – Hey nonny nonny!” (We could do a whole show on that “Hey nonny nonny!”)

 

[“150809solecreativeprinciple.mp3”:]

 

“Faith in mankind without faith in man is either insincere or, if sincere, it leads to the very results which we see in the tragic history of the Inquisition, Robespierre's terror and Lenin's dictatorship. Many democratic socialist and socialist revolutionaries saw the dangers in Lenin's concept; nobody saw it more clearly than Rosa Luxemburg. She warned that the choice to be made was between democratism and bureaucratism, and the development in Russia proved the correctness of her prediction. While an ardent and uncompromising critic of Capitalism, she was a person with an unshakable and profound faith in man. When she and Gustav Landauer were murdered by the soldiers of the German counter-revolution, the humanistic tradition of faith in man was meant to be killed with them. It was this lack of faith in man which made it possible for the authoritarian systems to conquer man, leading him on to have faith in an idol rather than in himself.…” – “The great teacher of us all, Proudhon, said that the unhappiest combination which might occur, could be that Socialism should unite itself to Absolutism; the striving of the people for economic freedom, and material well-being, through dictatorship and the concentration of all political and social powers in the State. May the future protect us from the favours of despotism; but may it preserve us from the unhappy consequences and stultifications of indoctrinated, or State Socialism.… Nothing living and human can prosper without freedom, and a form of Socialism which would do away with freedom, or which would not recognize it as the sole creative principle and basis, would lead us directly into slavery and bestiality.” – “Kropotkin summed up his idea of Socialism in the statement that the fullest development of individuality “will combine with the highest development of voluntary association in all its aspects, in all possible degrees, and for all possible purposes; an association that is always changing, that bears in itself the elements of its own duration, that takes on the forms which best correspond at any given moment to the manifold strivings of all…”

 

[How does a 'state' – all states being fragments of that global 'centralizing' energy… the totalitarian mindset… recognized by many on the Left but never called out as an organized presence… those I dub 'Plato's Tribesmen'… who place an 'Idea'… be it 'Perfection'… or 'History'… far above living things – how does a 'state' know… who must be silenced… who harassed… who weeded out… who offered cash… to protect its raison d'etre? How does it know what messages support it… and which threaten… that it can allow Marx… but not Kropotkin?

 

…unless it has a clear notion where its headed… i.e. a vision… which… to find success must be kept hidden… because all depends on keeping the people penned-in…

(…and… as we learned from Alice… 'secrecy' is a key 'teaching'… instilled in 'power's offspring: “A example of such an exercise is keeping silent. Ask a child: Do you think you could remain silent for a few hours sometime, without saying a word?… Repeat the exercise, making it more difficult each time, partly by lengthening the period of silence, partly by giving him cause to speak or by depriving him of something. Continue these exercises until you see that the child has attained a degree of skill therein. Then entrust him with secrets and see if he can be silent even then…” [Quoted in the July 19, 2015 show.])

…free from the annoyance of the people's scrutiny…

 

Obviously… being worshippers of Plato… they must have an 'original' to which to make us bend… “for our own good…”

 

…and on the flip… what is not a threat? How does it know what thought to let live… by offering encouragement… by bestowing largess… and then letting ego do the rest…

 

Put generally… I would say: thought that enables us to figure out their existence (Karl Popper and Martin Bernal come to mind…) and thought that allows us to get 'big'… psychically… such that we become free of any sense of dependence on 'them' (i.e.… on 'the state'… put generally…) Returning to Erich Fromm… – P.S.]:

 

…Only if the working class was led, so he thought, by a small well-disciplined group of professional revolutionaries, only if it was forced by this group to execute the laws of history, as Lenin saw them, could the revolution succeed and be prevented from ending up in a new version of a class society. The crucial point in Lenin's position was the fact that he had no faith in the spontaneous action of the workers and peasants – and he had no faith in them because he had no faith in man.… Faith in mankind without faith in man is either insincere or, if sincere, it leads to the very results which we see in the tragic history of the Inquisition, Robespierre's terror and Lenin's dictatorship. Many democratic socialist and socialist revolutionaries saw the dangers in Lenin's concept; nobody saw it more clearly than Rosa Luxemburg. She warned that the choice to be made was between democratism and bureaucratism, and the development in Russia proved the correctness of her prediction. While an ardent and uncompromising critic of Capitalism, she was a person with an unshakable and profound faith in man. When she and Gustav Landauer were murdered by the soldiers of the German counter-revolution, the humanistic tradition of faith in man was meant to be killed with them. It was this lack of faith in man which made it possible for the authoritarian systems to conquer man, leading him on to have faith in an idol rather than in himself. (p. 238 – 239)

 

Nobody has seen the danger which has come to pass under Stalinism more clearly than Proudhon, in the middle of the nineteenth century… Proudhon's thinking is based on an ethical concept in which self-respect is the first maxim of ethics. From self-respect follows respect of one's neighbor as the second maxim of morality. This concern with the inner change in man as the basis of a new social order was expressed by Proudhon in a letter, saying, “The Old World is in a process of dissolution… one can change it only by the integral revolution in the ideas and in the hearts…”

 

The same awareness of the dangers of centralization, and the same belief in the productive powers of man, although mixed with a romantic glorification of destruction, is to be found in the writings of Michael Bakunin; in a letter of 1868 he says: “The great teacher of us all, Proudhon, said that the unhappiest combination which might occur, could be that Socialism should unite itself to Absolutism; the striving of the people for economic freedom, and material well-being, through dictatorship and the concentration of all political and social powers in the State. May the future protect us from the favours of despotism; but may it preserve us from the unhappy consequences and stultifications of indoctrinated, or State Socialism.… Nothing living and human can prosper without freedom, and a form of Socialism which would do away with freedom, or which would not recognize it as the sole creative principle and basis, would lead us directly into slavery and bestiality.”

 

Fifty years after Proudhon's letter to Marx, Peter Kropotkin summed up his idea of Socialism in the statement that the fullest development of individuality “will combine with the highest development of voluntary association in all its aspects, in all possible degrees, and for all possible purposes; an association that is always changing, that bears in itself the elements of its own duration, that takes on the forms which best correspond at any given moment to the manifold strivings of all.” Kropotkin, like many of his socialist predecessors stressed the inherent tendencies for co-operation and mutual help present in man and in the animal kingdom.

 

[Now that is not a definition of 'socialism' that we ever hear… which suggests to me we should abandon the word… and call what Kropotkin sees: 'our freedom.' (And I'm thinking we should add Erich Fromm's The Sane Society to our group of necessary books for this moment of decision… visioning… and transition… – P.S.]

–––

 

[“150809blackathena.mp3”:]

 

How did Bakunin… in the mid-nineteenth century… know there was a totalitarian reality growing?… that would only deepen its hold?… “[In the last decades of the nineteenth century…] Scholars…, for various reasons, wanted to avoid giving credit to the Phoenicians… [The chapter in Black Athena, “The Final Solution of the Phoenician Problem, 1885 – 1945”] is concerned with the consolidation of the Aryan Model and the denial of both Egyptian and Phoenician influence on the formation of Greece. The denial of Phoenician influence is clearly related to the strong anti-Semitism of the period…” – “It was solely in France – with its post-1870 suspicion of German Aryanism – and among republicans – with their hatred of Catholic Royalist anti-Semitism – [that challenges to 'Extreme Aryan Classicism' could be found…] There was a strong tradition of secular and socially radical individualism in both the French and Swiss Jura which made it the model for the 'big three' social anarchists, Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin…”

 

I keep struggling with the question of how to adequately convey the risk we face…

 

We have placed ourselves in the hands of a damaged-few who believe they must eradicate tenderness…

 

You doubt this? Even with all the totalitarians across the political spectrum… and the poisoned pedagogues of 'class' across the generations… telling us this? If you doubt… you doubt because the facts that support it have been suppressed.

 

How did Bakunin… in the mid-nineteenth century… know there was a totalitarian reality growing?… that would only deepen its hold?…

 

…because those engaged with the political speech of the day could not help but see it… particularly one as attuned to encroachments on freedom as he… Consider the following from Martin Bernal's Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, Volume 1: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785 – 1985:

[In the last decades of the nineteenth century…] Scholars who, for various reasons, wanted to avoid giving credit to the Phoenicians [“Phoenicia: Cities along a strip of coast stretching from the present-day Lebanon to Northern Israel, the most famous of which were Byblos, Tyre and Sidon. The name Phoenicia refers to this region throughout Antiquity. However, it generally indicates the greatest period in the cities' history between 1100 and 750 BC. The Phoenician 'language' was like Hebrew, a dialect of Canaanite. The alphabet is often referred to as a Phoenician invention. It may well have originated in the region, but it was developed long before the Phoenician period…”] began to attribute irreducible Semitic elements in Greek and other European cultures to the Assyrians and Babylonians. Even here, however, there was the problem that the normal route of transmission would be by sea, through Phoenicia – or at least North Syria. Indeed, from the late 19th century there has been a tendency to attribute Oriental influences on Greece to Anatolia, whose 'Asianic' populations were not Semitic-speaking.… For instance, the British Classicist and historian P. Walcot, whose important work Hesiod and the Near East was published in 1966, devotes his first chapter to the Hittites, and his second to the Babylonians; however, neither of these – in striking contrast to the Egyptians and Phoenicians – are mentioned in Antiquity as sources of Greek mythology and religion.… (p. 365)

 

[The chapter in Black Athena “The Final Solution of the Phoenician Problem, 1885 – 1945”] is concerned with the consolidation of the Aryan Model and the denial of both Egyptian and Phoenician influence on the formation of Greece. The denial of Phoenician influence is clearly related to the strong anti-Semitism of the period, and in particular to its two climaxes or paroxysms – in the 1880s and 90s and the 1920s and 30s. The first of these followed the mass migration of East European Jews into Western Europe and crystallized around the Dreyfus Affair; the second came after the critical role of Jews in international Communism and the Russian Revolution and during the economic crises of the 1920s and 30s.… (p. 367)

 

From the 1880s onwards the intellectual atmosphere of Europe was transformed by the triumph of racial anti-Semitism in Germany and Austria, and its sharp rise elsewhere.… They were used as a scapegoat for the sufferings of the urban workers, in building up an identification of the urban workers and the peasants with the capitalists and landowners against these 'aliens'. Anti-Semitism also gained from the secularization and loss of faith after the late 1850s, and the success of other types of racism.

 

The surge of racism was linked to imperialism and the sense of national solidarity built up in the metropolitan countries against the barbarous non-European 'natives'.… (p. 370)

 

[One of the “Extreme Aryan” Classicists, the German Julius Beloch…] taught at [Rome's] university for fifty years, from 1879 – 1929… regarded himself as a failure condemned to exile. He appears to have been kept out of German academic life by the great German historian of Rome, Mommsen. Another reason for Beloch's inability to find a satisfactory position in Germany was that he was suspected, rightly or wrongly, of being Jewish. [We're familiar with that dynamic… from the shows in which we listened to Alice's analysis of Hitler… – P.S.] Despite – or more probably because of – this suspicion, he was not only a passionate German nationalist but also a virulent anti-Semite…. (p. 373)

 

It was solely in France – with its post-1870 suspicion of German Aryanism – and among republicans – with their hatred of Catholic Royalist anti-Semitism – [that challenges to 'Extreme Aryan Classicism' could be found…] There was a strong tradition of secular and socially radical individualism in both the French and Swiss Jura which made it the model for the 'big three' social anarchists, Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin. (p. 381)

Is it not time to synthesize and advance the gifts… of our 'Big Three' social anarchists… using Rosa's energy and fearlessness… and our own tenderness… to accomplish it?

 

–––

[“150809handsontheworld.mp3”:]

 

…What does this tell the child… if not… “I will give you your assignments… tell you what to think about…”…with the reminder implied: “I am in charge… ever-watching… ever-monitoring… ever-managing…” (a perfect set-up of the child… for the state…)

 

[We didn't get to our reading in this show. The following comment on it will be returned to next week… – P.S.]

 

“The infant is fond of something he is playing with that amuses him. Look at him kindly, then smilingly and very calmly take it from him, with a light air, replace it immediately, without making him wait long, with another toy and pastime.…”

[What does this tell the child… if not… “I will give you your assignments… tell you what to think about…”

 

…with the reminder implied: “I am in charge… ever-watching… ever-monitoring… ever-managing…” (a perfect set-up of the child… for the state…)

 

…further: when our children try to claim some fragment of the world they live in… and are prevented… find their active questing mind denied… and so they cry… what are they telling us really?… they are telling us what we told them… only without the affect… with feeling stripped… that is… “this world is not for you… you are for 'it'… to one day be used… as 'it' sees fit…”

 

Our children need to get their hands on the world they are here to become skilled in… so they can help their Brothers and Sisters… – P.S.]

–––

 

[August 9, 2015 show ends here.]

–––

 

* “WUR of August 23, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 19)

 

[“150823leadershipisfluid.mp3”:]

 

“The separation between leaders and workers which I had noticed at Geneva in the Temple Unique did not exist in the Jura Mountains. There were a number of men who were more intelligent, and especially more active than the others; but that was all.…” [What Peter observed is what I've observed too…: that 'leadership' is fluid… a result of many factors… that changes over the course of a lifetime… as we gain experience… as we absorb new information… Never is it fixed or given… – P.S.]…

We give our allegiance to the state because we have no other allegiance and we are communal beings and must plant our ‘solidarity’ somewhere. The state ensures we can have no other allegiance… the global-statesmen brook no challenges – these are not folks to whom we can entrust our earth… especially… the earth in us… the ‘ownership’ of which… once transferred to else but self… is lost. [From our September 4, 2014 commentary (in the menu under the title “Introducing Our Discussion of: Antisystemic Movements…”)]

August 18, 2014… Sisters and Brothers: What we discover… when we set our feet on that path to the truth… is that it's very well-trodden… many others have sought that fruit…

 

…and the insights we've found… they've been long-pondered too.

 

To reclaim our human energy… these are key: It is on the ground of ethics… and ethics only… that we can achieve our freedom successfully… and secondly… that we must step forward with confidence… with certainty… with an assurance of step of feet following deep prints… from our ancestors left… for our feet to find them…

I went first to Neuchatel, and then spent a week or so among the watchmakers in the Jura Mountains. I thus made my first acquaintance with that famous Jura Federation which for the next few years played an important part in the development of socialism, introducing into it the no-government, or anarchist, tendency.

 

In 1872 the Jura Federation was becoming a rebel against the authority of the general council of the International Workingmen's Association. The association was essentially a workingmen's movement, the workers understanding it as such and not as a political party. In east Belgium, for instance, they had introduced into the statutes a clause in virtue of which no one could be a member of a section unless employed in a manual trade; even foremen were excluded.

 

The workers were, moreover, federalist in principle. Each nation, each separate region, and even each local section had to be left free to develop on its own lines. But the middle-class revolutionists of the old school who had entered the International, imbued as they were with the notions of the centralized, pyramidal secret organizations of earlier times, had introduced the same notions into the Workingmen's Association. Besides the federal and national councils, a general council was nominated at London, to act as a sort of intermediary between the councils of the different nations. Marx and Engels were its leading spirits. It soon appeared, however, that the mere fact of having such a central body became a source of substantial inconvenience. The general council was not satisfied with playing the part of a correspondence bureau; it strove to govern the movement, to approve or to censure the action of the local federations and sections, and even of individual members. When the Commune insurrection began in Paris, – and “the leaders had only to follow,” without being able to say whereto they would be led within the next twenty-four hours, – the general council insisted upon directing the insurrection from London. It required daily reports about the events, gave orders, favored this and hampered that, and thus put in evidence the disadvantage of having a governing body, even within the association. The disadvantage became still more evident when, at a secret conference held in 1871, the general council, supported by a few delegates, decided to direct the forces of the association toward electoral agitation. It set people thinking about the evils of any government, however democratic its origin. This was the first spark of anarchism. The Jura Federation became the centre of opposition to the general council.

 

The separation between leaders and workers which I had noticed at Geneva in the Temple Unique did not exist in the Jura Mountains. There were a number of men who were more intelligent, and especially more active than the others; but that was all.… [What Peter observed is what I've observed too…: that 'leadership' is fluid… a result of many factors… that changes over the course of a lifetime… as we gain experience… as we absorb new information… Never is it fixed or given… – P.S.]

 

…From Neuchatel I went to Sonvilliers. In a little valley in the Jura hills there is a succession of small towns and villages, of which the French-speaking population was at that time entirely employed in the various branches of watchmaking; whole families used to work in small workshops.… [And… please… let us not be duped by the 'power'-guys attempts to make our 'decentralization' for us – let's reject their offer to design it… and assign it – with ironic tags like 'sharing economy' appended… – P.S.]

 

…The very organization of the watch trade, which permits men to know one another thoroughly and to work in their own houses, where they are free to talk, explains why the level of intellectual development in this population is higher than that of workers who spend all their life from early childhood in the factories. There is more independence and more originality among the petty trades' workers. But the absence of a division between the leaders and the masses in the Jura Federation was also the reason why there was not a question upon which every member of the federation would not strive to form his own independent opinion. Here I saw that the workers were not a mass that was being led and made subservient to the political ends of a few men; their leaders were simply their more active comrades, – initiators rather than leaders. The clearness of insight, the soundness of judgment, the capacity for disentangling complex social questions, which I noticed amongst these workers, especially the middle-aged ones, deeply impressed me; and I am firmly persuaded that if the Jura Federation has played a prominent part in the development of socialism, it is not only on account of the importance of the no-government and federalist ideas of which it was the champion, but also on account of the expression which was given to these ideas by the good sense of the Jura watchmakers. Without their aid, these conceptions might have remained mere abstractions for a long time. [And without you – to take note of them… and share them… with us… we who… in this moment… so need them – where would we be?… – P.S.]

 

[“150823watchmakersofjura.mp3”:]

 

“…the workers would have against them, not the rotten generation of aristocrats against whom the French peasants and republicans had to fight in the last century, – and even that fight was a desperate one, – but the middle classes…” […those 'classically-trained'… mission-imbued… newly minted and gleaming-fanatic… Plato's Tribesmen… – P.S.], which are far more powerful, intellectually and physically, and have at their service all the potent machinery of the modern state. However, I soon noticed that no revolution, whether peaceful or violent, had ever taken place without the new ideals having deeply penetrated into the very class whose economical and political privileges were to be assailed.…” [This is a revealing… a portentous… vantage from which to view our current situation… – has anyone taken it in?… – P.S.]

 

The theoretical aspects of anarchism, as they were then beginning to be expressed in the Jura Federation, especially by Bakunin; the criticisms of state socialism – the fear of an economic despotism, far more dangerous than the merely political despotism – which I heard formulated there; and the revolutionary character of the agitation, appealed strongly to my mind. But the equalitarian relations which I found in the Jura Mountains, the independence of thought and expression which I saw developing in the workers, and their unlimited devotion to the cause appealed far more strongly to my feelings; and when I came away from the mountains, after a week's stay with the watchmakers, my views upon socialism were settled. I was an anarchist.… (p. 281 – 7)

 

There was, however, one point which I did not accept without having given to it a great deal of thinking and many hours of my nights. I clearly saw that the immense change which would deliver everything that is necessary for life and production into the hands of society [I appreciate his use of this word 'society' in this context… acknowledging that we – the 99.999% – are everything… – P.S.] – be it the Folk State of the social democrats or the unions of freely associated groups, which the anarchist advocate – would imply a revolution far more profound than any of the revolutions which history had on record. Moreover, in such a revolution the workers would have against them, not the rotten generation of aristocrats against whom the French peasants and republicans had to fight in the last century, – and even that fight was a desperate one, – but the middle classes […those 'classically-trained'… mission-imbued… newly minted and gleaming-fanatic… Plato's Tribesmen… – P.S.], which are far more powerful, intellectually and physically, and have at their service all the potent machinery of the modern state. [And hasn't it just got exponentially worse than when he wrote those words?… with the power of our creativeness… our inventiveness… unfortunately used… devoted to… weapons of death placed in their hands… is that trajectory… that tendency… not obvious?… is it not clear how urgent is our situation right now?… how urgently we need to begin discussing an alternative (globally…) based in our ethical stance… not in some 'science' which is supposedly going to 'prove' that our future freedom is inevitable… no it is not… the folks who promoted that were also trained in this 'classically statist' manner… – P.S.] However, I soon noticed that no revolution, whether peaceful or violent, had ever taken place without the new ideals having deeply penetrated into the very class whose economical and political privileges were to be assailed. [Take note: all who may be listening to those agent provocateurs who want to pose a movement for global freedom as a matter of: “let's demonize some section of our 99.999%…” – listen… if they claim to be 'anarchists'… listen… to one of its founders speak… Is this not a revealing… a portentous… vantage from which to view our current situation… – has anyone taken it in?… how we… the 99.999% are doing on this score… because that tiny ten thousand – who operate the interstate system and work behind scenes to pull the strings of all the nation-state machineries – is really not the point… is insignificant… if we… the vast… vast everything… begin talking about it (but maybe we are talking about that one percent… The folk he's talking about may very well be that one percent… that the agents of the state encourage us to believe is the problem… So… it is that one percent that we need to think about as we listen to Kropotkin's words: those who are wealthy… but who aren't a member of that very exclusive tribe who have been trained to think of us as the cattle to keep herded… who have no 'nation' allegiance… who have only a 'tribe' allegiance… to 'rule'… to 'supremacy'… only… – P.S.] I had witnessed the abolition of serfdom in Russia, and I knew that if a consciousness of the injustice of their privileges had not spread widely within the serf-owners' class itself (as a consequence of the previous evolution and revolutions accomplished in Western Europe), the emancipation of the serfs would never have been accomplished as easily as it was accomplished in 1861. And I saw that the idea of emancipating the workers from the present wage-system was making headway amongst the middle classes themselves. The most ardent defenders of the present economical conditions had already abandoned the idea of right in defending their present privileges, – questions as to the opportuneness of such a change having already taken its place. [So… clearly… he's right… – we have to make our case… paint our global picture… show how we can all gleam authentic… how we… each one… show our brilliance… and that the global human society we make becomes a showcase of beauty mated with practicality and economy… simply because of that freedom-to-be-what-we-are that we embrace… – P.S.] They did not deny the desirability of some such change, they only asked whether the new economical organization advocated by the socialists would really be better than the present one; whether a society in which the workers would have a dominant voice would be able to manage production better than the individual capitalists actuated by mere considerations of self-interest manage it at the present time.

 

Besides, I began gradually to understand that revolutions – that is, periods of accelerated rapid evolution and rapid changes – are as much in the nature of human society as the slow evolution which incessantly goes on… And each time that such a period of accelerated evolution and reconstruction on a grand scale begins, civil war is liable to break out on a small or large scale. The question is, then, not so much how to avoid revolutions, as how to attain the greatest results with the most limited amount of civil war, the smallest number of victims, and a minimum of mutual embitterment. [I don't think that at this juncture… given what we understand now… given what we've learned from Karl Popper… and Alice Miller… and Martin Bernal… about the degree to which our containment is about the thoughts we have been systematically conditioned to think… and given the circumstance of the Internet and instantaneous global communication… that… in transmitting these new thoughts…it is really not a matter of any sort of violent conflict… it is a matter of those ideas taking root in enough hearts that believe in them… to work tirelessly to continue transmitting those ideas… the 'wave' that Gramsci talked about… the 'tenderness' that Gustav Landauer talked about… the softening of hearts… that is how we get a truly new social arrangement… in which all of us… every human being gets to live their gifts… gets to be free… – P.S.]

 

[“150823pariscommune.mp3”:]

 

“The question is,… that the oppressed part of society should obtain the clearest possible conception of what they intend to achieve, and how, and that they should be imbued with the enthusiasm which is necessary for that achievement; in that case they will be sure to attach to their cause the best and the freshest intellectual forces of the privileged class…” “When the workers became, in March, 1871, the masters of the great city, they did not attack the property rights vested in the middle classes. On the contrary, they took these rights under their protection… Having lived for two months in fear that the workers would make an assault upon their property rights, the rich men of France took upon them just the same revenge as if they had made the assault in reality.… If, then, – my conclusion was, – there are periods in human development when a conflict is unavoidable… let these conflicts take place not on the ground of vague aspirations, but upon definite issues; not upon secondary points… but upon broad ideas which inspire men by the grandness of the horizon which they bring into view…” The chief difficulty we face is not one of an overwhelming disproportion in resources… between we-the-ninety-nine-point-nine-nine-nine-percent… and the tiny-ten-thousand… but rather one of an overwhelming 'certainty'-disproportion between us… and 'the tiny ten' – and this because they have kept us busy working… surviving… and so unable to develop our thought… The chief difficulty we face… is that the 'power'-guys plan… they keep themselves hidden… What the spirit of freedom needed… the missing structural-supports in our successful strategy… was its solid ethical basis – our claim is not based on 'scientific legitimacy'… it is based on what we have always known: our right to be free… in our hearts we know this… that our gifts do not exist to be marketed… – its global-range… and the technological-backbone needed to support global-decentralization: an instantaneous electronic communication network… available now… for us to realize our ancestors' dreams – and our own.

 

[Kropotkin's objective was to so prepare us… so prepare our thoughts… that we could make sure the transition was as peaceful as possible… – P.S.] The question is, then, not so much how to avoid revolutions, as how to attain the greatest results with the most limited amount of civil war, the smallest number of victims, and a minimum of mutual embitterment. For that end there is only one means; namely, that the oppressed part of society should obtain the clearest possible conception of what they intend to achieve, and how, and that they should be imbued with the enthusiasm which is necessary for that achievement; in that case they will be sure to attach to their cause the best and the freshest intellectual forces of the privileged class.

 

The Commune of Paris was a terrible example of an outbreak with insufficiently determined ideals. When the workers became, in March, 1871, the masters of the great city, they did not attack the property rights vested in the middle classes. On the contrary, they took these rights under their protection. The leaders of the Commune covered the National Bank with their bodies, and notwithstanding the crisis which had paralyzed industry and the consequent absence of earnings for a mass of workers, they protected the rights of the owners of the factories, the trade establishments, and the dwelling-houses at Paris with their decrees. However, when the movement was crushed, no account was taken by the middle classes of the modesty of the communalistic claims of the insurgents. Having lived for two months in fear that the workers would make an assault upon their property rights, the rich men of France took upon them just the same revenge as if they had made the assault in reality. Nearly thirty thousand of them were slaughtered, as is known, – not in battle, but after they had lost the battle. If they had taken steps towards the socialization of property, the revenge could not have been more terrible.

 

If, then, – my conclusion was, – there are periods in human development when a conflict is unavoidable… let these conflicts take place not on the ground of vague aspirations, but upon definite issues [like the ownership of our bodies… – P.S.]; not upon secondary points… but upon broad ideas which inspire men by the grandness of the horizon which they bring into view. In this last case the conflict itself will depend much less upon the efficacy of firearms and guns than upon the force of the creative genius which will be brought into action in the work of reconstruction of Society. It will depend chiefly upon the constructive forces of Society taking for the moment a free course; upon the inspirations being of a higher standard and so winning more sympathy even from those who, as a class, are opposed to the change. The conflict, being thus engaged on larger issues, will purify the social atmosphere itself…

 

With these ideas I returned to Russia. (p. 289 – 292)

 

(Peter Kropotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist, written around 1898; a note by Nicolas Walter, who wrote the 'Introduction', reads: “…Kropotkin himself would have preferred the more neutral title Around One's Life (which was in fact used for the French edition); but he was overruled by his editors.”)

The chief difficulty we face is not one of an overwhelming disproportion in resources… between we-the-ninety-nine-point-nine-nine-nine-percent… and the tiny-ten-thousand… but rather one of an overwhelming 'certainty'-disproportion between us… and 'the tiny ten' – and this because they have kept us busy working… surviving… and so unable to develop our thought…

 

The tiny-ten-thousand know… have known for two and a half centuries… what they want: their own 'rule' fixed in place… we… beat-down and captured by our given ranks (and this as a global fixity…) their position continuously fed by young people bred to ensure their 'supremacy' is never questioned… ad infinitum…

 

The chief difficulty we face… is that the 'power'-guys plan… they organize… they act… in concert… act… attack… in secret… they keep themselves hidden… and they reinforce with each other a sense of legitimacy (and they control our thoughts… with the propaganda and the education system…) committing acts which an independent judgment would see as heinous…

 

…and existing trends suggest that that 'certainty'-disproportion will only get worse…

 

There is a noose called 'economic hardship' around the necks of we-hard-pressed-to-exist that is progressively tightening – and the escalating debt that comes from it increasingly constricts our options… as the interest accumulates in their pockets –

 

…our ability to achieve the freedom we long to see… and leave for the children… will not get any easier with more time passing…

 

What the spirit of freedom needed… the missing structural-supports in our successful strategy… was its solid ethical basis – our claim is not based on 'scientific legitimacy'… it is based on what we have always known: our right to be free… in our hearts we know this… that our gifts do not exist to be marketed… – its global-range… and the technological-backbone needed to support global-decentralization: an instantaneous electronic communication network… available now… for us to realize our ancestors' dreams – and our own.

 

It is imperative that our love… our tenderness… live in this time of transition… that we organize our core-'selves 'to reinforce and realize it.

 

–––

 

[Today’s reading: we continue the chapter “Poisonous Pedagogy” in… Alice Miller's For Your Own Good… When we left off… we were hearing from some of the 'child-rearing pedagogues': their recommendations for the complete suppression of feelings in children… – P.S.]

 

–––

* “WUR of August 23, 2015 Reading… continuing the chapter "Poisonous Pedagogy" in Alice Miller's For Your Own Good

 

[“150823picturetheworldwewant.mp3”:]

 

…and by the way… of course those who have exclusive hold on global-Authority conspire to keep it. It is time to get over our shock that they do heinous things in secret… and start talking about what we want. The vast majority of us understand that 'power' acts clandestine. Only the propped-up media-intermediaries demand proof of it – that is their function. Rather… what we need… as Kropotkin says… is “a clear conception of what global-society we want…” it ain't hard… we start with our own bodies: sleeping-in… connecting with those we want to connect with… force gone from our lives… It is for the 'work' of discussing and fleshing out and promulgating this picture… that 'core'-leadership is needed: those willing to put in a little extra energy… to get us to 'the flow'… break through the logjam of inertia … – P.S.)]

The infant must perceive order and discipline before he becomes conscious of them, [I imagine what the infant 'perceives' in this ostentatious display of false-sanctity is very like what that puppy of Samuel Butler's did: nothing at all… but… rather… felt shock and confusion… – P.S.] so that he will proceed to the stage of awakening consciousness with good habits already formed and his imperious physical egoism under control.… [“imperious physical egoism…” – i.e. those abilities in which the subjects excel over the tyrants (or 'statesmen'…) 'inciting' their obsession to suppress them – they hate that… being surpassed… because how can they appear to be 'gods' if they aren't supreme in all things?… And I do believe… they have used their secret weaponry against precisely such folk… unfortunately: our most beautiful Brothers and Sisters… who model hope… who inspire us with their brilliance… – P.S.]

 

Thus, the adult must instill obedience by the exercise of his power, this is done with a severe glance, a firm word, possibly by means of physical force (which curbs bad behavior although it is unable to produce good behavior) and by means of punishment. Punishment, however, need not primarily cause physical pain but can utilize withdrawal of kindness and of expressions of love, depending on the type or frequency of the disobedience. For example, for a more sensitive child who is being quarrelsome, this can mean removing him from his mother's lap, refusal of his father's hand or of the bedtime kiss, etc. Since the child's affection can be gained by expressions of love, this same affection can be made use of […now that's utilitarianism taken to its most hideous extreme… – P.S.] to make him more amenable to discipline. [We've pointed out that what Plato's Tribesmen do to us exposes their own sufferings unerringly… as infants. For instance… I've noticed they like to use what we love against us… just as their love for their parents was used against them… – P.S.]

 

…We have defined obedience as submission of the will to the legitimate will of another person.… [Under a system of 'class' – which today is totalitarian – who has the 'power' to say what are the 'rules' we must bend to… if not the few who by thievery and manipulation acquire the resources to monopolize 'decision-making' (a.k.a.… perpetuate into the future the instituted checks on our growth… individually and as 'a people'…) 'Legitimacy'… in a totalitarian 'order'… is a matter of “might makes right”…

(…and by the way… of course those who have exclusive hold on global-Authority conspire to keep it. It is time to get over our shock that they do heinous things in secret… and start talking about what we want. The vast majority of us understand that 'power' acts clandestine.. Only the propped-up media-intermediaries demand proof of it – that is their function. To engage in that diversion ['proving' hidden-'power' exists…] while our most-desperately abused Brothers and Sisters [and this does require that we have a global focus… because… sad to say… it does seem that there are enough folks in the U.S. who are willing to accept that deal… which each day gets worse and worse for us… but they plan to have us totally… tightly… under control before we (enough of us) really wake up – forced to enact 'cautionary' roles' in 'power's global 'Supremacy'-game… suffer that 'fate'… would provide an unseemly display of depravity. Rather… what we need… as Kropotkin says… is “a clear conception of what global-society we want…” it ain't hard… we start with our own bodies: sleeping-in… connecting with those we want to connect with… force gone from our lives… It is for the 'work' of discussing and fleshing out and promulgating this picture… that 'core'-leadership is needed: those willing to put in a little extra energy… to get us to 'the flow'… break through the logjam of inertia… – P.S.)]

[“150823totalitarianmirror.mp3”:]

 

“If treatment of this sort is carried through consistently enough and early enough, then all the requirements will have been met to enable a citizen to live in a dictatorship without minding it; he or she will even be able to feel a euphoric identification with it, as happened in the Hitler period… Just as in the symbiosis of the “diaper stage,” there is no separation here of subject and object. If the child learns to view corporal punishment as “a necessary measure” against “wrongdoers,” then as an adult he will attempt to protect himself from punishment by being obedient and will not hesitate to cooperate with the penal system. In a totalitarian state, which is a mirror of his upbringing, this citizen can also carry out any form of torture or persecution without having a guilty conscience. His “will” is completely identical with that of the government.… Our capacity to resist has nothing to do with our intelligence but with the degree of access to our true self.”

 

The will of the adult must be a fortress […again… the child has become the enemy… the threat… the opponent… – P.S.], inaccessible to duplicity or defiance and granting admittance only when obedience knocks at the gates. [Enzyklopadie… quoted in Rutschky]

When still in diapers, the child learns to knock at the gates of love with “obedience,” and unfortunately often does not unlearn this ever after:

…Turning now to the second major point, how to instill obedience, we begin by showing how this can be done at a very early age. Pedagogy correctly points out that even a baby in diapers has a will of his own and is to be treated accordingly. [Enzyklopadie…]

If treatment of this sort is carried through consistently enough and early enough, then all the requirements will have been met to enable a citizen to live in a dictatorship without minding it; he or she will even be able to feel a euphoric identification with it, as happened in the Hitler period:

…for the health and vitality of a political commonwealth owe just as much to the flourishing of obedience to law and authority as to the prudent use of energy of its leaders. Likewise in the family, in all matters of child-rearing, the will that gives orders and the one that carries them out must not be regarded as antagonistic; they are both the organic expression of what is actually a single will. [Enzyklopadie…] [It's in this light that we can best understand the guidance Bentham provides in his “logic of 'the will'” – attempting to make totalitarian control into a 'science'… – P.S.]

Just as in the symbiosis of the “diaper stage,” there is no separation here of subject and object. If the child learns to view corporal punishment as “a necessary measure” against “wrongdoers,” then as an adult he will attempt to protect himself from punishment by being obedient and will not hesitate to cooperate with the penal system. In a totalitarian state, which is a mirror of his upbringing, this citizen can also carry out any form of torture or persecution without having a guilty conscience. His “will” is completely identical with that of the government.

 

Now that we have seen how easy it is for intellectuals in a dictatorship to be corrupted, it would be a vestige of aristocratic snobbery to think that only “the uneducated masses” are susceptible to propaganda. Both Hitler and Stalin had a surprisingly large number of enthusiastic followers among intellectuals. Our capacity to resist has nothing to do with our intelligence but with the degree of access to our true self. Indeed, intelligence is capable of innumerable rationalizations when it comes to the matter of adaptation. Educators have always known this and have exploited it for their own purposes, as the following proverb suggests: “The clever person gives in, the stupid one balks.” For example, we read in a work on child raising by Grunewald (1899): “I have never yet found willfulness in an intellectually advanced or exceptionally gifted child” (quoted in Rutschky). [This is evidence… not of 'giftedness' in the child… but rather of the extent to which a child will… and so must… go… to capture the love of elusive parents… It is not lack of 'intelligence' that makes us balk… but rather a connection to an alternative allegiance… i.e., the earth… through our relations… – P.S.] Such a child can, in later life, exhibit extraordinary acuity in criticizing the ideologies of his opponents – and in puberty even the views by his own parents – because in these cases his intellectual powers can function without impairment. Only within a group – such as one consisting of adherents of an ideology or a theoretical school – that represents the early family situation will this person on occasion still display a naive submissiveness and uncritical attitude that completely belie his brilliance in other situations. Here, tragically, his early dependence upon tyrannical parents is preserved, a dependence that – in keeping with the program of “poisonous pedagogy” – goes undetected. This explains why Martin Heidegger, for example, who had no trouble in breaking with traditional philosophy and leaving behind the teachers of his adolescence, was not able to see the contradictions in Hitler's ideology that should have been obvious to someone of his intelligence. He responded to this ideology with an infantile fascination and devotion that brooked no criticism. [What distinguishes the groups (“core 'selves'”) that we form is our focus on becoming fully-developing individualities… through self- / soul-sufficiency… How else inoculate ourselves from the seductive pull – given our common experience (under 'class') of abandonment – of 'dependency'… i.e. returning to infancy in order to attempt (yet again…) to win love and acceptance… – P.S.]

 

In the tradition we are dealing with, it was considered obstinacy and was therefore frowned upon to have a will and mind of one's own. It is easy to understand that an intelligent child […unnecessary qualification…I've never met one who wasn't… – P.S.] would want to escape the punishments devised for those possessing these traits and that he or she could do so without any difficulty. What the child didn't realize was that escape came at a high price.

 

[“150823draculaunbound.mp3”:]

 

“He must arrange everything so that it be nature's doing and not his own, or at least so that this appear to be the case. The unpleasant occurrences in particular must not betray their origin if he is the one responsible for them.” The person actually benefiting from this manipulation must not be detected.… – A.M. [This 'theory'… applied politically – globally and nationally – provides the ideological expression… of hidden-'power'. Here's an illustration – in what follows let's consider the possibility that this “hidden 'power'” described by Weiller is not just the pattern… but the basis… of all such that grow out of it… under 'class'… We will be looking at events in France after the Revolution of 1789 – For our purposes… viewing from below… the actors on the political stage and their machinations are less important than the motive forces which generate them. What's interesting is that Karl Marx – whose The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte we will be quoting from at length – what's interesting is that Marx tells us this is his primary motive as well… identifying 'the class struggle' as the motive force… – P.S.]

 

–––

 

The father receives his powers from God (and from his own father). The teacher finds the soil already prepared for obedience, and the political leader has only to harvest what has been sown […time to recondition the soil… – P.S.]:

With the most forceful form of punishment, corporal chastisement, we come to the ultimate in punishment. Just as the rod serves as the symbol of parental discipline in the home, the stick is the primary emblem of school discipline. There was a time when the stick was the cure-all for any mischief in school as the rod was in the home. It is an age-old “indirect way of speaking from the soul,” common to all nations. What can be more obvious than the rule, “He who won't hear must be made to feel”? Pedagogical blows provide a forceful accompaniment to words and intensify their effect. The most direct and natural way of administering them is by that box on the ears, preceded by a strong pulling on the ear, which we still remember from our own youth. This is an unmistakable reminder of the existence of an organ of hearing and of its intended uses. It obviously has symbolic significance, as does a slap on the mouth, which is a reminder that there is an organ of speech and a warning to put it to better use.… The tried and true blow to the head and hair-pulling still convey a certain symbolism, too.…

 

Even truly Christian pedagogy, which takes a person as he is, not as he should be, cannot in principle renounce every form of corporal chastisement, for it is exactly the proper punishment for certain kinds of delinquency: it humiliates and upsets the child, affirms the necessity of bowing to a higher order and at the same time reveals paternal love in all its vigor… […“paternal love in all its vigor…” – what ironic words… given this is a 'love' stripped of its exuberance… – P.S.] We would be in complete sympathy if a conscientious teacher declared: I would rather not be a teacher at all than have to relinquish my prerogative of reaching for the ultima ratio of the stick when necessary.

 

…The father strikes his child and himself feels the smart, / Severity is a merit if you have a gentle heart,” writes the poet Ruckert. If the teacher is a true representative of the father, then he also knows how to display – with the stick when necessary – a love that is often purer and deeper than that of many a natural father. And although we call the child's heart a sinful one, we believe we may still say: The childish heart as a rule understands this love, even if not always at the moment. [Enzyklopadie… quoted in Rutschky]

As an adult, this child will often allow himself to be manipulated by various forms of propaganda since he is already used to having his “inclinations” manipulated and has never known anything else: […again… thought atrophies… or cannot take flight… under authoritarian oversight… – P.S.]

First and foremost, the educator must take care that these inclinations hostile and adverse to the higher will, instead of being awakened and nourished by early education (as so commonly occurs), be prevented by every possible means from developing or at least be eradicated as soon as possible.…

 

Whereas the child should be as little acquainted as possible with those inclinations unfavorable to his higher development, he should, on the other hand, be zealously and frequently introduced to all the rest or at least to their first buddings.

 

Therefore, let the educator instill in the child at an early age abundant and enduring inclinations of the better sort. Let him rouse him often and in divers ways to merriment, joyfulness, delight, hope, etc., but occasionally, although less frequently and more briefly, let him also encourage fear, sadness, and the like. He will have opportunity enough for this by virtue of the fact that, in the normal course of events, some of the child's manifold needs, not only of the body but also and primarily of the soul, are satisfied, that others are not, and that there are various combinations of both conditions. He must arrange everything so that it be nature's doing and not his own, or at least so that this appear to be the case. The unpleasant occurrences in particular must not betray their origin if he is the one responsible for them, [K. Weiller, “Toward a Theory of the Art of Education”), 1805, quoted in Rutschky)

The person actually benefiting from this manipulation must not be detected.… [This 'theory'… applied politically – globally and nationally – provides the ideological expression… of hidden-'power'. Here's an illustration – in what follows let's consider the possibility that this “hidden 'power'” described by Weiller is not just the pattern… but the basis… of all such that grow out of it… under 'class'.

 

We will be looking at events in France after the Revolution of 1789 – the event that initiated a wave of 'bourgeois' (the 'classically'-trained 'intellectual class' that is done with aristocratic pretensions…) revolt across Europe against the aristocracy and Napoleonic invasion… after which followed… in France… restoration of monarchy: Napoleon making himself emperor… followed by other monarchs… Napoleon's nephew using popular revolt and hunger for a republic to bring about a coup d'etat and strengthen the state (this is referred to as the Revolution of 1848…)

 

For our purposes… viewing from below… the actors on the political stage and their machinations are less important than the motive forces which generate them. What's interesting is that Karl Marx – whose The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte we will be quoting from at length – what's interesting is that Marx tells us this is his primary motive as well… identifying 'the class struggle' as the motive force: “I… demonstrate how the class struggle in France created circumstances and relationships that made it possible for a grotesque mediocrity [the nephew… “Napoleon the Little”… to use Victor Hugo's phrase…] to play a hero's part…” But… what we will be considering… is that assigning motive power to theoretical abstractions is not the same as seeing the forces that motivate the humans hidden in… the abstractions – some of those humans are open and honest about their actions… some are not – but none of them… in our analysis… are abstractions. And let us never forget that in this period about which Marx writes there are folks busily implementing… the recommendations of Jeremy Bentham.

…by the beginning of the 19th century AD Germans were convinced that they were the 'intellectual instructors of mankind'. It was a self-assessment accepted by most 'progressive' Europeans and North Americans. German philosophy and education provided a middle way between bankrupt traditions and the French Revolution and atheism…

 

In France this Germanic trend is best represented by the popular philosopher and politician Victor Cousin, who flourished under the grand bourgeois, compromise regime of Louis Philippe. Cousin established French primary education on the Prussian model, and like Humboldt [in the wake of the French Revolution… “after the humiliation of the traditional government and its beloved army after their catastrophic defeat by Napoleon at Jena in 1806 (the Prussian monarchy turned to Humboldt to undertake reforms.) In 1809, among other reforms undertaken to face the French Revolutionary challenge, Humboldt was entrusted with the reorganization of the educational system. He based the new structure on Bildung (derived from his earlier sketch: 'On the Study of Antiquity and of the Greeks in Particular') which he believed would reanimate the German people after their crushing defeats.” (Martin Bernal, Black Athena, p. 283 – 4)] and like Humboldt, whom he greatly admired, he reserved a special place in the whole educational system for the Ancients, and for the Greeks in particular. (p. 318 – 9)

 

[August 23, 2015 show ends here.]

 

–––

 

* “WUR of August 30, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 20)

Please forgive the self-indulgence. I lost my cat Iggy this week. He was such a good friend, I grieve that I was unable to protect him. My son took this video a few months back of him: “Iggy”:

[“150830iggyimissyou.mp3”:]

 

My son watched the child pretending to “lose control of the dog” over a month ago – practicing… as we now know… while singing “Hit the Road Jack”. You were such a good friend Iggy… You live in me… but you should have lived in your own skin… These sick folk know how to create sadness… that's the only thing they know how to create.

 

Sisters and Brothers: It's been unnaturally warm in the Bay Area… even at night… our figs once again are being fried and dropping into a sodden pink mess… the EMF-bombardment is intense… and they've killed my cat… Iggy… using a child and a pit bull as means… There is no way that it was an accident… so long as money buys acts I will suspect convenient deaths… They said… the one true thing they said… that a cat had hurt their dog when he was a puppy… That I believe… I believe he was brought in with the express purpose of killing Iggy… who had blossomed into a neighborhood ambassador… greeted people as I no longer could… as everyone is on the payroll in my neighborhood. My son watched the child pretending to “lose control of the dog” over a month ago – practicing… as we now know… while singing “Hit the Road Jack”. You were such a good friend Iggy… You live in me… but you should have lived in your own skin… These sick folk know how to create sadness… that's the only thing they know how to create.

 

–––

 

[“150830hiddenelimination.mp3”:]

 

Consider the reaction of the 'power'-guys – hidden 'power' – to the Paris Commune: 30,000 dead… to the Russian Revolution… how many millions dead across Europe in World War II… that ended the global mobilization for socialism? Do we see the trajectory? The 'global-state-statesmen' have been upping the body count exponentially in reaction to our global efforts to get free of them… and as their experience in secret repression has progressed… i.e.… their objective has been not just to eliminate dissent… but to eliminate dissent in such a way that we don't even know they did it… let alone be able to 'prove' it… to recognize this… is 'practical politics'… basing our strategy on an analysis of the actual conditions facing us… which includes the existence of hidden-'power' [or the 'global-shadow-state' if you prefer…] what hidden-'power' is doing to us… and our conditioned subservience…

 

August 24, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: Last week we heard Kropotkin tell us that we must develop a clear picture of the world we want in order to excite our Brothers and Sisters about it. What's stopping us? Today we look at “hidden-'power'”… We ask “what do we mean by “hidden-'power'”?”… and “Why must we incorporate an understanding of it into our strategic planning to realize that developed picture of the world we want?”

 

In our Waking Up Radio show of December 7, 2014 we began the chapter in Antisystemic Movements titled “1968: The Great Rehearsal”…

 

Let's recall what our Good Three – Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein – said:

There have only been two world revolutions. One took place in 1848. The second took place in 1968. Both were historic failures. Both transformed the world. The fact that both were unplanned and therefore in a profound sense spontaneous explains both facts – the fact that they failed, and the fact that they transformed the world. We celebrate today July 14, 1789, or at least some people do. We celebrate November 7, 1917, or at least some people do. We do not celebrate 1848 or 1968. And yet the case can be made that these dates are as significant, perhaps even more significant, that the two that attract so much attention.

 

1848 was a revolution for popular sovereignty – both within the nation (down with autocracy) and of the nations (self-determination, the Volkerfruhling). 1848 was the revolution against the counterrevolution of 1815 (the Restoration, the Concert of Europe). It was a revolution “born at least as much of hopes as of discontents” (Namier: 1944, 4). It was certainly not the French Revolution the second time around. It represented rather an attempt both to fulfill its original hopes and to overcome its limitations. 1848 was, in a Hegelian sense, the sublation (Aufhebung) of 1789.

[‘Sublation’… says the dictionary… dates from the mid-19th century – probably just as Hegel was being seriously ‘sublated’ himself – comes from the Latin ‘sublat’ (‘taken away’)… from ‘sub’ (‘from below’)… and from the stem ‘tollere’ (‘take away’); and means: “to assimilate a smaller entity into a larger one…” – P.S.]

1848 was, in a Hegelian sense, the sublation (Aufhebung) of 1789.

 

The same was true of 1968. It too was born of hopes at least as much as discontents. It too was a revolution against the counterrevolution represented by the U.S. organization of its world hegemony as of 1945. It too was an attempt to fulfill the original goals of the Russian Revolution, while very much an effort to overcome the limitations of that revolution. It too therefore was a sublation, a sublation this time of 1917.

 

The parallel goes further. 1848 was a failure – a failure in France, a failure in the rest of Europe. [That depends on one's perspective… doesn't it?… we're going to be thinking more about whether that failure for us (success for global-'power') was by plan… – P.S.] So too was 1968. In both cases the bubble of popular enthusiasm and radical innovation was burst within a relatively short period. In both cases, however, the political ground-rules of the world-system were profoundly and irrevocably changed as a result of the revolution. It was 1848 which institutionalized the old left (using the term broadly). And it was 1968 that institutionalized the new social movements. Looking forward, 1848 was in this sense the great rehearsal for the Paris Commune and the Russian Revolution, for the Baku Congress and Bandoeng. 1968 was the rehearsal for what?

Consider the reaction of the 'power'-guys – hidden 'power' – to the Paris Commune: 30,000 dead… to the Russian Revolution… how many millions dead across Europe in World War II… that ended the global mobilization for socialism? Do we see the trajectory? The 'global-state-statesmen' have been upping the body count exponentially in reaction to our global efforts to get free of them… and as their experience in secret repression has progressed…

 

…i.e.… their objective has been not just to eliminate dissent… but to eliminate dissent in such a way that we don't even know they did it… let alone be able to 'prove' it…

(…to recognize this… is 'practical politics'… basing our strategy on an analysis of the actual conditions facing us… which includes the existence of hidden-'power' [or the 'global-shadow-state' if you prefer…] what hidden-'power' is doing to us… and our conditioned subservience…)

Moreover… when… from 'power's perspective… there are “too many people”… when they can't provide enough 'jobs'… and especially when… simultaneously… we are waking up – as tends to happen when off the job-intravene… i.e.… when one starts thinking authentically – what do they do?… think: World War II… only without the muss and fuss… because these are “natural disasters” they do to us.

 

 

–––

 

* “WUR of October 11, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 26)

 

[“151011endgametime.mp3”:]

 

Our argument here is that to successfully organize to design a global alternative to the regime of 'class'… reclaiming our human energy globally… we have to address the actual conditions that 'power' has used to defeat our organization: agent infiltration… and EMF (electro-magnetic-force) weapons… These actual conditions then become assumptions of our activism… and only focuses of it in the sense of (in the case of agents) structuring our practice to eliminate the possibility of agents undermining it… and… (in the case of EMF weapons) to protect ourselves against them… …and… we need discussion: various venues and platforms for propagating it… particularly in neighborhoods… using the tools above just mentioned (more on this next week…) (When I talk about 'agent infiltration' I'm not talking just about 'movements'… I'm talking about into all aspects of our existence under class… This is something they have been preparing for… this 'end-game-time' when the resources run out [which they read as “too many people…] and as 'stewards' of Plato's dream – the Republic – they follow that playbook pretty carefully… and Plato advised them: “You've got to manage the population… don't allow it to get so large such that it threatens your rule…”)

 

October 6, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: Our argument here is that to successfully organize to design a global alternative to the regime of 'class'… reclaiming our human energy globally… we have to address the actual conditions that 'power' has used to defeat our organization: agent infiltration… and EMF (electro-magnetic-force) weapons… These actual conditions then become assumptions of our activism… and only focuses of it in the sense of (in the case of agents) structuring our practice to eliminate the possibility of agents undermining it… and… (in the case of EMF weapons) to protect ourselves against them…

 

…protection against EMF-weapons means doctors willing to be 'Miklos'… tracing the physiological effects of these various weapons on our bodies… devising tests that confirm them (at times I taste metal… so is there a 'saliva-test'?…) helping to document their existence…

 

…and it means folks who can design low-cost detection devices… and others with means to help disseminate them…

 

…it means folks willing to create the online mechanisms for organizing global General Strikes… as well as to counter attempts to suppress them…

 

…and… we need discussion: various venues and platforms for propagating it… particularly in neighborhoods… using the tools above just mentioned (more on this next week…) (When I talk about 'agent infiltration' I'm not talking just about 'movements'… I'm talking about into all aspects of our existence under class… This is something they have been preparing for… this 'end-game-time' when the resources run out [which they read as “too many people…”] and as 'stewards' of Plato's dream – the Republic – they follow that playbook pretty carefully… and Plato advised them: “You've got to manage the population… don't allow it to get so large such that it threatens your rule…” Point being: they are organizing in our communities… and I'm not just talking about on the level of infiltration of the media and the arts… which are obvious because those are the thoughts that occupy folks' heads – that's the front-line there – but I'm talking about buying up land and real estate in areas where there had been progressive movements… and being the ones that write those 'letters to the editor'… They are actively involved in crafting public opinion… and we haven't talked about that… We have to… those are barriers that have to be addressed… barriers to our believing that we deserve our freedom…)

 

…and we must urge ourselves on despite what seems like a world set against it… acknowledging that it's very challenging to confront a global set of 'rulers' who stay hidden.

 

[“151011theftofourgreatness.mp3”:]

 

Perhaps the most useful (strategic) way of thinking about hidden-'power' (as we neither know nor care who the ten thousand 'power'-guys are exactly…) is as a series of suppressions… or thefts… i.e.… the effects of these busy-as-bees-global-misanthropists: what has been taken from us – our 'selves'… most fundamentally – that must be recovered for us to have certainty about the need to defend it… the recovered self… the authentic. (More and more of us today are seeing that it is this individual 'self' that we have to have allegiance to… in order to want the bigger societal vision that allows that individual self to flourish… We can't want that global alternative if we don't desperately want this jewel… this gem… this treasure… which is ourselves… our individual 'self'… to be able to flourish and expand limitlessly… And we want the 'authentic' – that's key… – as we can't expand limitlessly unless we have a world… designed by us… which is honest…)

 

Perhaps the most useful (strategic) way of thinking about hidden-'power' (as we neither know nor care who the ten thousand 'power'-guys are exactly…) is as a series of suppressions… or thefts… i.e.… the effects of these busy-as-bees-global-misanthropists: what has been taken from us – our 'selves'… most fundamentally – that must be recovered for us to have certainty about the need to defend it… the recovered self… the authentic. (More and more of us today are seeing that it is this individual 'self' that we have to have allegiance to… in order to want the bigger societal vision that allows that individual self to flourish… We can't want that global alternative if we don't desperately want this jewel… this gem… this treasure… which is ourselves… our individual 'self'… to be able to flourish and expand limitlessly… And we want the 'authentic' – that's key… – as we can't expand limitlessly unless we have a world… designed by us… which is honest…)

 

We have been synthesizing and advancing our ancestors' gifts… coming to (our own) terms with what has happened to us… What is this 'history' that we're given? If not a 'history' of our suppression? What does this 'history' mean… for us?… if not the theft of our greatness? (and we need to ponder this… the reality that each human being possesses the seed of 'greatness'… and that has been suppressed massively… across the millennia – which is why it is going to be a dazzling thing to see those seeds sprout and bear fruit – that's our future…)

 

[“151011wearenotworkers.mp3”:]

 

“We are human beings… not 'workers'…” What is this 'history' that we're given? If not a 'history' of our suppression? What does this 'history' mean… for us?… if not the theft of our greatness?… leaving us with a dangerous (for 'power'…) pack of unanswered questions… that we set aside when we decide to 'fit'… into 'the system'… into one of those 'roles' those ten thousand guys have created for us…

 

What is this 'history' that we're given? If not a 'history' of our suppression? What does this 'history' mean… for us?… if not the theft of our greatness?… leaving us with a dangerous (for 'power'…) pack of unanswered questions… that we set aside when we decide to 'fit'… into 'the system'… into one of those 'roles' those ten thousand guys have created for us…

 

[“151011followingourquestions.mp3”:]

 

…from infancy up… 'force' never felt right… provoked unease… and unanswered questions… stimulated discord… put us at odds with the very ones we must learn from… and this process was for us… various… Our determination… despite this early silencing… to “follow our questions” is the re-education process… it is the 'pursuit of happiness'… as… to solve long-buried riddles not only gives us satisfaction… but peace… it is restorative of calm… to finally find ourselves on a true path… the path that leads to a reincorporation of all the true power of which we were systematically robbed. “Following our questions” begins by writing them down… taking them seriously… it means never being without our notebooks…

 

…but when we revisit that 'pack' with new information – a sun opening the darkness – we are born anew (an expression unfortunately already [multiply] claimed… but no less apt for that…)

 

I've found that the process of regaining our original 'selves' is as many-faceted as that of losing it – another expression of the 'class'-system's inherent totalitarianism… We didn't lose our 'self' all at once… it was a many-layered theft… a series of multiple suppressions – which is what makes its recovery so challenging… and so inevitable once we embark on the path of seeking it… which is the path of 'following-our-questions'… For each of us those questions vary somewhat – though they are uniformly sourced in 'power's thrust to ensnare us in a 'web of obligation' (and of course initially it is our parents who do this… ) –

 

…from infancy up… 'force' never felt right… provoked unease… and unanswered questions… stimulated discord… put us at odds with the very ones we must learn from… and this process was for us… various…

 

…but for each of us (under 'class'…) our search for answers got interrupted. We cannot battle long when 'the world' confirms as 'right' a massive 'wrong'…

 

Our determination… despite this early silencing… to “follow our questions” is the re-education process… it is the 'pursuit of happiness'… as… to solve long-buried riddles not only gives us satisfaction… but peace… it is restorative of calm… to finally find ourselves on a true path… the path that leads to a reincorporation of all the true power of which we were systematically robbed.

 

“Following our questions” begins by writing them down… taking them seriously… it means never being without our notebooks…

 

And just as 'power's need to divide us (from ourselves and from each other…) is the source of our unanswered questions under 'class'… recovering our lost connections with all our relations… and particularly with our Brothers and Sisters… is the source of our freedom…

 

This process is much more contagious than 'power'-worship… the earth bends us to her… once we attend to her (the circularity of 'power's propaganda is an attempt to put itself in the way of… and to replicate… this effect…) and…

 

…as Walter Lundquist (quoted in Waking Up, p. 80) said: “Once you wake up the human animal you can’t put it back to sleep again.”

 

–––

 

[“151011derangeddreamofthepowermad.mp3”:]

 

We have been collectively enacting the fantasies of the deranged. It's long past time for us to live authentic lives. Karl Popper has reminded us that 'the state' is a recent invention… coterminous with the 'birth'… the 'self-creation'… of the global-state-statesmen… these self-same 'power'-mad Few… …and we said that it is only by self-creating ourselves into 'a people' here in the U.S.… that we can confront global-'power'… confront the 'logic' and the repressive machinery of 'the state'… and this is confirmed by Kropotkin when he says that “mutual aid leads to mutual confidence… which is the first condition for courage…” The key to the successful organizing of ourselves into groups… 'core-selves'… and broader associations around the implementation of specific plans… lies in the open acknowledgement of the tactics 'power' uses to destroy 'solidarity' (which is an embedded goal in whatever we do.)

 

'Martial artists' in this moment… I've been arguing we must be… as 'power' wars on us incessantly when we claim our right to be fully-developing individualities… i.e.… pursue our happiness collectively… This 'project' requires us to resist 'power's totalitarian ethics… its utilitarian 'morality'.

 

But what we haven't discussed is the degree to which… our freedom is an intervention in… unconscious patterns of these global-'statesmen'… Plato's Tribesmen…

 

…patterns that they have no ability to see… let alone alter…

 

…and that these patterns mean… they cannot feel remorse or empathy… they cannot feel anything… though they long for a sense of absolute safety…

 

…and their dream… is a world… not just machine-like… but run by… machines.

 

Their need for what they think of as absolute 'safety' explains their obsession with social fabrication… with being the 'architect' of what… under 'class'… is called 'reality' – though it is anything but…

 

We are trying to be authentic in a world of 'class'… a world therefore false by definition… but… in addition… we are trying to be authentic in a world which they… these Sad-Abandoned-Children-Made-Misanthropists… who hide their faces from us… while claiming global-provenance… are actively trying to make more inauthentic by the minute…

 

(…and I'm more and more convinced… that this daily invention and dissemination of more falseness… ever-deeper lies… while done to achieve their obvious end of increasing divisions between us – we-the-people – is also done just to keep us disoriented… dispirited… off our centers… never knowing what anything is [and this is… of course… what was done to them… as children…])

 

Brothers and Sisters… this charade is not worthy of us… being forced to live out the 'Power'-mad Few's experience of abandonment… as if we were but shadows in a dream… the dream of a diseased mind.

 

We have been collectively enacting the fantasies of the deranged.

 

It's long past time for us to live authentic lives.

 

Karl Popper has reminded us that 'the state' is a recent invention… coterminous with the 'birth'… the 'self-creation'… of the global-state-statesmen… these self-same 'power'-mad Few…

 

…and we said that it is only by self-creating ourselves into 'a people' here in the U.S.… that we can confront global-'power'… confront the 'logic' and the repressive machinery of 'the state'… and this is confirmed by Kropotkin when he says that “mutual aid leads to mutual confidence… which is the first condition for courage…”

 

The key to the successful organizing of ourselves into groups… 'core-selves'… and broader associations around the implementation of specific plans… lies in the open acknowledgement of the tactics 'power' uses to destroy 'solidarity' (which is an embedded goal in whatever we do.)

 

What we're doing is showing that there is an authentic way to engage with 'power' – eschewing the phony routes it provides…

 

Once we see their penchant for orchestration… recognize that they own the media… we cannot help but also see that almost all the 'news' we get has some element of fabrication or craft… as controlling what we think is (for their sense of 'security'… their 'rule'…) everything.

 

–––

 

[“151011sleepingmonsterawakes.mp3”:]

 

“The state must be self-sufficient. It must aim at economic autarchy ['economic independence… self-sufficiency…]; for otherwise the rulers would either be dependent upon traders, or become traders themselves. The first of these alternatives would undermine their power, the second their unity and the stability of the state.” [And here we are in debt to Hirschman… who explains the way in which the 'modern'… self-created… 'power'-guys implemented this injunction… by monopolizing the financial mechanisms… access to credit. And so… we see… the sleeping monster Plato… awoke in the minds of these sick folks… and from the seed of his flights of fancy and careless jokes… was built… millennia later… a massive yoke…]

 

Alice Miller explains the roots of totalitarianism – the disease we have been discussing – in child-rearing under the regime of 'class'. Karl Popper exposes the roots of totalitarianism… and 'collective utility' – its ideological justification – in Plato…

 

In the key elements of Plato's – and the totalitarian's – political programme that Popper identifies (in what follows…) do we not recognize our current reality? – clearly… these post-French Revolution… self-invented global-'rulers' have followed Plato's guidance carefully. Let's ask ourselves what their adherence to this program… the imposition of these ideas on us – and the suppressed synthesis of Karl Popper… Martin Bernal… his exposure of Bildung… and Gottingen… Albert O. Hirschman… who clarifies their broad political strategy… and Alice Miller… who explains how it was accomplished with 'child-rearing'… confirms both the imposition… and the conscious intention behind it – has meant for the scope of the human spirit… what it has meant for us to be assigned [by the market or otherwise…] our functions… what it has meant for our common earth that we have allowed such tiny spirits to ravage her. So here's Plato's political program:

“(A) The strict division of the classes; i.e. the ruling class consisting of herdsmen and watchdogs must be strictly separated from the human cattle. [This goal was achieved by its being embedded in an 'objective' 'education system' – i.e. by means of 'educational' screening (a 'system' which provides them with a comforting self-justification: they tell themselves they identify and promote 'the best' of 'the best'…) – the pretence of 'objectivity' helps to conceal its absence… is in keeping with their need to stay hidden… to escape detection… to hide the hand behind the plans to capture and command the mystery of our human energy… – P.S.]

 

“(B) The identification of the fate of the state with that of the ruling class; the exclusive interest in this class, and in its unity; and subservient to this unity, the rigid rules for breeding and educating this class, and the strict supervision and collectivization of the interests of its members.

 

“From these principle elements, others can be derived, for instance the following:

 

“(C) The ruling class has a monopoly of things like military virtues and training, and of the right to carry arms and to receive education of any kind [and recall we said last week (the October 4, 2015 show) that 'the state' is “the self-organization of 'power'”… – P.S.]; but it is excluded from any participation in economic activities, and especially from earning money. [I would argue that utilizing 'accumulation' as a political strategy… i.e. its use as a stratagem… they see as distinct from pursuing money for its own sake… – P.S.]

 

“(D) There must be a censorship of all intellectual activities of the ruling class, and a continual propaganda aiming at moulding and unifying their minds. All innovation in education, legislation, and religion must be prevented or suppressed.

 

“(E) The state must be self-sufficient. It must aim at economic autarchy ['economic independence… self-sufficiency…]; for otherwise the rulers would either be dependent upon traders, or become traders themselves. The first of these alternatives would undermine their power, the second their unity and the stability of the state.” [And here we are in debt to Hirschman… who explains the way in which the 'modern'… self-created… 'power'-guys implemented this injunction… by monopolizing the financial mechanisms… access to credit. And so… we see… the sleeping monster Plato… awoke in the minds of these sick folks… and from the seed of his flights of fancy and careless jokes… was built… millennia later… a massive yoke… – P.S.] (The Open Society and Its Enemies: The Spell of Plato, p. 86 – 7)

[“151011disposedofinsecret.mp3”:]

 

“As to my translation, Shorey puts it a little differently; I shall quote from his translation (the italics are mine) also the preceding sentence (referring to infanticide): '…the offspring of the inferior, and any of those of the other sort who are born defective, they [the rulers] will properly dispose of in secret, so that no one will know what has become of them. “That is the condition,” he said, “of preserving the purity of the guardian's breed.”') It must have seemed like a dream come true… manna from heaven… these EMF (electro-magnetic-force) weapons… to the 'power'-mad Plato's Tribesmen… confirmation that they were 'meant' to 'rule'… But could they get people to do it?… administer 'shocks' to fellow 'citizens'… How many of our loved ones… in the years subsequent… have they killed? You know folks who have had these weapons used against them. I suspect that almost all of us in urban areas know someone who was targeted… “disposed of in secret…” as Plato authorized 'rulers' to do: eliminate the 'unneeded”… the elderly… the homeless… the disobedient… those with 'heart'… those who care about their Brothers and Sisters. These weapons… after all… would 'have' to be tested… and 'the deficient' needed to go… a 'perfect' conjoining of streams of Necessity… …all of us have lost folk… without knowing it – and those targeted wouldn't know either… because the symptoms are misdiagnosed as 'strokes'… 'heart attacks'… congestive heart failure… various cancers… and Alzheimer's…

 

And what practice is key to the totalitarian creed… to 'collective utility'? – where does it begin… if not in child-alienation?… the practice Plato recommended: child abandonment…

(Popper was attacked for this translation: “'The race of the guardians must be kept pure', says Plato (in defence of infanticide) when developing the racialist argument that we breed animals with great care while neglecting our own race, an argument which has been repeated ever since.”

 

His reply: “Is my translation wrong? Or my assertion that this has been, ever since Plato, the main argument of racialists and breeders of the master race? Or are the guardians not the masters of Plato's best city?

 

“As to my translation, Shorey puts it a little differently; I shall quote from his translation (the italics are mine) also the preceding sentence (referring to infanticide): '…the offspring of the inferior, and any of those of the other sort who are born defective, they [the rulers] will properly dispose of in secret, so that no one will know what has become of them. “That is the condition,” he said, “of preserving the purity of the guardian's breed.”') (The Open Society and Its Enemies: The Spell of Plato, p. 337 – 8)

And it seems to me… there is a direct line from that command… to the centuries… millennia… that follow… of child-abandonment under 'class' (this is the subject of John Boswell's The Kindness of Strangers: the Abandonment of Children in Western Europe from Late Antiquity to the Renaissance…)

 

…and… again… we see in their use of EMF [electro-magnetic-force] weaponry… with which we are “disposed of in secret…” what (historically) was done to them.

 

It must have seemed like a dream come true… manna from heaven… these EMF (electro-magnetic-force) weapons… to the 'power'-mad Plato's Tribesmen… confirmation that they were 'meant' to 'rule'… But could they get people to do it?… administer 'shocks' to fellow 'citizens'… those the 'power'-mad (on Plato's authority…) label 'deficient' – 'unneeded'… 'superfluous'… deleterious to the herd… upsetting them… interfering with the plans of 'the chosen' – and target for elimination…

 

…and an experiment at Yale (one of the hubs for the propagation of the 'new master class' ideology…) in 1961 answered the question: yes they could (there's a film out now about that question… called The Experimenter…)

 

How many of our loved ones… in the years subsequent… have they killed? You know folks who have had these weapons used against them. I suspect that almost all of us in urban areas know someone who was targeted… “disposed of in secret…” as Plato authorized 'rulers' to do: eliminate the 'unneeded”… the elderly… the homeless… the disobedient… those with 'heart'… those who care about their Brothers and Sisters. These weapons… after all… would 'have' to be tested… and 'the deficient' needed to go… a 'perfect' conjoining of streams of Necessity…

 

…all of us have lost folk… without knowing it – and those targeted wouldn't know either… because the symptoms are misdiagnosed as 'strokes'… 'heart disease'… congestive heart failure… and Alzheimer's…

 

The cost of accommodating ourselves to 'the false' has come home… we dare not tarry long in deciding to act… now we know… now we know that the world is waiting for us accept the mantle of our 'greater freedom'… bought with their blood and suffering… and… now we know… with our own.

 

–––

[“151011lossofthemothersaffection.mp3”:]

 

How much damage has this one man… Plato… done? It is incalculable… but one thing is certain… it is on his authority that the abandoned-children-who-would-be-gods have contaminated society with the glorification of their own fundamental dishonesty… their obsession with hiding… and lying: “The contrast between the Platonic and the Socratic creed is even greater than I have shown so far… Plato's complete break with anything resembling Socrates' intellectualism is nowhere more obvious than in the place where he twice expresses his hope that even the rulers themselves, at least after a few generations, might be induced to believe his greatest propaganda lie; I mean his racialism, his Myth of Blood and Soil, known as the Myth of the Metals in Man and of the Earthborn. Here we see that Plato's utilitarian and totalitarian principles overrule everything, even the ruler's privilege of knowing and of demanding to be told, the truth…” and in this compulsive need of 'power's to lie… to stay hidden… to punish the 'disobedient'… and eliminate the 'unneeded' (or merely 'deficient'…) we see a key 'repetition compulsion.' They – these ten thousand die-hard misanthropists – have been afraid of us and afraid of us and afraid of us for… – let's say for the sake of convenience – two and a half centuries… ever since the French Revolution… they have projected all of their fear of the unknown onto us. This is… for our purposes… perhaps their most devastating repetition compulsion… …but it is derived from another… more basic… one: their need to 'win' affection… to 'prove' they deserve our attention… because they are 'the best'… this is the key side-effect… of abandonment… of loss of the mother's affection.

 

(And what is the thrust of almost every TV-show my son watches?: “Killing people's not so bad… it's all relative… morally-neutral even… it all depends on 'context'…” [on what 'the state' – which is in all of us… i.e. the 'utilitarian mindset' – feels is needed… Read: “Morality is nothing but political hygiene…” Karl Popper noted a half century or so ago. He was talking about Plato… but Plato lives… in the global-state-statesmen…] This is a new development… designed to dull our sensibilities… make us more like them… so they'll feel safer… safe from any threat of challenge…)

And what is the mindset inherent in the totalitarian creed… and its defining practice of child-alienation?: dualism ('collective utility'…) the deification of 'Mind'… contempt for 'the material'… the real… the concrete… for what Marx (with the ancient Greeks…) would call 'Necessity' – into which category… necessarily… their children… and ours… were placed – all for the sake of the 'idea' of the 'Perfect State'… that state that manifests… expresses… and elevates 'the best'… from which striving to 'achieve' the goal of the most 'perfect' human being… arises… identified as supreme… the 'philosopher-king'.

 

How much damage has this one man… Plato… done? It is incalculable… but one thing is certain… it is on his authority that the abandoned-children-who-would-be-gods have contaminated society with the glorification of their own fundamental dishonesty… their obsession with hiding… and lying:

The contrast between the Platonic and the Socratic creed is even greater than I have shown so far. Plato, I have said, followed Socrates in his definition of the philosopher. “Whom do you call true philosophers? – Those who love truth,” we read in the Republic. But he himself is not quite truthful when he makes this statement. He does not really believe in it, for he bluntly declares in other places that it is one of the royal privileges of the sovereign to make full use of lies and deceit: “It is the business of the rulers of the city, if it is anybody's, to tell lies, deceiving both its enemies and its own citizens for the benefit of the city; and no one else must touch this privilege.”

 

“For the benefit of the city”, says Plato. Again we find the appeal to the principle of collective utility is the ultimate ethical consideration. Totalitarian morality overrides everything, even the definition, the Idea, of the philosopher. It need hardly be mentioned that, by the same principle of political expediency, the ruled are to be forced to tell the truth. “If the ruler catches anyone else in a lie… then he will punish him for introducing a practice which injures and endangers the city…” Only in this slightly unexpected sense are the Platonic rulers – the philosopher-kings – lovers of truth.

 

Plato illustrates this application of his principle of collective utility to the problem of truthfulness by the example of the physician. The example is well chosen, since Plato likes to visualize his political mission as one of the healer or saviour of the sick body of society.…

 

…What kind of lies has Plato in mind when he exhorts his rulers to use strong medicine? Crossman rightly emphasizes that Plato means “propaganda, the technique of controlling the behaviour of… the bulk of the ruled majority.” Certainly, Plato had these first in his mind; but when Crossman suggests that the propaganda lies were only intended for the consumption of the ruled, while the rulers should be a fully enlightened intelligentsia, then I cannot agree. I think, rather, that Plato's complete break with anything resembling Socrates' intellectualism is nowhere more obvious than in the place where he twice expresses his hope that even the rulers themselves, at least after a few generations, might be induced to believe his greatest propaganda lie; I mean his racialism, his Myth of Blood and Soil, known as the Myth of the Metals in Man and of the Earthborn. Here we see that Plato's utilitarian and totalitarian principles overrule everything, even the ruler's privilege of knowing and of demanding to be told, the truth. The motive of Plato's wish that the rulers themselves should believe in the propaganda lie is his hope of increasing its wholesome effect, i.e. of strengthening the rule of the master race, and ultimately, of arresting all political change. (The Open Society and Its Enemies: The Spell of Plato, p. 138 –140)

…and in this compulsive need of 'power's to lie… to stay hidden… to punish the 'disobedient'… and eliminate the 'unneeded' (or merely 'deficient'…) we see a key 'repetition compulsion.' They – these ten thousand die-hard misanthropists – have been afraid of us and afraid of us and afraid of us for… – let's say for the sake of convenience – two and a half centuries… ever since the French Revolution… they have projected all of their fear of the unknown onto us. This is… for our purposes… perhaps their most devastating repetition compulsion…

 

…but it is derived from another… more basic… one: their need to 'win' affection… to 'prove' they deserve our attention… because they are 'the best'…

 

…this is the key side-effect… of abandonment… of loss of the mother's affection.

 

–––

 

[Apologies… this portion of the show I unfortunately neglected to read… please look for it next week…]

 

We are reclaiming our authentic selves… and in order to do that we need support… we need others similarly focused on the development of 'self / soul-sufficiency' – individually – as well as our development… collectively… into 'a people' able to advance our right to pursue happiness…

 

…so we must confront the barriers to our doing these things… – all of these barriers being in essence one: “hidden-'power'”… 'power' in one of its many guises. And I think there is some advantage… some ways in which it may be helpful… for us to understand where they came from… these Plato-worshippers… how they think… the kinds of things they do to destroy our hope (and why…)

 

…that it is important for us to see what they will… inevitably… try to do… in order to prevent it from happening.

 

What are the kinds of things they will want to do… to undermine our solidarity?… and how do we withstand such attempts?

 

The Zapatistas use 'conflict resolution' to ensure there is no erosion of group cohesion… which is… I think… useful guidance… something we also must design…

 

…but of a particular kind.

 

–––

 

* “WUR of October 11, 2015 Reading… continuing our interlude: excerpts from Marx's Eighteenth Brumaire… and Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914… before returning to the chapter "Poisonous Pedagogy" in Alice Miller's For Your Own Good

 

[“151011theaterforrevolution.mp3”:]

 

“The political housemaids of France are sweeping away the glowing lava of the revolution with old brooms and wrangle with one another while they do their work.” [Now that's astute political analysis… Do we have a press… of any kind… that independent of 'power'… or its utilitarian mindset… today? Moreover… we see that no one is deceived… not even for a moment… the performance is so seen…]

 

[We are reading excerpts from Marx's Eighteenth Brumaire… and Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914, in order to see the origins of the 'modern' bureaucratic nation-state in the fixed determination of 'statesmen' to repress us… we-the-people… It is a new invention… with no less devastating effects for being so. And so long as it lasts… it – these global-'statesmen' – will forestall our growth… our right to express our infinite expansiveness… – P.S.].

 

After the review of October 3, the Permanent Commission summoned War Minister d'Hautpoul. He promised that these breaches of discipline should not recur. We know how on October 10 Bonaparte kept d'Hautpoul's word. As Commander-in-Chief of the Paris army, Changarnier had commanded at both reviews. He, at once a member of the Permanent Commission, chief of the National Guard, the “saviour” of January 29 and June 13, the “bulwark of society,” the candidate of the party of Order for presidential honours, the suspected Monk of two monarchies, had hitherto never acknowledged himself as the subordinate of the War Minister, had always openly derided the republican Constitution and had pursued Bonaparte with an ambiguous lordly protection. Now he was consumed with zeal for discipline against the War Minister and for the Constitution against Bonaparte. While on October 10 a section of the calvary raised the shout: “Vive Napoleon! Vivent les saucissons!” [“Hurrah for Napoleon! Hurrah for the sausages!”] Changarnier arranged that at least the infantry marching past under the command of his friend Neumayer should preserve an icy silence. As a punishment, the War Minister relieved General Neumayer of his post in Paris at Bonaparte's instigation, on the pretext of appointing him commanding general of the fourteenth and fifteenth military divisions. Neumayer refused this exchange of posts and so had to resign. Changarnier, for his part, published an order of the day on November 2, in which he forbade the troops to indulge in political outcries or demonstrations of any kind while under arms. The Elysee newspapers attacked Changarnier; the papers of the party of Order attacked Bonaparte; the Permanent Commission held repeated secret sessions in which it was repeatedly proposed to declare the country in danger; the army seemed divided into two hostile camps, with two hostile general staffs, one in the Elysee, where Bonaparte resided, the other in the Tuileries, the quarters of Changarnier. It seemed that only the meeting of the National Assembly was needed to give the signal for battle. The French public judged this friction between Bonaparte and Changarnier like that English journalist who characterized it in the following words:

 

“The political housemaids of France are sweeping away the glowing lava of the revolution with old brooms and wrangle with one another while they do their work.” [Now that's astute political analysis… Do we have a press… of any kind… that independent of 'power'… or its utilitarian mindset… today? Moreover… we see that no one is deceived… not even for a moment… the performance is so seen… – P.S.]

 

–––

 

[October 11, 2015 show ends here.]

 

–––

* “WUR of October 18, 2015… “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’” (Part 3.5): Segue From Antisystemic Movements… To Alice

 

Today’s show: “Establishing a 'safe' place to plan and express our love: places for the cultivation of soul-sufficiency… which necessarily means: helping each other get 'big' – the process of reclaiming… sharing… and expanding our original 'selves'…” (Part 27)

 

[“151018theworldwemakeishonest.mp3”:]

 

We are reclaiming our authentic selves… and in order to do that we need support… we need others similarly focused on the development of 'self / soul-sufficiency' – individually – as well as on our development… collectively… into 'a people' able to advance our right to pursue happiness… What's unique about this moment… different from any other time when our ancestors fought for freedom… unique in the history of 'class'… is that we are in the 'end-game'… the time when all 'power's lies are exposed… our internalization of them pulled out and examined… and we decide where our allegiances lie… whether with the Zapatistas… with all the struggling earth-connected… with the oceans and all life… or with these ten thousand 'power'-guys – a 'teaching'-moment we might say… when we chip away at the numbers of folks willing to serve a dying system… and increase our own… those of us who choose 'life'… choose 'self / soul-sufficiency'… and choose our right as 'a people' to grow our own gifts without coercion… our right to pursue happiness… …so we must confront and discuss the barriers before us… – all of these barriers being in essence one: “hidden-'power'”… And I think there is some advantage… some ways in which it may be helpful… for us to understand where they came from… these Plato-worshippers – it is important to see 'power's destructive tactics… in order to move around them. What are the kinds of things they will want to do… to undermine our solidarity?… and how do we withstand such attempts?

 

October 12, 2015… Sisters and Brothers: We are reclaiming our authentic selves… and in order to do that we need support… we need others similarly focused on the development of 'self / soul-sufficiency' – individually – as well as on our development… collectively… into 'a people' able to advance our right to pursue happiness… initially here in the U.S.… where it is codified in the Declaration of Independence… and then as a right (defined as the right to own and grow our own gifts… 'self-creation') advanced for all of our Brothers and Sisters globally….

 

What's unique about this moment… different from any other time when our ancestors fought for freedom… unique in the history of 'class'… is that we are in the 'end-game'… the time when all 'power's lies are exposed… our internalization of them pulled out and examined… and we decide where our allegiances lie… whether with the Zapatistas… with all the struggling earth-connected… with the oceans and all life… or with these ten thousand 'power'-guys – a 'teaching'-moment we might say… when we chip away at the numbers of folks willing to serve a dying system… and increase our own… those of us who choose 'life'… choose 'self / soul-sufficiency'… and choose our right as 'a people' to grow our own gifts without coercion… our right to pursue happiness…

 

…so we must confront and discuss the barriers before us… – all of these barriers being in essence one: “hidden-'power'”… 'power' in any of its many guises. And I think there is some advantage… some ways in which it may be helpful… for us to understand where they came from… these Plato-worshippers – and we are reading excerpts from Karl Marx's The Eighteenth Brumaire… and Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914… and Alice Miller's For Your Own Good… to help us do that – and to understand how they think… and hence the kinds of things they do to destroy our hope (and why they are so determined to do them…)

 

…that it is important for us to see the kinds of tactics they will use… inevitably… to try to undermine solidarity (in whatever ways we are able to build it …) – as well as the psychological dynamics at play that prevent them from remembering their early experience of abuse… and resulting loss of authentic feeling… loss of their authentic 'self'… their early resistance to the coercive pressure to obey authority (known euphemistically as 'child-rearing' under 'class'…) which means that appeals to their compassion or reason are useless –

 

…it is important to see 'power's destructive tactics… in order to move around them.

 

What are the kinds of things they will want to do… to undermine our solidarity?… and how do we withstand such attempts?

 

Clearly… 'self-preservation' (in a short-term… narrow sense… or… rather… we should say: 'special privilege-preservation') propels their obsession with clandestine tactics: their dedicated focus on knowing what we think… their grim determination to prevent our organizing successfully on our own behalf – these have been obsessions of 'power' from Day One… since 'class' begun.

 

The Zapatistas use 'conflict resolution' to ensure there is no erosion of group cohesion… which is… I think… useful guidance… something we also must design…

 

…but of a kind crafted to our particular challenges… those being the fact that: the process of digestion by 'the state' is on-going… continuously wears on us – attempts to break down our carefully crafted alternative allegiances… our self-sufficiency knowledges are meager compared to the Zapatistas… as is our understanding of the earth as the source of authentic thought – its concepts and language (this is one of their most key gifts that they have shared with us…) we have not yet created autonomous – physical and otherwise – structures… that necessarily question the 'legitimacy' of 'the state… and we have no land or communal living arrangements…

 

On the other hand… we possess… technological advantages – tools – that allow us to organize globally – that allow us to be more outward-focused in our allegiance… identity… vision… and planning…

 

…particularly as we begin with some understandings… some premises… as far as I know not available to the Zapatistas… for instance… a clearer understanding of the motives of 'power'… that their motives are totalitarian… not pecuniary (i.e.… that the problem is 'class'… not 'capitalism'…) and so the 'power'-guys' assaults on us they view – through their own totalitarian-utilitarian lens – as 'necessary'… 'for the greater good'… We know that they cannot be moved by 'reason' (and this is not to suggest that the Zapatistas think they can…) as the global-statesmen believe they possess 'reason' of a 'higher order'… We understand they tend to genocide – open and otherwise – and EMF-weapons to control (limit) the population… as well as – particularly in regions targeted to be 'low-end' on the 'status-continuum' – prodding us on to 'war'… to 'self'-annihilation (useful as well for their propaganda purposes in the 'higher-end' regions…) when we become too threatening to them. I.e.… with the Zapatistas… we understand that we represent for 'humanity' itself… but we also have to accept the responsibility attendant upon our location in the belly of the beast… the wider 'legal' space we inhabit… to actively organize for the freedom of the human being globally… after ten thousand years of 'class'.

 

–––

 

[“151018adronefreezone.mp3”:]

 

The question we will be exploring with our organization… is whether the degree of our understanding… the complete nakedness of 'power' – its origins and intentions – itself provides protection from its agents… No one… in that setting… will want to out themselves as 'agent' by attempting to sow seeds of dissension and stress… no matter how subtly they go about it… ultimately where we're moving… is to extract agreements from the state to allow us to exist autonomously within it… as Zapatistas do – only without the constant threat of annihilation by the state hanging over our heads – a transitional (to generalized human freedom) legal framework establishing our right as a people to pursue happiness… to be replicated in other regions globally – that we inter-link with. This claiming of this right… we will be arguing… means that we need a little oasis… except from taxes… building codes… and surveillance – a 'drone-free-zone'! – to identify the conditions for the pursuit of human happiness.

 

Agents of the global-state will not necessarily try to manufacture discord among us on matters of 'policy' (although this could happen… it's less likely when participation in a group is premised on one's desire to free human energy globally… I suppose… in theory… disagreements could arise on the level of 'political strategy'… but not on overall goal…)

 

…much more likely is their 'Iago'-act… their 'he-say-she-say' song-and-dance… all that 'ear-whispering'… to get tears flowing…

 

If someone is paid to lie and try to create unhappiness unbeknownst… while all the while wearing the mask of benevolence… their 'put-upon-long-suffering-saint' robe… manifesting a character on whom we could not bear to heap our mistrust or accusation… someone we would never think is anything but what they seem…

 

…if such a one has infiltrated our 'association'… our 'heart-and-soul-in-communal-whole'… and tears have started to flow… what did we say in a previous show?… we bring our troubled mind to the group for restorative calm… The fact that we are keeping our eye on the problem of infiltration… the fact that the problem… our reality… is named – that alone is huge.

 

Recall: everyone who's there is aspiring to be a 'martial artist in the defense of a free humanity'… which means they are on the path of 'self-soul-sufficiency'… – that which is restorative of authentic life… the true 'self'… – that is our personal aspiration… and that is what we attempt to model for each other.

 

Into this setting… insert 'he-say-she-say'…

 

…in that setting… the 'spoutings-of-tears' flow into discussions of hidden-'power': 'the state in us'…

 

…i.e.… the 'conflict resolution' itself should teach… should voice suppressed thoughts… The question we will be exploring with our organization… is whether the degree of our understanding… the complete nakedness of 'power' – its origins and intentions – itself provides protection from its agents… No one… in that setting… will want to out themselves as 'agent' by attempting to sow seeds of dissension and stress… no matter how subtly they go about it…

 

We want to create circumstances… conditions… in which it makes no sense for them to even try to infiltrate… this advances our cause of 'honesty' already… because ultimately where we're moving… is to extract agreements from the state to allow us to exist autonomously within it… as Zapatistas do – only without the constant threat of annihilation by the state hanging over our heads – a transitional (to generalized human freedom) legal framework establishing our right as a people to pursue happiness… to be replicated in other regions globally – that we inter-link with. This claiming of this right… we will be arguing… means that we need a little oasis… except from taxes… building codes… and surveillance – a 'drone-free-zone'! – to identify the conditions for the pursuit of human happiness. We need to create these spaces… and 'the political will' allows it. That is why education with the broader community is key… because we all want this. We don't want anybody's 'stuff'… the earth is abundant… we want our freedom… we want our space apart from all the coercion of the 'class'-system… and we want to have free and open discussions. They say that is possible… under 'class'… it's never been true… as we'll read when we explore Kropotkin.

 

[“151018mediacraftedthoughts.mp3”:]

 

……as… the continuous manipulation of our thoughts is the name of 'power's game – they have been laser-like focused on that since Bentham pulled their coat… The global-statesmen own the media… its results they must own as well… When it comes to the crafting of public opinion… the result is the intention. What is the main U.S. media-crafted message of late?… “racism is rising in the United States.” Intended result: divisions grow… hope erodes… retreat of critique into exclusive identities… 'power' is left in control. ('Division' is the name of 'power's game Brothers and Sisters… 'unity' must be… 'solidarity' must be… our watchword… Let's have discussions of that… of how to get to a future without coercion: every single one of us… regardless of false division that 'class' has created for us… every single one of us wants that.)

 

I thought of trying to use an 'actual' (in quotes because in all vetted media products there is an element of craft…) situation… but it's proving difficult. I'm referring to a story in the East Bay Express of October 7 – 13, 2015 (“Racial Profiling Via Nextdoor.com”…) in which an online community networking site is being flooded with subtly racist posts – and the folks who complain are the ones kicked off the site or punished in some other way… But it's a terrible example to use because we would never put our intercommunications into the hands of a third party – in this case… a company – that would be a set-up for being messed with… a set-up for 'power's attempts to manipulate us…

 

…as… the continuous manipulation of our thoughts is the name of 'power's game – they have been laser-like focused on that since Bentham pulled their coat.

 

The global-statesmen own the media… its results they must own as well… When it comes to the crafting of public opinion… the result is the intention. What is the main U.S. media-crafted message of late?… “racism is rising in the United States.” Intended result: divisions grow… hope erodes… retreat of critique into exclusive identities… 'power' is left in control.

 

('Division' is the name of 'power's game Brothers and Sisters… 'unity' must be… 'solidarity' must be… our watchword… Let's have discussions of that… of how to get to a future without coercion: every single one of us… regardless of false division that 'class' has created for us… every single one of us wants that.)

 

–––

 

[“151018.mp3”:]

 

Please consider again the following excerpt from our commentary on the first chapter of Antisystemic Movements (the entire commentary is shared on this webpage – it's listed in the menu…) as well as from our March 9, 2014 show.

 

In upcoming shows… with Peter Kropotkin's help – and I'm posting on the 'Blog' page with the upcoming show draft pdf another pdf file with some of Kropotkin's thoughts on 'the economy' and 'the state'… I'm typing and posting text daily and changing the draft number as I do… we'll be (starting next week) focusing more on concretizing the vision we have of our alternative global social arrangement… based on non-coercion… and Kropotkin has a lot to say to help us with this – we will be laying out what will likely be (some of) the basic structural supports of the self-sufficiency framework for our freedom…

 

…as well as examining the character of our education work with the broader community…

 

Both of these things require that we confront the notion of 'the economy'… exploring its ideological quality… the fact that while it is posed to us as essential to life itself… it actually means 'destroying the earth'… which is why 'the system' is dying… and 'they' – the global-state-statesmen – are trying to impose a harder form of coerced work (as well as reduce our numbers by clandestine means…) on us globally… before enough of us can wake up and work together to create our sensible alternative to coercion and death: that being… freedom and life… for every human being…

 

So please listen again to the argument in this excerpt… we will be… in future shows… returning to it:

All to say… consider this… that ‘war’ is not to reinvigorate dead markets… but to suppress our uprisings against injustice. In the Waking Up Radio show of March 9th, 2014 we said that…

[“140309econtool.mp3”:]

 

“The machinations of states is theater… with two tightly interwoven objectives: first… 'work steadily to conquer the people… according to “the laws” of hierarchy… i.e.… ensuring there are “winners” and “losers”…' This is key overall strategy… And by the way… when we said that “the responsibility of 'the intellectual' is to stand with the people and renounce the privilege of standing apart…” – this is not a national project… a national Left is useless… it effectively means you stand with 'power'… agree to its terms… agree to betray your Brothers and Sisters who happen to be the designated 'losers'… globally speaking… So… ensuring that there are “winners” and “losers” is key strategy both for maintaining the undergirding ideology “merit rises” – the notion that there's some legitimate reason in this gross unfairness – behind the hideousness – and it's necessary for maintaining 'power's invisibility – the notion that there's just these “natural forces” at play… And… according to the “laws of PR-chest-pounding-posturing”… this must be on-going… And the second key objective: 'play the game of “Supremacy” successfully… using quantifying means to keep score… – otherwise known as “the economy”… while maintaining the chest-pounding to draw from the people the requisite energy…' We've said that the definition of “the economy” that's most authentic is “eating the earth…” controlling the resources of the planet… the most key one strategically being us… But… looking at Europe before the spread of fascism across it… 'socialism'… which in the people's minds simply meant 'freedom'… sweeping across Europe… 'infecting' the colonies even… So… that resource which is absolutely key was at risk of being lost… So 'economy' geared up… for 'destroying' is also 'consuming': removing resources from our use… so 'eating the earth' can be destroying the earth by means of war… or destroying the earth by means of what's called 'growing the economy'… 'development'. The book Savage Continent (by Keith Lowe) provides prodigious illustration of resources being removed from our use… and…turned back over to ‘power’… Keith Lowe describes… an orgy of destructiveness. This systematic attack on ‘economic life’ was itself the ‘economic system’ working at a clip (because the point is privatization: atomization plus privatization equals control of us… manufactured ‘scarcity’…) racing at a pace unequaled since… The ‘economic system’ is not ‘capitalism’…. It’s called ‘power’… and they invent a tool called ‘the economy’ to keep us confused… War is an expression of this ‘economic system’… and ‘the economy’ is war by other means… i.e…. it’s about controlling the energy of the majority… the goal being… to beat us into submission… and… in the ‘normal’ course of events… overt violence is (as Solozzo said…) “too expensive…” in terms of maintaining legitimacy… as a means of controlling. And so they ‘normally’ rely on Bentham… whose Panoptic guidance says: “wage war by other means… i.e. be ‘economic’… and ‘efficient’….” “Let the weight of scarcity weigh on their minds…” Bentham advised.…” [From the March 9, 2014 Waking Up Radio show.]

–––

 

[“151018.mp3”:]

 

This system is designed to keep us atomized – separate from each other – and deeply insecure (which is what we are necessarily when we are cut off from each other…)

 

Rather than have our health and happiness crushed in the jaws of 'the system'… we can resist both pressures – loss of each other… and loss of security – by coming together and planning collaboratively…

 

So we've been discussing how to make safe spaces for our doing that… identifying the premises of our cooperative planning…

 

I've gathered excerpts from previous shows in which we begin the discussion of this question… the premises of our working together. I hope you will listen again to them.

 

Back in April there were five premises we identified as key:

[“150412newworldpremises.mp3”:]

 

…consider how completely absorbing is the project of founding a new world on a fresh foundation… based in premises that are opposite to the 'logic' of 'rule': non-commercial… non-utilitarian… our right to develop our earth-gifts without force being applied to this process (continuous growth…) …a project therefore… with clear 'terms of engagement'… with clear terms for our coming together… rooted in the understanding that we are… first… reclaiming our 'lost' gifts (which are not lost… are always there… waiting… to be re-ignited…) second… that we are… each one of us… the axis that turns the wheel. There can be no more ceding… giving up… relinquishing… our power… our leadership capacities… to some supposed possessor of 'higher knowledge'. This has been 'power's principle con for millennia…. Third… agreement that it is our responsibility to… literally… reclaim the world. And… fourth… all of our creative projects must be 'inclined' toward our future – our future together uncoerced… And there is a fifth: our projects acknowledge the existence of hidden-'power'… we need safe spaces that are safe in every sense… 'safe houses' all over the world working on this… on ending 'class' and making our interrelations with each other…and with the earth… healthy. [From the April 12, 2015 Waking Up Radio show.]

Then… in May… we said that:

[“150510safedesign.mp3”:]

 

…reclaiming our human energy globally is based in… …“reclaiming our 'within'…” …and how do we do that if not by coming together in discussion – with a dual purpose of understanding: global-'power'… and 'internalized discipline' / the inauthentic (false) self – i.e., in order to upend… both of them… …and while there will be inevitable infiltration… if we 'do our planning' of these spaces right… we can nullify that tactic… What makes a space 'safe'?… safe for the envisioning and building of a new world without coercion? Put practically: no agents… no infiltration. But… as that's not possible… is there a way to design a space… a project… such that the very act of participation in it… builds it… moves it toward its goals… What helps to realize the goal of a world premised on individual self- and soul-sufficiency? Let's slightly modify Kropotkin's guidance: he told us that “freedom is always the best solution to the problem of gaining our freedom…” If we want a world with no coercion… a space that's 'safe' would also be premised on the absence of coercion… beyond fundamental agreement on the end-goal as the purpose of our participation… [From the May 10, 2015 Waking Up Radio show.]

Then… in June…:

[“150614livingouropposite.mp3”:]

 

The first broad element of safety… we must admit the existence of global-'power'… we must admit that the problem is coercion… a coerced-work system… not our Brothers and Sisters… that so long as our human energy is on the market… we are kept cattle to be priced… fatted… and slaughtered at the whim of the global-state-statesmen… Second… we must recognize that every human being under 'class' has questions that they harbored as infants… which remain within them… and which must be addressed… for us to get our freedom… questions that manifest… and Alice Miller shows us this… a coerced-work system's dependence on our obedience… an obedience that must be sown in us… by means of coercion… as infants… and reinforced by all social institutions… which makes it deeply totalitarian… My son gave me a good name for this: “Total Immersion Coercion”… Third… unbound time… Fourth… attention is given… we develop our capacity to listen… Fifth: learning is constant (so you see these points are the opposite of what we got… and that's the point… what we want is the opposite of what we got… and so we have to start living that opposite… in our spaces that we make for ourselves…). [From the June 14, 2015 Waking Up Radio show.]

 

[“150614practicalpolitics.mp3”:]

 

In our May 10th, 2015 show we asked… “is there a way to design a space… a project… such that the very act of participation in it… builds it… moves it toward its goals?…” and we emphasized the absence of coercion as a key element of this design… This quest is the opposite of Bentham's: a design so welcoming of freedom that even agents are accepted. But how realistic an expectation is this? How has agent-disruption worked in the past? Generally… folks are planted to influence / manipulate actions… thoughts… and emotions… such that the goal is never reached… the effort effectively derailed. Does our clear focus on the main goal of freeing human energy globally make it 'agent-destructiveness-proof'? We are getting to the nut… of the problem of our gaining our freedom… 'practical politics'… It's time to plan realistically for the 'power' we know exists out there… But how do we hold onto our tenderness (which is… after all… required of us to grow our souls…) in circumstances of constant attempts to destroy us?… our mutual support in knowing this is happening is key… and a huge advance… a treasure without measure… over previous activist generations… [From the June 14, 2015 Waking Up Radio show.]

 

[“150614thedesignprovesitself.mp3”:]

 

…and… on questioning the utility of whatever we do… asking always the question: “how does this action further the goal?” – the 'principle of utility' applied to establishing the soul's free expansion in a realm of its own creation.… because if the beast we're wrestling with is totalitarian… it necessarily starts in child-rearing… So this first step …then… which needs to be taken… is withdrawing our children (and ourselves… in time… with each other's help) from 'the system'… (…and I've thought a lot about that about how when my energy was claimed by the 'wage-work-system' I could not do what I'm doing now… and I'm really pondering that… the difficulty of that… particularly as I take these walks and I see the numbers of folks who have no choice but to participate in what I think of as a 'high-tech-lynching'… To see the ease with which 'power' can… commandeer our human energy and turn us against each other…) [From the June 14, 2015 Waking Up Radio show.]

–––

 

[“151018.mp3”:]

 

We've said that one of the ways 'power' will attempt to mess with our heads (for that is their objective…) and create unhappiness… is by dropping hurtful comments in our ears…

 

…but there are other forms of manipulation to cause group disunity: draining finances… draining energy… singling one person out for EMF-battery and thereby isolating them physically…

 

…and in the area of our work in the community… or wherever there is a community-interface… we are also vulnerable (exposed) to agent-action… in their conscious misrepresentation of our objectives and messages (I saw this a lot with the Occupy Movement here locally… the agents would be the ones to smash windows and then… afterwards… be the ones to grab the microphone whenever the press came around… to justify it… or to in some other way convey a negative impression of the Occupiers…)

 

…clarity on the purpose and content of our education – our continuing to deepen our understanding of both of these things – is therefore key…

 

…it's essential that whatever we say grows true power: voices suppressed thoughts… asks the questions that we suppressed as children… exposes the lies of the system… and serves our reconnection with the ancestors… the earth… and each other.

 

In the end… we must trust both in the practices we put in place to strengthen group cohesion… and the power of the education we do with the broader community.

 

A summing-up of the broad thrust of our thoughts… on creating 'safe spaces'… from previous shows might be helpful: a useful metaphor for our global collaborative effort to envision and organize for a new social arrangement based on opposite premises (opposite to 'class'…) is 'distributed generation' – that is… we honor our diversity and independence in the creative work we do around the globe… These opposite operating premises for our lives when our human energy is free… must also be the premises of our working together collaboratively… and to participate means with these premises we agree: no coercion…; we are reclaiming our 'not-lost-but-waiting-for-us' gifts…; each one of us is the axis that turns the wheel (no more ceding of our power to others…); it is our responsibility to reclaim the world from the system of 'class'…; our creative work together inclines toward our free future…; hidden-global-'power' (its clandestine agents and EMF-weapons) is ever-engaged in an attempt to undermine our efforts (infiltration is inevitable and we must ensure our planning design is such that we move toward our goal regardless of agent-action…); every human being under 'class' harbors questions they suppressed as infants – questions which must be invited in our planning and education work… as these questions draw us onto our unique path of freeing the earth from the system of 'class'; – the principle of 'utility' must be applied to our actions… i.e. we must ask of everything we do: “how does this further the goal?”

 

The vast… vast… billions of us want to be free of coercion in our lives and world… want to strengthen our empathy… we don't want to lose our humanity… We just want to see our way out from under 'the boot'… out of 'power's obsessive vise-like hold on our throats… We want to believe in our free future… and need a realistic sense of hope…

 

…and nothing could be more 'realistic' than a social arrangement that the vast billions of us want.

 

These are phenomenal times… we are living in an altogether new moment… facing phenomenal challenges…

 

…and fresh conditions for our resistance… learning as we go… how to invent… at long last… the world we want.

 

–––

 

* “WUR of October 18, 2015 Reading… continuing our interlude: excerpts from Marx's Eighteenth Brumaire… and Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914… before returning to the chapter "Poisonous Pedagogy" in Alice Miller's For Your Own Good

 

[“151018.mp3”:]

 

Meanwhile, Bonaparte hastened to remove the War Minister, d'Hautpoul, to pack him off in all haste to Algiers and to appoint General Schramm War Minister in his place. On November 12, he sent to the National Assembly a message of American prolixity ['prolix': “(of speech or writing)… using or containing too many words; tediously lengthy… – P.S.], overloaded with detail, redolent of order, desirous of reconciliation, constitutionally acquiescent, treating of all and sundry but not of the questions brulantes [burning questions] of the moment. As if in passing he made the remark that according to the express provisions of the Constitution the President alone could dispense of [administer] the army. The message closed with the following words of great solemnity:

 

“Above all things, France demands tranquility… But bound by an oath, I shall keep within the narrow limits that it has set for me… As far as I am concerned… elected by the people and owing my power to it alone, I shall always bow to its lawfully expressed will. Should you resolve at this session on a revision of the Constitution, a Constituent Assembly will regulate the position of the executive power. If not, then the people will solemnly pronounce its decision in 1852. But whatever the solutions of the future may be, let us come to an understanding, so that passion, surprise or violence may never decide the destiny of a great nation… What occupies my attention, above all, is not who will rule France in 1852, but how to employ the time which remains at my disposal so that the intervening period may pass by without agitation or disturbance. I have opened my heart to you with sincerity; you will answer by frankness with your trust, my good endeavours with your cooperation, and God will do the rest.”

 

The respectable, hypocritically moderate, virtuously commonplace language of the bourgeoisie reveals its deepest meaning in the mouth of the autocrat of the Society of December 10 and the picnic hero of St. Maur and Satory.

 

The burgraves of the party of Order did not delude themselves for a moment concerning the trust that this opening of the heart deserved. About oaths they had long been blasé; they numbered in their midst veterans and virtuosos of political perjury. Nor had they failed to hear the passage about the army. They observed with annoyance that in its discursive enumeration of lately enacted laws the message passed over the most important law, the elector law, in studied silence, and, moreover, in the event of there being no revision of the Constitution, left the election of the President in 1852 to the people. The electoral law was the leaden ball chained to the feet of the party of Order, which prevented it from walking and so much the more from storming forward! Moreover, by the official disbandment of the Society of December 10 and the dismissal of the War Minister d'Hautpoul, Bonaparte had with his own hand sacrificed the scapegoats on the altar of the country. He had blunted the edge of the expected collision. Finally, the party of Order itself anxiously sought to avoid, to mitigate, to gloss over any decisive conflict with the executive power. For fear of losing their conquests over the revolution, they allowed their rival to carry off the fruits thereof. “Above all things, France demands tranquillity.” This was what the party of Order had cried to the revolution since February [1848], this was what Bonaparte's message cried to the party of Order. “Above all things, France demands tranquillity.” [“The people will choose totalitarianism over chaos…” we are told Plato said… – P.S.] Bonaparte committed acts that aimed at usurpation, but the party of Order committed “unrest” if it raised a row about these acts and construed them hypochondriacally. The sausages of Satory were quiet as mice when no one spoke of them. “Above all things, France demands tranquillity.” Bonaparte demanded, therefore, that he be left in peace to do as he liked and the parliamentary party was paralyzed by a double fear, by the fear of again evoking revolutionary unrest and by the fear of itself appearing a the instigator of unrest in the eyes of its own class, in the eyes of the bourgeoisie.… (p. 75 – 81)

 

[I think we have a sense now of the Society of December 10… Before returning to the conclusion of The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte… and from there to Alice… let's step back and view events from the perspective of the 'world-system'… In the September 13, 2015 show…we asked about the word 'class'… sought the origins of its current use… used as an ideological weapon of the 'global-state-statesmen' against we-the-people… and as an ideological tool to indoctrinate their children… Since then I've found Immanuel Wallerstein's answer… in his 2011 book… The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914… which is very relevant to this discussion… and in particular the chapter… “The Liberal State and Class Conflict, 1830 – 1875”… which… as I write this (on September 19, 2015) I'm strongly considering that we read together (although to interject yet another interjection at this point might seem unwieldy… but… I'm thinkin' on it… Here's how that chapter starts… – P.S.]:

 

“The Liberal State and Class Conflict, 1830 – 1875”, Chapter 3 in Immanuel Wallerstein's The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914… (page 77 – 141)

 

During the first half of the nineteenth century, socialism as a concept was still not separate from “bourgeois democracy” as a concept or, as Labrousse (1949b, 7) says, “Jacobinism and socialism remained muddled in political life.” In some sense, it probably remained for at least a century thereafter that a full distinction of the two concepts did not exist. Nonetheless, liberalism (which seems to me a better locution than “bourgeois democracy”) and socialism began to have diverging trajectories as political options after 1830. Indeed, as Hobsbawm (1962, 284) argues:

Practical liberals… shied away from political democracy… The social discontents, revolutionary movements, and the socialist ideologues of the post-Napoleonic era intensified this dilemma [of relying upon the majority to carry out the dictates of reason] […and there… embedded in that off-hand remark… is the core… key… almost originating propaganda piece of 'class'… – P.S.] and the 1830 Revolution made it acute. Liberalism and democracy appeared to be adversaries rather than allies.

 

[Before continuing it would be helpful to understand clearly what Wallerstein means by 'liberalism.' The following quote from the opening chapter (p. 5 - 6) of this book by Wallerstein should help clarify how he is using the term 'liberal'… and 'liberalism':

 

“Liberalism started ideological life on the left of the political spectrum, or at least on the center-left. [From the little I've digested thus far from this book by Wallerstein… he uses 'liberals' as I use 'Plato's Tribesmen'… the 'power'-guys… post-French Revolution… We shall have to consider whether that comparison is accurate as we go along… but if there is any correspondence at all… to apply the term 'left' to these guys… in any sense of the word… from where I sit… invalidates it… – P.S.] Liberalism defined itself as the opposite of conservatism, on the basis of what might be called a “consciousness of being modern” (Minogue, 1963, 3). Liberalism proclaimed itself universalist. Sure of themselves and of the truth of this new world-view of modernity, liberals sought to propagate their views and intrude the logic of their views within all social institutions, thereby ridding the world of the “irrational” leftovers of the past. To do this, they had to fight conservative ideologues, whom they saw as obsessed with fear of “free men” – men liberated from the false idols of tradition.

 

“Liberals believed, however, that progress, even though it was inevitable, could not be achieved without some human effort, without a political program. Liberal ideology was thus the belief that, in order for history to follow its natural course, it was necessary to engage in conscious, continual, intelligent reformism, in full awareness that “time was the universal friend, which would inevitably bring greater happiness to ever greater numbers” (Schapiro, 1949, 13). [Straight-up Bentham… of course… who at least was honest… but these guys can absolutely not be taken at their word – not these guys… with their 'lordly lies' and their training as infants to keep secrets. Secrecy is their watchword… hiding their m.o.… public presentation necessarily the dissemination of propaganda… – P.S.]

 

“…To be sure, the center is merely an abstraction, and a rhetorical device. One can always locate oneself in central position simply by defining the extremes as one wishes. Liberals are those who decided to do this as their basic political strategy. Faced with the normality of change, liberals would claim a position between the consevatives – that is, the right, who wanted to slow down the pace of normal change as much as possible – and the “democrats” (or radicals or socialists or revolutionaries) – that is, the left, who wanted to speed it up as much as possible. In short, liberals were those who wished to control the pace of change so that it occurred at what they considered to be an optimal speed. But could one really know what is the optimal speed? Yes, said the liberals, and their metastrategy was precisely geared to achieving this end.”

 

[What I want to know is… what happened to the language 'world bourgeoisie'… 'world elite'… 'world right'… the “managers of the status quo…” of Antisystemic Movements – true… he uses 'world right' in his chapter of Does Capitalism Have A Future?… which is more straight-forward… and states their totalitarian ambition more baldly… perhaps we will discover the answer in the course of our reading…

 

[Returning to Chapter 3… “The Liberal State and Class Conflict, 1830 – 1875”… – P.S.]:

The concept of class and class conflict was not a contribution of socialist ideologues, much less of Karl Marx. It is a Saint-Simonian idea, developed and pursued by Guizot as part of the liberal project. Saint-Simon's view of the class structure in the modern industrial world was that there were three classes: the property owners, the propertyless, and the savants [It seems to me a clear debt here to Plato… – P.S.]. He saw the class conflict between the “industrials” (those who work) and the idlers as a transitional phase, to be superseded by a harmonious society […and another debt here… to Bentham… as well as to Plato… – P.S.] of productive industrial classes under the aegis of the savants […the 'philosopher-kings'… – P.S.], a meritocratic vision in which the old aristocracy of birth would be replaced by an aristocracy of talent (Manuel, 1956; Iggers, 1958b). For Guizot, the concept of class was an essential element in his efforts to “legitimate the political aspirations of the bourgeoisie” (Fossert, 1955, 60).

 

But in 1830, Guizot and his friends succeeded, as they were simultaneously succeeding in Great Britain, in establishing a form of middle-class rule “as a permanent juste milieu or golden mean between the extremes of revolution and reaction” (Starzinger, 1965, viii). The Chamber of Deputies on August 7, 1830, suppressed the Preamble to the Charter of 1814 “as wounding the national dignity by appearing to grant to Frenchmen rights which belong to them essentially” (Collins, 1970, 90). The liberals politically and the grande bourgeoisie socially had at last won their droit de cite. [Wallerstein's note (partially) reads: “Both L'homme (1960, 36) and Pouthas (1962, 258) speak of the substitution of one class for the other as the dominant force…”]

 

Since, in addition, this coincided with a period of accelerating economic and social change, the most urgent problems facing France and Great Britain had now become the “social problems” of industrialism, and especially those of the “new proletariat, the horrors of uncontrolled break-neck urbanization” (Hobsbawn, 1962, 207). Class conflict would therefore come to mean something different from what Saint-Simon and Guizot had had in mind. The Revolution of 1830 itself came at a moment of particular economic difficulty for the workers (high unemployment, unusually high wheat prices). It provided evidence of the utility of political uprising and served to stimulate workers' consciousness, a sense of having common interest “solely as proletarians,” a sense of the “dignity of the worker” (Festy, 1908, 330). The liberals perceived this change immediately. Thiers said in a statement to the Chamber of Deputies: “The day after the Revolution of July, we saw our duty to moderate it. In effect it was no longer liberty, but order which was in danger” (cited in Bezucha, 1974, 137).

 

The next few years were to see worker unrest of a new intensity and quality in both France and Great Britain. It has been increasingly noted in the literature on strikes and workers' unrest how much of this activity was that of “artisans” as opposed to “workers.” Although the line is not always as clear as some seem to think, in general those referred to as “artisans” had more technical skills, higher real income, and more workplace autonomy than other kinds of workers. Many of these “artisans” were members of organizations that had been in existence long before the nineteenth century, and which functioned to advance the welfare of their members through social support and mutual help. The organizations were hierarchical and built around rituals.

 

These organizations were the only ones permitted at all in the periods when trade-union organization had been strictly forbidden, and then only under the careful surveillance of the authorities. In the changing political situation after 1830, however, even mutual aid societies began to take on new roles, as See (1951, 2:199) pointed out: “Many of these societies served… to hide veritable resistance organizations, hostile to the employers; by creating auxiliary monetary reserves (bourses auxiliaires), they created funds to support the unemployed and strikers.” Thus it could be, as Stearns (1965, 371 – 372) has argued, that such “artisans” were more likely to engage in strike action at this time than the “factory workers,” who, being in an even weaker position, were “almost totally quiescent.” [While Wallerstein – in his use of quotation marks with the 'class' designations – acknowledges the fluidity of the categories into which we are put… for ease of analysis in Academe… and to facilitate 'power's planning… The critique in this space goes further. You recall during the September 27, 2015 show… my comment that 'class' categorizations have no valid use for us… exist… rather… to serve 'power's ideological purposes… – P.S.]

 

The distinction made by many scholars between artisans and factory workers seems to be asserted primarily on the basis of differing workplace organization. But in fact the artisans were usually in “workshops,” which were not all that different in structure and even social organization from the rather small “factories” that existed in this era. I suspect the real difference was in the social origins of the two groups of workers. The “artisans” were males, and males who came for the most part from the immediate area. The “factory workers” were largely either women and children (Bezucha, 1974, 35) or “migrants,” which included both those who came from rural communities and workers speaking another language.

 

The most dramatic expression of protest by the “artisans” was that of the canuts of Lyon, first in 1831 and then in 1834. The struggles began right after the July Revolution, and included machine destruction and eviction of “foreign” workers. The background to this was an eighteenth-century militancy of journeymen, which had erupted in 1786 in the so-called tuppenny riot (emeute de deux sous), in which the journeymen sought to obtain a fixed minimum rate for finished cloth. The ongoing turmoil continued up to the French Revolution and the enactment of the Loi Le Chapelier. Bezucha (1974, 46) concludes that “the French Revolution, in fact, broke the momentum created prior to 1789 and may have retarded the development of a workers' movement in Lyon.” In the years between 1789 and 1830, however, the relatively stable system of the compagnon had been replaced by a more “fluid one of piece-work laborers” (Bezucha, 1974, 46)

 

Levasseur (1904, 2:6) asks the questions, Why Lyon? Why 1831? His answer is that Lyon was living off a luxury industry, silk, which made it more “sensitive… to economic crises and political turmoil.” The immediate issue, as in 1786, was a minimum wage, which had been agreed to by the prefect but subsequently revoked by the central government. The first strike was relatively nonpolitical. But discontent continued. There was a strike in Paris in 1832. The atmosphere was more and more politicized, partly by the dissatisfaction of the working classes with the politics of the July Monarchy, partly (at least in Lyon) by the agitation of the Italian nationalist forces. Mazzini's aide-de-camp, General Romorino, was often in Lyon recruiting persons for their attempts to liberate Savoy and Piedmont (Bezucha, 1974, 122). On February 14, 1834, a general strike was called. It did not succeed. The local Republican party was divided in its attitude. A repressive law caused a further reaction by the workers in April, an uprising in which some three hundred were killed. This attempt came to be viewed as a “landmark in the history of the European working class” (Bezucha, 1974, 124). This time the repression by the authorities was definitive. There was a “monster trial” in 1835, which the government used “to get rid of the republicans.” Faced with the beginnings of a serious class struggle by the urban working class, the liberal state initially reacted as repressively as did its predecessors.

 

The story was not very different in Great Britain. The moral equivalent of the July Revolution was the Reform Bill of 1832. Great Britain did not know “three glorious days” of “revolution.” Instead, there was a parliamentary battle in which the revolution was “voted” in, on the crucial second reading in 1831, by a single vote.

 

When, despite this, the bill was defeated in committee. Parliament was dissolved, and a pro-reform Parliament elected. At the time there was great awareness of events in France, and the possibilities of “worse” happening. Macaulay's speech on March 2, 1831, in favor of reform makes clear the reasoning of those who advocated it:

Turn where we may, within, around, the voice of great events is proclaiming to us, Reform, that you may preserve… Renew the youth of the State. Save property divided against itself. Save the multitude, endangered by its own ungovernable passions. Save the aristocracy, endangered by its own unpopular power. Save the greatest, and fairest, and most highly civilised country that ever existed, from calamities that may in a few days sweep away all the rich heritage of so many ages of wisdom and glory. The danger is terrible. The time is short. If this Bill should be rejected, I pray to God that none of those who concur in rejecting it ever remember their votes with unavailing remorse, amidst the wreck of laws, the confusion of ranks, the spoliation of property, and the dissolution of social orders.

Macaulay's argument was heard. And, exactly as in France, once the middle strata had won their droit de cite, attention turned immediately to containing the claims of the working classes. Chartism, “much the most important movement of working men” (Evans, 1983, 215) and a continuation of the old radical reform movement, was contemporaneous with and strongest during the great industrial depression from 1837 to 1843. It gained considerable notoriety and seemed a real menace to the authorities for several years. A large part of Chartist ranks were drawn from members of trade societies. But it also had support from middle-class radicals (Rowe, 1967, 85). The Chartist movement existed simultaneously with, and was in direct rivalry with, the free-trade movement of the Anti-Corn Law League. Halevy (1947, 9) raises the specter of a potential for “civil war.” Briggs (1959, 312) speaks of the two movements as representing “a contrast between two segments of a divided society.” Gash (1965, 2) says of the “Movement” (“a phrase borrowed from Continental politics”) that it “had an undeniable air of class war.…

 

…The internal problems of Great Britain and France never became large enough that those powers could not concentrate attention on the geopolitics of the world-system. The July Revolution, repeated and confirmed by the independence of Belgium and the Reform Act of 1832, was to have an immediate effect on Europe. Whereas the relations of Great Britain and France between 1815 and 1830 had been correct, and those countries often found themselves on similar sides of world issues, the heritage of the two-century struggle for hegemony continued to ensure enough mutual suspicion to preserve a degree of distance. The July Revolution overcame that, affecting even the Tory government of Wellington before the Reform Bill was enacted Europe now entered the era of the entente cordiale, a marriage perhaps not of love but certainly of reason, one that would survive all subsequent quarrels until at least 1945. The term itself was probably coined by Palmerston in 1831, although it did not come into official use until 1842 (Guyot, 1926, 220; Halevy, 1950, 3:73, n. 1). The geopolitical basis of the alliance was clear, “As a Liberal power, France was [after the July Revolution] in the nature of things the ally of Liberal England” (Halevy, 1950, 3:73). Great Britain could now pursue with greater ease its containment of absolutism in Europe and expand the circle of liberal states (Guyot, 1926, 88, 117)

 

But there were further motives. Great Britain and France faced the same internal problems, and even if France was not yet ready to embrace the free-trade nostrums of Great Britain, the entente cordiale seemed “in the eyes of democrats and socialists” as an “alliance of capitals” that was a “fait accompli” (Guyot, 1926, 302). Was this so wrong? Indeed, the two effects were not separate. In pressuring other powers to follow their example, Great Britain and France, with the entente cordiale, “discouraged the international revolutionary propaganda which counted on the divisions among the powers” (Guichen, 1917, 424 – 425).

 

Furthermore, 1830 launched a pattern that would discourage such propaganda even further. For France at least, 1830 served to restore France to a sense of world centrality and nationalist pride. It was not Guizot but the French socialist Louis Blanc (1844, 4:143 – 144) who would write:

The July Revolution… was more than the denouement of a struggle against the Church and royalty; it was the expression of national sentiment that had been excessively repressed by the treaties of 1815. We were determined to shake off the yoke of these treaties and restore the European equilibrium.

One of the curious facts to note about the July Revolution was what happened in Algeria. Charles X's launching of the imperial venture had made Great britain most unhappy, and Louis XVIII was ready to sacrifice it to appease the British. When, however, the French restrained themselves from direct intervention in Belgium, they felt they had done their share of pleasing the British, and simply continued the occupation, this time without British protest. One reason clearly was its effect on worker unrest within France. The “floating” population of Paris, the potential revolutionaries, were being encouraged to settle in Algeria. Indeed, in 1838 Leon Blondel, a high civil servant in Algeria, could say with some confidence: “Africa is an element of order in France” (cited in Tudesq, 1964, 2:815).

 

The liberal states thus combined legitimating the political role of the middle classes (and thereby receiving from them legitimation in turn) and internal repression of working-class discontent with an entente cordiale between themselves to ensure their dominance in the geopolitical arena. This seemed to work at first. But it was fragile, as the European revolution of 1848 was to demonstrate. More would have to be done to secure a stable political framework for the capitalist world-economy in the post-1789 situation. [And… again… as Hirschman suggests… a lot of megalomaniacal scheming can be hidden 'neath the ideology of 'an economy' that never stops eating… because of some supposed 'inherent logic of accumulation'… – P.S.]

 

…The conservatization of the French regime contrasted with what was happening in the other liberal states. A liberal pope, Pius IX, had been elected in 1846, to the dismay of Metternich (Bury, 1948, 425). If Belgium remained “calm” in 1848, “it was because it had made its revolution, peacefully, in 1847. (Dhondt, 1949, 124) Similarly, the liberals and radicals had won their internal struggle against the Sonderbund in Switzerland in 1847, with the diplomatic support of the British but amid French hesitation (Halperin, 1948, 1:157). Indeed, this was a moment of temporary breakdown of the entente cordiale. At home, the British had handled well the chartist challenge at the same time that Sir Robert Peel was steering through the Repeal of the Corn Laws [“Materially the repeal of the Corn Laws would protect the poorer classes in time of scarcity against any disastrous rise in food prices. Morally, it gave them assurances that, unenfranchised though most of them were, their welfare was an object of concern to an aristocratic Government and Parliament” (Gash, 1977, 97)], such that the “specter of Communism” passed them by as well. The crisis of 1847 “provoked no revolutionary disturbance” (Halevy, 1947, 181), although the Irish had to pay the price for this [the Irish potato famine occurred just at the time of the debate on the Corn Laws… that the Irish famine became a ploy in the intra-Conservative political game is clear from Clark's account of repeal: “The traditional remedy for famine was to suspend the Corn Laws and open the ports. But Peel told his Cabinet that if he did this (in the case of Ireland at this time) he could not promise to reimpose them, and a majority in the Cabinet felt they could not support him in this policy on these terms. He therefore retired, but the Whigs could not, or would not, form a government. Peel therefore returned to office at the Queen's request (and) repealed the Corn Laws himself.”)]

 

Nonetheless, the weakening of the liberal project in France, one of the two pillar states, provided enough tinder for the revolutionary flame to be ignited throughout the nonliberal [meaning “non-'bourgeois'”] parts of Europe. To be sure, Metternich and the Austrians blamed the British, accused of being too liberal, for the uprisings, but the blame is more legitimately placed at the feet of the French, who got cold feet and were not liberal enough. John Stuart Mill (1849, 7) was very severe on Louis-Philippe in assessing the causes of the February 1848 uprising in Paris, which was the beginning of the 1848 European revolutions:

No government can now expect to be permanent unless it guarantees progress as well as order; nor can it continue really to secure order, unless it promotes progress. [It certainly seems the global-state-statesmen have taken this advice to heart… although modified to say: “seem to guarantee 'progress'…” that message is drummed into all school-children and every other 'class'-bound human… across the globe – an associated set of messages actually: “not everyone is smart…” “the system identifies and rewards the 'smart ones'…” “the 'really smart' are busy making our lives easier…” “'the system' works hard to provide you with 'the good life' but you must do your part too… and keep your skills marketable… because 'science' is developing so fast… if you don't you could fall through the cracks (and of course that would be your fault…”) – these are just a few of 'the system's key messages about 'progress'… – P.S.] It can go on as yet, with only a little of the spirit of improvement; while reformers have even a remote hope of effecting their objects through the existing system, they are generally willing to bear with it. But when there is no hope at all; when the institutions themselves seem to oppose an unyielding barrier to the program of improvement, the advance of tide heaps itself up behind them till it bears them down.

The tide – that is, the European revolution of 1848 – as all such great happenings, was made up of a mixture of movements and objectives. In France, it consisted essentially of the joining together of Europe's 'first great proletarian insurrection' (Tilly, 1971, 228) with the acute discontent of the left liberals who shared John Stuart Mill's view of the conservatization of the July Monarchy. Elsewhere in Europe, instates that were not as yet committed to liberalism, there were no proletarian insurrections; rather, there were liberal uprisings combined with nationalist uprisings. Two situations, with two solutions: Louis Napoleon handled the first; Palmerston, the rest.

 

The uprising of February 1848 illuminated the hopes of a 'social republic,' a vague socialist utopia that would provide jobs to the unemployed and liberation to all those who suffered indignities and inequalities. Everyone put forward their claims: the “artisans,” who sought to restore their privileges and their mode of production; the peasants, who sought to reestablish traditional rights of collective usage; the women, who sought the extension of “universal” suffrage to include them; the slaves, who sought abolition. The pendulum was beginning to swing too far, and in June the forces of order under General Cavaignac reined in the unruly dangerous classes. “Pitiful provisional government!” cried Labrousse (1948,2) “It feared the social revolution as much as it did the counter-revolution.”

 

Cavaignac could repress; he could not relegitimize the state. Nor could the monarchs return; they had exhausted their credit. Into this void stepped Louis Napoleon, who sought to re-create a liberal, orderly, modern state and who, as Zeldin (1958, 6) puts it so well, “was not elected because he was [the] candidate [of the Party of Order], but… was their candidate because they saw he was bound to win.” But what did Louis Napoleon represent? He represented, first of all, the Napoleonic tradition, which combined the legacy of the French Revolution, a commitment to scientific and industrial progress, and nationalism. During the 1840s, Louis Napoleon had been a sharp critic of the July Monarchy because he felt that, by distancing itself from progressive liberalism, it was “building on sand and would surely tumble.” And, unlike Guizot, he was aware that “with proper safeguards a democratic regime could be established without threatening the stability of the country.”

 

–––

 

The liberals acted in 1848 just as they had in 1830. Dismayed by a regime that had become too rigid, too illiberal, they rose up and quickly won the day. Then, dismayed by the possibility that the lower strata would be able to take advantage of the situation and push things too far, they renewed their links with the political groups they had just ousted from power, because 'the enemy, at present, is on the left' (Palmade, 1961, 255). When Louis Napoleon made his coup d'eat on December 2, 1851, the primary objective was to repress the left. The secondary objective was, however, to constrain the ability of conservative forces to act other than through him. One can, if one wants, emphasize the Caesarist – the so-called Bonapartist – element in the regime. If one does, however, one risks missing the degree to which the outcome of the repression, which was both real and effective, was that of a centrist regime, oriented to capitalist expansion, constructing a liberal compromise – one led not by a classical liberal but by an enlightened conservative.” (Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914, p. 77 – 92)

 

[Returning now to the conclusion of The Eighteenth Brumaire… – P.S.]

Bonaparte would like to appear as the patriarchal benefactor of all classes. But he cannot give to one class without taking from another. Just as at the time of the Fronde it was said of the Duke of Guise that he was the most obligeant man in France because he had turned all his estates into his partisans' obligations to him, so Bonaparte would fain be the most obligeant man in France and turn all the property, all the labour of France into a personal obligation to himself. He would like to steal the whole of France in order to be able to make a present of her to France or, rather, in order to be able to buy France anew with French money, for as the chief of the Society of December 10 he must needs buy what ought to belong to him. And all the state institutions, the Senate, the Council of State, the legislative body, the Legion of Honour, the soldiers' medals, the washhouses, the public works, the railways, the etat major [General Staff] of the National Guard to the exclusion of privates, and the confiscated estates of the House of Orleans – all become parts of the institution of purchase. Every place in the army and in the government machine becomes a means of purchase. But the most important feature of this process, whereby France is taken in order to give to her, is the percentages that find their way into the pockets of the head and the members of the Society of December 10 during the turnover. The witticism with which Countess L., the mistress of M. de Morny, characterized the 4 of the Orleans estates: “C'est le premier vol de l'aigle” [“It is the first flight (theft) of the eagle”] is applicable to every flight of this eagle, which is more like a raven [I resent that! The raven is most regal… – P.S ]. He himself and his adherents call out to one another daily like that Italian Carthusian admonishing the miser who, with boastful display, counted up the goods on which he could yet live for years to come: “Tu fai conto sopra i beni, bisogna prima far il conto sopra gli anni.” [“Thou countest thy goods, thou shouldst first count thy years.”] Lest they make a mistake in the years, they count the minutes. A bunch of blokes push their way forward to the court, into the ministries, to the head of the administration and the army, a crowd of the best of whom it must be said that no one knows whence he comes, a noisy, disreputable, rapacious boheme that crawls into gallooned coats with the same grotesque dignity as the high dignitaries of Soulouque. One can visualize clearly this upper stratum of the Society of December 10, if one reflects that Veron-Crevel [In his work, Cousine Bette, Balzac delineates the thoroughly dissolute Parisian philistine in Crevel, a character which he draws after the model of Dr. Veron, the proprietor of the Constitutionnel ('a French bourgeois daily')] is its preacher of morals and Granier de Cassagnac its thinker. When Guizot, at the time of his ministry, utilized this Granier on a hole-and-corner newspaper against the dynastic opposition, he used to boast of him with the quip: “C'est le roi des droles,” “he is the king of buffoons.” One would do wrong to recall the Regency or Louis XV in connection with Louis Bonaparte's court and clique. For “often already, France has experienced a government of homme entretenus” [kept men].

 

Driven by the contradictory demands of his situation and being at the same time, like a conjurer, under the necessity of keeping the public gaze fixed on himself, as Napoleon's substitute, by springing constant surprises, that is to say, under the necessity of executing a coup d'etat en miniature every day, Bonaparte throws the entire bourgeois economy into confusion, violates everything that seemed inviolable to the Revolution of 1848, makes some tolerant of revolution, others desirous of revolution, and produces actual anarchy in the name of order, while at the same time stripping its halo from the entire state machine, profanes it and makes it at once loathsome and ridiculous. The cult of the Holy Tunic of Treves [“a Catholic relic preserved in the Treves Cathedral, alleged to be a holy vestment taken from Christ while he was suffering death. It was regarded by pilgrims as an object of veneration.”] he duplicates at Paris in the cult of the Napoleonic imperial mantle. But when the imperial mantle finally falls on the shoulders of Louis Bonaparte, the bronze statue of Napoleon will crash from the top of the Vendome Column. (Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, p. 133 – 135)

 

[Because our – that is… we-the-people's – understanding of 'historical' events is generally through the lens of the 'educational system' of (premised on) 'class'… designed to reinforce the 'logic' of 'rule' (consciously or unconsciously…) which 'logic'… we are now seeing… is embedded in the utilitarian mindset… a.k.a. 'dualism'… on which 'thought' itself is premised – under 'class' – how do we 'make' authentic 'sense' of the blow-by-blow 'class'-sanctioned ('system'-stamped-legitimate) historical descriptions we are given?

 

What does this 'history' mean… for us?… what are we to make of it?

 

Let's return to this question after considering the broader world-systems context provided by Immanuel Wallerstein – this will be his view further into the same chapter (“The Liberal State and Class Conflict”) we've been excerpting. Two things stand out… one: “the supremacy game” the 'power'-guys are engaged in with each other… experimenting with their new toy… the 'powerful'… bureaucratic… nation-state – and two: their self-creation as 'global-state-statesmen'… with a common vision and purpose… inventing… as the key structural means for accomplishing this… an interstate 'mechanism' to ensure our – that is… we-the-people's – suppression… A question we should ask ourselves… I think… is… why… even in the analyses of those who have our interests in mind… these obvious motives of 'power' are not the starting point of these analyses… and why rather our advocates help legitimate these unmistakable motives by employing the ideology of 'economic development'? Wherever we stand on this issue… there needs to be discussion… – P.S.]:

The 1850s marked the high point of growth in British exports. The export of cotton piece goods “just about doubled” in the decade, actually increasing even the rate of growth, which, Hobsbawm argues (1975, 30 – 31), provided “invaluable [political] breathing-space.” Cotton textiles were still central to British wealth, but this was the period in which metals and machinery moved to the fore as the leading industry, and with them the emergence of “bigger industrial units all along the line” (Clapham, 1932, 2:114). Great Britain was clearly on the road to becoming an industrial state. “The course was set” (Clapham, 1932, 2:22). For Great Britain, these were “buoyant years,” in which her economic dominance of the world-economy went “virtually unchallenged” and in which the new world of industry “seemed less like a volcano and more like a cornucopia (Coleman, 1973, 7 – 8). Great Britain was comfortably hegemonic, but also complacently so, not always feeling she had to watch over every fluctuation of the world-economy.

 

–––

 

Yet, we should not exaggerate. The voyage was “not half over.” Agriculture remained “by very far the greatest of [Great Britain's] industries” (Clapham, 1932, 2:22). Church (1975, 76) believes that calling this period the “mid-Victorian boom” must be severely qualified.” Yes, there was a price rise, business expansion, and an improved standard of living, but the growth rate in production was not all that big, and 1858 saw the most profound downward business cycle of the century. Like all economic leaders, Great Britain was preparing its own fall. It was resistant to innovation. It was in 1856 that Bessemer first read his paper on his use of air blasts to make quality steel more inexpensively, but his ideas would not be widely adopted until the Kondratieff B-phase. The expansion of the world-economy was bringing in its wake further industrialization in the United States and various parts of Europe, making Great Britain's competitive position “steadily more difficult,” particularly because these countries indicated, with the significant exception of France, that they had “no intention of following Britain's example” in adopting free trade (Schlote, 1952, 43). Indeed, Great Britain itself would eventually sour on free trade.

 

In this midcentury British glow, France seemed initially at a disadvantage because of the turmoil of 1848. Once again, its revolutions seemed to be hurting its economic development. But this time only most briefly, because the political solution to the turmoil – the populist authoritarianism of the Second Empire – served to resolve some of the political tensions precisely because this regime had made itself, as none had done before, the proponent and propellant of a leap forward of French economic structures, thereby consolidating the liberal core of the world system.

 

The economic indicators were clear: Foreign trade tripled (Palmade, 1961, 193). The production of the means of production grew relative to the production of consumable goods (Markovitch, 1966, 322). There was a boom not only in domestic investment but also in foreign investment, such that by 1867 net income from external investments exceeded net export of capital. For Cameron (1961, 79), this meant that France had become “a 'mature' creditor nation.” And French public finances had become, along with those of Great Britain, “solid.” The public subscription to government loans “demonstrated the strength of savings and the abundance of capital which existed in the two countries” (Gille, 1967, 280). In short, this was a time of economic glory for France as well as for Great Britain. This was “to the benefit, if not the credit, of the Second Empire,” but, as Palmade (1961, 127, 129) insists, “the externally favorable situation fell to a government firmly committed to taking advantage of it.”

 

Furthermore, it was a government that thought governmental action was essential to this economic expansion, one that did not consider, in the words of Napoleon III [Louis Bonaparte], that state action was a “necessary ulcer” but rather that it was “the benevolent motor of any social organism.” The intention nonetheless was to promote private enterprise thereby. Although the “primary concern” of the government was to “create as many [economic] activities as possible,” still the government wished to “avoid this grievous tendency of the state to engage in activities which private individuals can do as well as or better than it can.” Furthermore, the public works program of the government was directed not merely to aid industry, but to shore up the agricultural sector. And behind this practice – “a precursor of technocratic Gaullist modernization” – was the objective of combating “political instability and class conflict (Magraw, 1985, 159), crucial for a regime that had emerged in the crucible of the Revolution of 1848.

 

–––

 

This is where the famous Saint-Simonian link comes in. Actually, we should talk of the post-Saint-Simonians, those who had emerged out of the pseudoreligious phase under Enfantin and who retained only the “radical” spirit of Saint-Simon – rigorously modernist, technocratic, reformist, ultimately neither “socialist” nor “conservative” (as some have claimed) but essentially “liberal” in spirit, as became most clear in the Second Empire. It was liberal in spirit because it combined the two key features of liberalism: economic development linked to social amelioration. [And by 'social amelioration'… recall… he's referring to the continuous provision of 'progress' to 'the people'… and the maintenance of 'order' – i.e. a 'social contract' dependent on being able to rape the earth elsewhere… i.e.… dependent on 'the colonies'… – P.S.] For liberals, the two are obverse [“corresponding to something else as its opposite or counterpart…” I would say that one implies the other… – P.S.] sides of the same coin. The Saint-Simonians affirmed “the primacy of the economic over the political sphere” (Blanchard, 1956, 60). But they also argued, in the 1831 formula of Isaac Pereire, that economic progress would bring about “an amelioration of the lot of the largest and poorest strata” (cited in Plessis, 1973, 86). This is of course why Napoleon III and the Saint-Simonians were “made for each other” (Weill, 1913, 391 – 92). To be sure, the Saint-Simonians were “about the only intellectual group available to [Napoleon]” (Boon, 1936, 85). But also vice versa: the modernist sector of the bourgeoisie, the true liberals, “needed [Napoleon] to liberate themselves from the timidities of the well-to-do” (Agulhon, 1973, 234), who had dominated the Party of Order in the July Monarchy. This is why Guerard (1943, chap. 9) called Napoleon III “Saint-Simon on horseback.”

 

It is in this period as well that banks came into their own as key agents of national economic development. In this, too, the credit must go to the post-Saint-Simonians (such as the brothers Pereire), who were “the first to realize the role of stimulus and coordinator that banks could play in economic life” (Chlepner, 1926, 15). But the story predates the brothers Pereire. From at least 1815 on, the biggest banks – notably the Rothschilds and the Barings – shifted their emphasis to long-term loans, first in negotiating and promoting loans to governments and second in sustaining large private enterprises. Since, as Landes (1956, 210 – 212) notes, were these banks to show “too voracious an appetite,” they could be undercut by competitors, they tended to form cartels. The Rothschilds in particular found their best profits in a tacit link with the Holy Alliance [“In September 1815, the three monarchs of the 'east' (Austria, Prussia, and Russia) signed the document that became known as the Holy Alliance – the pledge to work together to maintain the status quo in Europe, if necessary by intervention in countries threatened by revolution. Great Britain did not join the signatories.” p. 42… – P.S.] and were thus able to locate themselves in the principal money markets, which at that time were “more markets of demand than centers of money supply” (Gille, 1965, 98). Furthermore, the “favorite gambit” of the Rothschilds – the short-term emergency loan to a government in difficulty – was not necessarily an aid to national self-sufficiency. Cameron (1957b, 556) argues that such governments “rarely ever regained [their] independence” and compares the practice to a “habit-forming drug.” [And we… of course… immediately think of 'payday lending'… which comparison succinctly expresses the downward trajectory of 'the system'… its urgent sense that they must develop lock-down techniques to use on us that are guaranteed effective… before we get… globally… that their jig is up… and that it is for us imperative that we begin designing our alternative… – P.S.]

 

The need, of course, was for more locally controlled sources of credit. Chlepner (1926, 19) reminds us that, before the Credit Mobilier of the brothers Pereire, there were “predecessors” in Belgium – most notably the Societe Generale, founded by King William in 1822. It was, however, only after Belgium marked its independence in 1831 with the enthronement of Leopold I that the bank became a major actor in economic development, primarily in the construction of railways. If this bank and the rival Banque de Belgique, founded in 1835, both went into relative hibernation after the financial crisis of 1838, they were even harder hit by the Anglo-French economic crisis of 1846 – 1847. With this in the background, February 1848 led to fear of revolution, fear of the loss of independence, and a “veritable financial panic” (Chlepner, 1926, 238; see also 1931), which caused the state to come to the aid of the bank and end the period of agitation. Belgium thus was able to avoid the revolutionary upsurge and could then move to a more truly liberal system, eliminating the semiofficial character of the Societe Generale in 1851.…

 

The banking controversies in Great Britain, previously discussed, created a situation in which the banks were unable to play a direct role in promoting economic growth. These controversies culminated in the Bank Act of 1844, whose objective, from Peel's point of view, was primarily to “make more solid the foundations of the gold standard” and secondarily to remove the use of gold as an internal political weapon (Fetter, 1965, 192). Perhaps Great Britain could afford, better than other countries, not to have a banking policy that would promote economic growth. Cameron (1961, 58 – 59) calls this “inefficient” but notes that “paradoxically,… the very obstacles placed in the way of a rational banking and monetary system stimulated the private sector to introduce the financial innovations necessary for realization of the full benefits of technical innovation in industry.”

 

What the British state had promoted by its failures – an adequate supply of credit for the midcentury economic expansion – the French state under Napoleon III wold create deliberately. The decree of February, 1852 authorizing the formation of mortgage banks, the Credit Foncier of Emile Pereire being one of the first, provided the financial underpinning for the reconstruction of Paris by Haussmann. “From a laggard, France became a leader and innovator in mortgage credit” (Cameron, 1961, 129). The Rothschilds were not happy. James de Rothschild argued that this change in structure would concentrate too much power in untried hands. It seems a case of the pot calling the kettle black. In any case, the rise of the great corporate banks of the Second Empire took the monopoly away from what had been called the haute banque, a “powerful group of private (unincorporated) bankers” (Cameron, 1953, 462). But the haute banque had not provided sufficient credit to French business enterprises.

 

Toward the end of the Second Empire, in 1867, the largest of the new banks, Credit Mobilier, failed. The Rothschilds, however, were still there, and are still there today. Nonetheless, the liberal state, by its intervention, had changed the worldwide credit structure of modern capitalism: “The banking system of every nation in Continental Europe bore the imprint of French influence” (Cameron, 1961, 203). The creation of larger numbers of banks oriented to the international market may have diminished the power of the haute banque. This was not necessarily a great virtue for the weaker state structures in tight financial situations. Jenks (1927, 273) discusses the perverse effect of greater competition in the field of loans to governments:

Competition simply augmented the risks of marketing the loan in the face of efforts of the unsuccessful banker to cry it down.… What the competition did encourage, however, was the pressing of more money upon frequently “bewildered” borrowers.… In a word, the loan business was monopolescent.

 

The collapse of Credit Mobilier gives credence to this analysis. It formed part of a sequence that led to the drying up of loans to weak governments and hence the accentuation of what was to become the Great Depression after 1873.

 

The liberals had achieved what they had hoped to achieve in midcentury. The long upswing of the world-economy and the actions of the governments of the core zone – in particular, of Great Britain and France – secured a steady process of worldwide relocations., until at least the end of the twentieth century century. We may call this the “strong market,: one of the three pillars of the liberal world order that was to be the great achievement of the capitalist world-economy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. But there were two further pillars for a liberal world order: the strong state, and the strong interstate system. It is to the process of securing them that we now turn.

 

The absolute monarchies had not been strong states. Absolutism was merely the scaffolding within which weak states sought to become stronger. It would only be in the post-1789 world-system's atmosphere of normal change and popular sovereignty that one could build truly strong states – that is, states with an adequate bureaucratic structure and a reasonable degree of popular acquiescence (which in wartime could be converted into passionate patriotism).… [This strikes me as upside-down…

 

[This might be a good moment to revisit our earlier question:

 

“Two things stand out… one: “the supremacy game” the 'power'-guys are engaged in with each other… experimenting with their new toy… the 'powerful'… bureaucratic… nation-state – and two: their self-creation as 'global-state-statesmen'… with a common vision and purpose… inventing… as the key structural means for accomplishing this… an interstate 'mechanism' to ensure our – that is… we-the-people's – suppression… A question we should ask ourselves… I think… is… why… even in the analyses of those who have our interests in mind… these obvious motives of 'power' are not the starting point of these analyses… and why… rather… our advocates help legitimate… and obscure… these unmistakable motives by employing the ideology of 'economic development'?”

 

Elsewhere on this webpage [listed in the menu] we posted comments on Chapter 1 of our Good Three's Antisystemic Movements… “Rethinking the Concepts of Class and Status-Group in a World Systems Perspective”:

 

All to say… consider this… that ‘war’ is not to reinvigorate dead markets… but to suppress our uprisings against injustice. In the Waking Up Radio show of March 9th, 2014 we said that…

 

[“140309econtool.mp3”:]

 

“The machinations of states is theater… with two tightly interwoven objectives: first… 'work steadily to conquer the people… according to “the laws” of hierarchy… i.e.… ensuring there are “winners” and “losers”…' This is key overall strategy… And by the way… when we said that “the responsibility of 'the intellectual' is to stand with the people and renounce the privilege of standing apart…” – this is not a national project… a national Left is useless… it effectively means you stand with 'power'… agree to its terms… agree to betray your Brothers and Sisters who happen to be the designated 'losers'… globally speaking… So… ensuring that there are “winners” and “losers” is key strategy both for maintaining the undergirding ideology “merit rises” – the notion that there's some legitimate reason in this gross unfairness – behind the hideousness – and it's necessary for maintaining 'power's invisibility – the notion that there's just these “natural forces” at play… And… according to the “laws of PR-chest-pounding-posturing”… this must be on-going… And the second key objective: 'play the game of “Supremacy” successfully… using quantifying means to keep score… – otherwise known as “the economy”… while maintaining the chest-pounding to draw from the people the requisite energy…' We've said that the definition of “the economy” that's most authentic is “eating the earth…” controlling the resources of the planet… the most key one strategically being us… But… looking at Europe before the spread of fascism across it… 'socialism'… which in the people's minds simply meant 'freedom'… sweeping across Europe… 'infecting' the colonies even… So… that resource which is absolutely key was at risk of being lost… So 'economy' geared up… for 'destroying' is also 'consuming': removing resources from our use… The book Savage Continent provides prodigious illustration of resources being removed from our use… and…turned back over to ‘power’… He describes… an orgy of destructiveness. This systematic attack on ‘economic life’ was itself the ‘economic system’ working at a clip (because the point is privatization: atomization plus privatization equals control of us… manufactured ‘scarcity’…) racing at a pace unequaled since… The ‘economic system’ is not ‘capitalism’…. It’s called ‘power’… and they invent a tool called ‘the economy’ to keep us confused… War is an expression of this ‘economic system’… and ‘the economy’ is war by other means… i.e…. it’s about controlling the energy of the majority… the goal being… to beat us into submission… and… in the ‘normal’ course of events… overt violence is (as Solozzo said…) “too expensive…” in terms of maintaining legitimacy… as a means of controlling. And so they ‘normally’ rely on Bentham… whose Panoptic guidance says: “wage war by other means… i.e. be ‘economic’… and ‘efficient’….” “Let the weight of scarcity weigh on their minds…” Bentham advised.…” [From the March 9, 2014 Waking Up Radio show.]

 

But when the people arise… ‘economy’… ‘efficiency’… and all that jazz… flies out the door…

 

…and in walks war.

 

‘Economy’ is just a tool… like any other technology.

 

So ‘war’ is always war on us… whether they spill our guts with guns… or markets.

 

The economy is just war by other means… and war is the profligate failure of ‘breeding’… to control the energy of the majority (the true point of the ‘education’ we’re all given.)

 

What they (the ‘power’-guys…) hate most… is resistance. What they love most… is obedience – (From our commentary on Chapter 1 in Antisystemic Movements… “Rethinking the Concepts of Class and Status-Group in a World Systems Perspective”) – P.S.]

 

 

 

 

(Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern World-System IV: Centrist Liberalism Triumphant, 1789 – 1914, p. 102 – 119

 

 

 

 

… – P.S.]

[Returning to Alice… and skipping ahead…]

 

In the three scenes that follow, we see vivid examples of how the principles described above can be put into practice. I quote these passages at such length in order to give the reader an idea of the atmosphere these children (i.e., if not we ourselves, then at least our parents) breathed in daily. This material helps us to understand how neuroses develop. They are not caused by an external event but by repression of the innumerable psychological factors making up the child's daily life that the child is never capable of describing because he or she doesn't know that things can be any other way. [The totalitarian state – which is what we got today… must be systematically replaced… with new thoughts… – P.S.]

Until the time he was four, I taught little Konrad four essentials: to pay attention, to obey, to behave himself, and to be moderate in his desires.

 

The first I accomplished by continually showing him all kinds of animal, flowers, and other wonders of nature and by explaining pictures to him: the second by constantly making him, whenever he was in my presence, do things at my bidding; the third by inviting children to come play with him from time to time when I was present, and whenever a quarrel arose, I carefully determined who had started it and removed the culprit from the game for a time; the fourth I taught him by often denying him something he asked for with great agitation. Once, for example, I cut up a honeycomb and brought a large dishful into the room. “Honey! Honey!” he cried joyfully. “Father, give me some honey,” pulled his chair to the table, sat down, and waited for me to spread a few rolls with honey for him. I didn't do it but set the honey before him and said: “I'm not going to given you any honey yet; first we will plant some peas in the garden; then, when that is done, we will enjoy a roll with honey together.” He looked first at me, then at the honey, whereupon he went to the garden with me. Also, when serving food, I always arranged it so that he was the last one served. For example, my parents and little Christel were eating with us once, and we had rice pudding, which he especially liked. “Pudding!” he cried joyfully, embracing his mother. “Yes,” I said, “it's rice pudding. Little Konrad shall have some, too. First the big people shall have some, and afterwards the little people. Here, Grandmother, is some pudding for you. Here, Grandfather, is some for you, too! Here, Mother, is some for you. This is for Father, this for Christel, and this? Whom do you think this is for?” “Onrad,” he responded joyfully. He did not find this arrangement unjust, and I saved myself all the vexation parents have who give their children the first portion of whatever is brought to the table. [Salzmann (1796), quoted in Rutschky]

The “little people” sit quietly at the table and wait. This need not be demeaning. It all depends on the adult's intention – and here the adult in question shows unabashedly how much he enjoys his power and his bigness at the expense of the little ones.

 

Something similar occurs in the next story, in which telling a lie is the only possible way for the child to read in privacy:

A lie is something dishonorable. It is recognized as such even by those who tell one, and there probably isn't a single liar who has any self-respect. But someone who doesn't respect himself doesn't respect others either, and the liar thus finds himself excluded from human society to a certain extent.…

 

 

–––

 

* “Embracing Global Goals, Scope and Action: Becoming Global Actors… Claiming the ‘All’”: Introducing Our Discussion of: Antisystemic Movements… by Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein.

 

September 4th, 2014… Sisters and Brothers: In the WUR show of August 31, 2014 we argued that most of the ‘thought’ on the Left is ‘magical’… because based in and on a notion of ‘reality’ from which critical bits are extruded: ‘the democratic introjection’ (as Marcuse put it…) or ‘poisonous pedagogy’ (as Alice Miller put it…) – or ‘the state in us’ (as I’m putting it…) – and what’s also missing is an accurate understanding (as to source and aims) of ‘power’ as a conscious actor… i.e. with a clear vision and goal – an ‘original’ as their mentor Plato might put it – a model ever before their eyes that they use to sculpt… or pound… us into the shape they want. In short… what’s missing is the ‘theory’ of why we obey.

(We give our allegiance to the state because we have no other allegiance and we are communal beings and must plant our ‘solidarity’ somewhere. The state ensures we can have no other allegiance… the global-statesmen brook no challenges – these are not folks to whom we can entrust our earth… especially… the earth in us… the ‘ownership’ of which… once transferred to else but self… is lost.)

We can’t move forward until we confront our obedience. Here’s a mini-video – first in a series of ‘non-coercion commercials’ that I’m planning – that presents the concept:

–––

 

 

…or visit the video on you tube:

 

“Children are disappearing. Is it really just the state that’s robbing our children of their youth?… or is it also the state… in us?”

 

–––

 

But… I believe… ‘the state within’… and ‘the global state’ that ‘power’ is unfolding apace… must be confronted simultaneously… that confronting one confronts the other ‘naturally’… because the one is but the micro of the larger ‘death’… and ‘life’ is ‘life’… and cannot be split… is one continuous whole.

 

What this means… as we said in an earlier show… is that it’s critical that we – across all the false categories – start bulking up our solidarity… with the ancestors… the earth… and each other. And we’re going to be continuing to argue in upcoming shows… that the opposite of solidarity… is force and coercion… and that when we manifest force and coercion… we manifest the state… and when we oppose force and coercion… we oppose the state.

 

To help us think this through we will be reading together the first chapter of Antisystemic Movements… by Giovanni Arrighi, Terence K. Hopkins, and Immanuel Wallerstein; followed by “The Proletarian Is Dead; Long Live the Housewife?” by Claudia von Werlhof, and then “A Manifesto for Global Capital?” by Ellen Meiksins Wood.

 

–––

 

* “Introduction” to Antisystemic Movements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sergei Konionkov’s To Those Who Fell Fighting for the Cause of Peace and the Brotherhood of Nations (1918) (…floating in a Goya sky… “as Peace should still her wheaten garland wear… (Hamlet, V. 2.41)]

 

–––

 

The concept of antisystemic movements is one which presumes an analytic perspective about a system. The system referred to here is the world-system of historical capitalism which, we argue, has given rise to a set of anti-systemic movements. It is the contours of this process that we are proposing to outline here. We are in search of the system-wide structural processes that have produced certain kinds of movements and which have simultaneously formed the constraints within which such movements have operated.

 

The movements have had their own mode of self-description. This self-description emerged largely out of categories that were formulated or crystallized in the nineteenth-century capitalist world-economy. Class and status-group were the two key concepts that justified these movements, explained their origins and their objectives, and indeed indicated the boundaries of their organizational networks.

 

The contemporary dilemmas of these movements are part and parcel of the same problem as the dilemmas of the concepts of class and status-group. That is why we felt that we could not analyze the movements, either historically or prospectively, without first rethinking these two concepts from a world-systems perspective.

 

We shall not repeat in this introduction the arguments that are to be found in the articles. We would merely like to suggest that if the structural processes that gave birth to these movements have been world-scale from the beginning, the organizational responses hitherto have been predominantly at the level of the various states. It is because we believe that new organizational responses will begin to surface that will be more world-scale that we think it urgent, not only for theory but for praxis, to reexamine the patterns and the degree of success of the world-system’s antisystemic movements heretofore.

[…“urgent… for praxis…” perhaps I’ve been too closeted in my personal journey… but I don’t believe there is today in academia any such concept of itself… as ‘urgently’ moving to help ‘praxis’ along… I don’t believe that… in general… it thinks much about we-cattle at all… – P.S.]

–––

 

* “Rethinking the Concepts of Class and Status-Group in a World Systems Perspective”

(…begins by revisiting The Wealth of Nations….)

 

This essay was presented at the IVth Colloquium of the annual International Colloquia on the World-Economy, sponsored by the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems, and Civilizations; the Maison des Sciences de L’Homme; and the Starnberger Institut zur Erforschung Globalen Strukturen, Entwicklungen, und Krisen… in New Delhi, January 4 – 6, 1982.)

In his well-known but often neglected conclusion to Book I of The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith defined the interests of “the three great, original and constituent orders of every civilized society,” that is, those who live by rent, those who live by wages, and those who live by profit….

[…“he who owns the lexicon rules the world…” truly… truly… we have been effectively penned… by definition… told… that the very existence of ‘civilization’ depends… on our being trapped… strapped… booted… leashed… bound to ploughs… and beat… – P.S.]

…His argument was that the interests of the first two orders coincide with the general interest of society because, according to his analysis, the real value of both rents and wages rises with the prosperity and falls with the economic decline of society. The interests of profit earners, on the other hand, are different from, and even opposite to, such general social interest, because to widen the market and narrow the competition are always in the interest of merchants and manufacturers. And, while to “widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; …to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens.”

 

Profit-earners not only have an interest contrary to the general one. They also have a better knowledge of their interest and a greater power and determination in pursuing it than those who live by either rent or wages….

[…perspective and scope of ‘interest’… I’ve never heard discussed… that the (constructed) structure itself places some… to ‘look long’… ‘think big’… and places us to see… and be… the opposite… never discussed (outside of Virginia Woolf…) is what it means that it’s only the miniscule few… who take responsibility for ‘the all’ of things… globally… and how this disproportion in ‘interest’… skews the very ‘quality’ of ‘humanity’ to suit the soul’s damage of the tiny few… – P.S.]

…The indolence of landowners, “which is the natural effect of the ease and security of their situation, renders them too often, not only ignorant, but incapable of that application of mind which is the necessary in order to foresee and understand the consequences of any public regulation.” As for the wage-earner, “he is incapable either of comprehending the general social interest, or of understanding its connection with his own.” Moreover, in the public deliberation, “his voice is little heard and less regarded, except upon some particular occasions, when his clamour is animated, set on, and supported by his employers, not for his, but their own particular purposes.”

[…as I read these words… the singularity of this present moment we are in… in which we finally can move… together… to a world that reflects our interests… we… whose energy has been… ‘historically’… ‘set on’ and used for other people’s purposes… the few… who ‘little hear and less regard’ our voices…. His words are true: we’ve never spoken before in our true voices… as our true voices need our true world to speak true. As we seek… as we see… as we speak… as we become… we bring into being… the world we need… to clarify our voices into that perfect harmony our souls have been seeking… for so long… – P.S.]

…Profit-earners, on the other hand, particularly those who employ the largest amount of capital, draw to themselves by their wealth the greatest share of the public consideration. Moreover, since during their whole lives they are engaged in plans and projects, they have a more acute understanding of their particular interest than the other orders of society.

 

The Wealth of Nations being a work of legislation, the purpose of this “class analysis” was to warn the sovereign against the dangers involved in following the advice and yielding to the pressures of merchants and master manufacturers. As the head of the national household, he should instead strengthen the rule of the market over civil society [i.e. allow ‘competition’ to exist… – P.S.], thereby achieving the double objective of a more efficient public administration and a greater well-being of the nation.

 

It is not our purpose here to assess the soundness of the advice given by Smith to the national householder or of the substantive analysis on which it was based. Rather, we want to point out those aspects of his analysis that can be considered as paradigmatic of political economy and that we can find duplicated in contemporary class analysis.

[…implicit… in drawing this equation between ‘political economy’ and ‘class analysis’… that runs clearly through The Wealth of Nations… is the heretofore undisguised thought… that humans-made-‘citizens’ have no ‘legitimate’ claim to existence… apart from our service to the state… following the ‘order’ to which we are assigned…. Now… confronting this fact – the fact that we tell ourselves… by our obedience… the very thing that Goering said of himself: “It is not I who live, but the [state] who lives in me…” – in broad, public discussions… signals the advance of humanity itself… – P.S.]

First, the tripartite social order of which he spoke was a predicate of a particular kind of society; that defined by the territorial reach of a definite sovereign or state. These were the states of Europe as they had been and were being formed within mutually exclusive domains operating within an interstate system.

 

Second, his social orders (or classes) were defined on the basis of property relations. The ownership of land, of capital, and of labor-power define his three great orders of society. Among the proprietors of capital, what some today would call a “fraction” of capital (merchants and master manufacturers) is singled out for special treatment in view of its political-economic power, of its greater self-awareness of its own interests, and of the opposition of its interests to the general social well-being.

 

Third, the interests of each of the social orders / classes were identified with its market situation; that is, both their competitive opportunities in relations to each other as classes (and of individuals within each class to each other), and the costs and benefits to each of them of monopoly power within markets, understood as restriction of entry. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith limited the subjective ground of collective action by a class to these market interests. Monopoly power in the product as well as in factor markets was traced back to the creation of tolerance of restrictions to entry on the part of the sovereign / state.

 

Fourth, market relations were defined within or between national economic spaces. Class conflicts and alignments were thus limited to struggles within each state for influence / control over its policies. The unit of analysis, in other words, was the nation-state, which determined both the context and the object of class contradictions.

 

Fifth, a “relative autonomy” of state actions in relation to class interests and powers was presupposed. The enactment of laws and regulations by the state was continuously traced to the powers and influence of particular classes or “fractions” thereof. But the sovereign was assumed to be in a position to distance himself from any particular interest to promote some form of general interest, reflecting and / or generating a consensus for this general interest.

 

If we contrast this analytical framework with that associated with Karl Marx’s critique of political economy (that is, of Smith and other classical economists), we notice two consequential shifts of focus: a shift away from state-defined economic spaces to world-economic space on the one hand, and a shift away from the marketplace to the workplace on the other.

 

The first shift implied that the market was no longer seen as enclosed within (or “embedded” in) each nation-state as an independent economic space, and that the world-economy was no longer conceived of as an interstate economy linking discrete national economic spaces. Rather, nation-states were seen as jurisdictional claims in a unitary world market. By effecting the socialization of labor on a world scale, the world market determined the most general context of the class contradictions and therefore of the class struggles of capitalist society, which Marx defined by its constitutive orders, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat:

The modern history of capital dates from the creation in the sixteenth century of a world-embracing commerce and world-embracing market. (Capital, Volume I)

 

This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This development has, in its turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed down from the Middle Ages. (The Communist Manifesto)

This was not a mere matter of trade relations between sovereign states. Rather, the developing bourgeoisie…

…compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois modes of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeoisie themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image. (The Communist Manifesto)

The world so created was characterized by a highly stratified structure of domination and had more than market interests as subjective grounds for collective action:

Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West. (The Communist Manifesto)

The second shift implied that the antagonism between the two great classes into which, according to Marx, bourgeois society as a whole tends to split, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, was no longer traced to relations in the product or factor markets but to relations in production. In order to define the interests of the nation and of its component classes, Smith took leave of the pin factory whose scenario opens The Wealth of Nations to follow the interplay of supply and demand in the marketplace, and of class interest in the national political arena. Marx, in his critique of political economy took us in the opposite direction. We take leave not of the shopfloor but of the noisy sphere of the market place (and, we may add, of the political arena) “where everything takes place on the surface and in view of all men,” and follow the owner of the means of production and the possessor of labor power “into the hidden abode of production, on whose threshold there stares us in the face ‘No admittance except on business.’” (Capital, Volume I) In this hidden abode of production, Marx discovered two quite contradictory tendencies that implied two quite different scenarios of class struggle and social transformation.

 

The first was the one generally emphasized in Marxist literature after Marx: even if we assume that in the marketplace the relationship between the owners of the means of production and the owners of labor-power appears as a relationship between equals, in the sense that the commodities they bring to the market tend to exchange at their full cost of production / reproduction (which, of course, is not always or even normally the case),…

[…and of course… as Polanyi reminded us… human energy is not… can not be… a ‘commodity’… i.e. it is not ‘produced for exchange in the market…’ and that applying this term to the earth and us… is a fiction…

 

…and of course… as Bentham reminded ‘rulers’… fictions can be enforced as real… by the state… but what a toll it takes… this living lives premised on lies… on our souls… – P.S.]

…the relationship would still be a fundamentally unequal one. This is so because of the longer-run effects of capitalist production on the relative value and the relative bargaining power of capital and labor. Capitalist production, that is, is seen as a process that tends to reduce the value of labor-power (its real costs of reproduction) and simultaneously to undermine the bargaining power of its possessors, so that the advantages of the reduction of labor’s costs of reproduction tend to accrue entirely to capital.

…but are not these “longer-run effects of capitalist production”… the ever-increasing disparity in relative ‘power’… and so in ‘relative bargaining power’… a function of ‘political’ ‘power’ – ‘the state’ as the tool of ‘power’? – and never… in reality… of ‘capitalist production’… at least if we use that word to suggest an effect of ‘market laws’… – P.S.]

This tendency obviously poses problems of realization of the growing mass of surplus labor that capital appropriates in production. These problems periodically manifest themselves in crises of overproduction that are overcome on the one hand…

…by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented. (The Communist Manifesto)

 

[…Kropotkin’s words… about seeing ‘history’ with fresh eyes – once they’re open… (“Petr understood that ‘power’ selectively passes down the ‘stories’ that further its mission, and that, “Ere long history will have to be re-written on new lines….” we said in the Waking Up Radio show of February 23rd, 2014…) – is never more relevant than when we’re looking at what’s called ‘the economy’…

 

…i.e. could it be that Marx… who wrote so forcefully about taking the world away from ‘philosophy’ and setting it on its feet again… was likewise viewing things falsely?… Adam Smith’s words – their full import – have never been taken to heart: we commoners have been “little heard and less regarded….” The whole point of ‘class’… is to establish (irrevocably… soon… they hope…) that we ‘don’t matter’… so why would any of its ‘thinkers’ – whose allegiance is to ‘Thought’… or so they might imagine – consider it worthwhile to try to see the world from the eyes of those who ‘can’t put two sentences together’?… who are ‘mere matter’… to the mind of ‘Thought’… to be used to advance… a ‘bigger’ agenda that they could ‘never understand’.

 

All to say… consider this… that ‘war’ is not to reinvigorate dead markets… but to suppress our uprisings against injustice. In the Waking Up Radio show of March 9th, 2014 we said that…

The book Savage Continent provides prodigious illustration of resources being removed from our use… and…turned back over to ‘power’… He describes… an orgy of destructiveness. This systematic attack on ‘economic life’ was itself the ‘economic system’ working at a clip (because the point is privatization: atomization plus privatization equals control of us… manufactured ‘scarcity’…) racing at a pace unequaled since… The ‘economic system’ is not ‘capitalism’…. It’s called ‘power’… and they invent a tool called ‘the economy’ to keep us confused… War is an expression of this ‘economic system’… and ‘the economy’ is war by other means… i.e…. it’s about controlling the energy of the majority… the goal being… to beat us into submission… and… in the ‘normal’ course of events… overt violence is (as Solozzo said…) “too expensive…” in terms of maintaining legitimacy… as a means of controlling. And so they ‘normally’ rely on Bentham… whose Panoptic guidance says: “wage war by other means… i.e. be ‘economic’… and ‘efficient’….” “Let the weight of scarcity weigh on their minds…” Bentham advised.

 

But when the people arise… ‘economy’… ‘efficiency’… and all that jazz… flies out the door…

 

…and in walks war.

 

‘Economy’ is just a tool… like any other technology.

 

So ‘war’ is always war on us… whether they spill our guts with guns… or markets.

 

The economy is just war by other means… and war is the profligate failure of ‘breeding’… to control the energy of the majority (the true point of the ‘education’ we’re all given.)

 

What they (the ‘power’-guys…) hate most… is resistance. What they love most… is obedience –

Further… can we finally now be honest about those “means whereby crises are prevented”? When Marx and Engels say ‘overproduction crises’ are only ‘solved’ by digging ever deeper ‘power’s grave… that is to say… by eating ever more “means whereby crises are prevented”… those ‘means’ are the earth and us… where ‘conquest’ – the raison d’être of ‘class’ – mowed right over us…. As our authors said: “the structural processes that gave birth to [resistance] have been world-scale from the beginning…” – and our ‘place’ in the structure has always been premised on the privileging or suffering of those ‘higher up’ or ‘low’…

 

What happened to us was not ‘economic’… but rather deeply ‘psychological’… – P.S.]

It would seem from the above that the unequal relation between labor and capital, continuously reproduced and enhanced in the workplace, leads capital either to self-destruction in the marketplace or to a greater development of the world-economy, both extensively (incorporations) and intensively. Given a finite globe, the more thorough this development, the greater the self-destructiveness of capital.

 

In this scenario labor plays no role in precipitating capitalist crises except in a negative sense; it is its growing subordination in the workplace, and consequent weakening of bargaining power in the marketplace, that are ultimately responsible for the outbreak of the “epidemic of overproduction,” as Marx called it. Labor, or its social personification, the proletariat, plays an active role only in transforming the self-destructiveness of capital into political revolution. The increasing precariousness of working and living conditions induces proletarians to form combinations against the bourgeoisie.

Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their battles lies, not in the immediate result, but in the ever-expanding union of the workers….

 

This organization of the proletarians into a class, and consequently into a political party, is continuously being upset again by the competition between the workers themselves. But it ever rises up again, stronger, firmer, mightier….

 

Altogether collisions between the classes of the old society further, in many ways, the course of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself, whose interests have become antagonistic to the progress of industry; at all times, with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries. In all these battles it sees itself compelled to appeal to the proletariat, to ask for its help, and thus, to drag it into the political arena. (The Communist Manifesto)

Alongside this scenario, however, as we indicated, Marx suggested another one, quite distinct in its unfolding. Both in the Manifesto and in Capital we are told that, along with the growing mass of misery, oppression, and degradation, the strength of the working class grows too, not so much as a result of political organization aimed at counteracting its structural weakness, but rather as a result of the very process of capitalist production.

Along with the constantly diminishing number of the magnates of capital… grows the mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation, but with this too grows the revolt of the working-class, a class always increasing in numbers, and disciplined, united, organized by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself. (Capital, Volume I)

 

The essential condition for the existence, and for the sway of the bourgeois class, is the formation and augmentation of capital; the condition for capital is wage labor. Wage labor rests exclusively on competition between the laborers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the laborers, due to competition, by their revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. (The Communist Manifesto)

Here, therefore, the strengthening of labor in the workplace is the cause of the crisis of capital.

 

As we know, Marx never managed to reconcile these two contradictory tendencies that he discovered in the abode of production, let alone to work out fully and systematically all their implications for the analysis of class contradictions in capitalist society. Instead, Marx, in some of his historical writings, and many followers in their theoretical writings, gave up the critique of political economy and reverted to the Smithian paradigm of class analysis, reviving rather than carrying out the critique of political economy.

 

In the case of Marx, this retreat is most evident in his writings on the class struggle in France, in which class interests were defined in terms of a national political-economic space, and what goes on in the abode of production simply does not come into the picture at all. Obviously, Marx himself thought that the shift of focus he was advancing to analyze the overall, long-term tendencies of capitalist society had a limited relevance for the concrete analysis of a concrete instance of class struggle at a relatively low state of development of such tendencies.

[Let’s pause and recap… perhaps slightly translate (for our purposes…): Marx saw two (contradictory) ‘tendencies’ as inherent in the ‘process’ of capital accumulation (or ‘production’…): first… the unequal ‘power’ relation between those who “put ‘capital’ to work”… and we-who-do-the-work… is a bias that but increases over time… because ‘power’ uses its ‘power’ advantage to drive our bargaining position ever lower (‘cheapen its costs of labor’…) resulting in our increasing ‘immiseration’…

 

(…time-out to vent a suppressed rant… I am looking at a red line under ‘immiseration’… that is a politically-motivated red line… as are the lines under ‘commodification’… ‘commodify’… and ‘ain’t’… the rest will have to wait…)

 

…continuing… resulting in our increasing ‘immiseration’ over time… and… even though this results eventually in a ‘crisis of overproduction’ for ‘capital’… also referred to as a ‘crisis of realization’ – i.e., no one to buy its ‘stuff’ – this is not by our – we commoners’ – action or plan… as we are politically-weak paupers.

 

(But… I would argue… it’s also not “by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself…” – ‘power’ hides in so-called ‘economic forces’… there is absolutely no ‘objective reason’ why ‘the state’… in theory… could not undo the bias… except for the one we’re all trained in… of ‘might makes right’…. ‘Power’… ‘rule’… are not inevitable… though they are made by the few to seem so.).

 

However… despite our increasing pauperization… Marx prophesied our growing strength due to our increasing numbers and organization in ‘the abode of production’ (neglecting to consider that ‘society’ overall… was modeled on the design of the Panopticon.) Still… given that the scope… frame… and audience… for these two respective ‘analyses’ are different… it’s hard for me to see them as ‘contradictory tendencies’.

 

What I see as the pressing need for us… for all of us (globally)… is getting on the same page… which means we need to come to some agreement… as to what these “overall, long-term tendencies of capitalist society…” are… exactly… – P.S.]

Moreover, even at the theoretical level, the shift of focus away from the noisy sphere of political economy did not imply any belittlement of the nation-state as the main locus of political power, that is, of the monopoly of the legitimate use of violence over a given territory. This power embodied in nation-states, whatever its origins, could obviously be used, and has indeed generally been used, simultaneously in two directions: as an aggressive / defensive instrument of intra-capitalist competition in the world-economy, and as an aggressive / defensive instrument of class struggle in national locales. True, the growing density and connectedness of world-economic networks on the one hand, and the displacement of class contradictions from the marketplace to the workplace on the other, would ultimately make nation-states “obsolete” from both points of view. In outlining this tendency, however, Marx was only defining the situation that the capitalist world-economy would asymptotically [“asymptote: a line that continually approaches a given curve but does not meet it at any finite distance. From the Greek ‘not falling together’…”] …that the capitalist world-economy would asymptotically approach in the very long run. The farther the class struggle was from the projected asymptote, the more it would take on a political / national character. Even the proletariat, the class which in his view had neither country nor nationality, had first of all to wage a national struggle.

Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word. (The Communist Manifesto)

 

[Our intent… in examining ‘Marxism’… is… in translating it into terms that unify us globally – into ‘earth’-terms… as we all feel the same earth under our toes – to show that the path to freedom does not lie down a ‘Marxist’ road. This is not an easy task. ‘Marxism’ has claimed the energies of the Left for so long… its ‘intellectualism’ has such a cachet about it – it’s a language hard to learn… and a certain pride attaches to those who labored long to learn it… it’s acquisition then being such… that few who have it… are willing to relinquish it.

 

Nonetheless… I believe ours is a worthwhile project – this effort of ‘translation – ‘necessary’ even… perhaps… but I must say I’m not fully convinced… as simply trusting our bodies… should be sufficient….

 

But as we read this together… I ask that we keep in mind… what was discussed in the Waking Up Radio show of August 31, 2014… that… “the ‘modern’ language of ‘classification’… of ‘specialization’… of ‘ranking’ as to ‘historical stage’… and certainly as to ‘class’… is itself the key tactic of control… of containment… so it’s not just that when we’re trying to ‘win’ (play ‘power’s game…) that we’re snuggled up close and sucked right in… but even when we challenge its propaganda… because engaging with it hardens our chains… and in some sense validates the system….”

 

Reminding us of this caution is reminding us of the central problem: we’re told ‘civilization’ itself depends on our enslavement… we’re told Thought itself requires the categories ‘power’ provides… the key one being ‘class’. With the benefit of hindsight we could reply to Marx’s idea that “the proletariat must rise to be the leading class of the nation…” by saying that it has no empirical basis…

 

but it’s intent was polemical… not analytical…

 

…but when we reject the terms themselves… how reply? Why argue with false premises… except that so many still believe in them?

 

Within the mindset of ‘class’… we commoners can never become ‘the leading class’… surely this is obvious?

 

But what is less so… is whether we can re-define ‘the nation’… to our advantage… whether we can re-claim ‘the state’ from the global-statesmen – is that’s what’s happening this very moment (September 18, 2014) as the Scottish people vote on independence?… the transition?… a piece of it?… the first of the intermediate steps… to freedom?…. We will return to this question… – P.S.]

Marx’s empirical retreat into political economy did not, however, entail a corresponding retreat at the theoretical level. It simply implied a recognition of the distance separating the historical circumstances of nineteenth-century Europe from the asymptotic circumstances projected in the Manifesto and in Capital.

[But this assumes a ‘logic’ to ‘history’ that ‘it’ does not possess… – P.S.]

Far more than this was implicit in the retreat into / revival of political economy by Marxists after Marx, however. The most striking characteristic of the theories of finance and monopoly capital, of imperialism, and of state capitalism, synthesized in canonical form by Lenin, is that they take us back to the noisy sphere of political economic relations. Their main concerns are the forms of capitalist competition, and the class contradictions identified are those defined in terms of market interests and state power. However much such formulations may or may not be justified in terms of the political strategies of the time, we are concerned here with their elevation by epigones [“…a less distinguished follower or imitator of someone, esp. an artist of philosopher…” “from the Greek ‘epigonoi’: ‘those born afterward’…”] into theoretical advances rather than pragmatic retreats from Marx’s critique of Smithian political economy.

 

This theoretical retreat into political economy had some justification in the tendencies that came to characterize the capitalist world-economy around the turn of the century. The growing unity of the world market presupposed by Marx’s paradigmatic shift began to be undermined by the re-emergence of state protectionist / mercantilist policies. These policies increasingly transferred world capitalist competition from the realm of relations among enterprises to the realm of relations among states. As a consequence, war and national / imperial autarky [“…economic independence or self-sufficiency in a country, state, or society…”] came to the fore and in pragmatic terms shaped the scenario of the world-economy. Connected with this tendency, the high concentration and centralization of capital, characteristic of most of the new leading / core sectors of economic activity, led to a resurgence of practices, often backed by state power, that restricted competition within the national / imperial segments into which the world-economy was splitting. States thus returned to the forefront of world-economic life, and monopoly in and through the sovereign became once again the central issue around which conflicts and alignments among classes and fractions thereof revolved. This situation, which has broadly characterized the first half of the twentieth century, undoubtedly warranted a revival of political economy as the most relevant theoretical framework for the short- or medium-term analysis of class contradictions and conflicts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

–––

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

–––

 

 

–––

 

* “The Proletarian Is Dead; Long Live the Housewife?” …by Claudia von Werlhof

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Francisco Goya’s Third of May, (1808, Portion)]

 

–––

 

If We Have Understood Housework, Then We Have Understood the Economy

 

Housework is a phenomenon that is most difficult to understand, but if we have understood housework, then we have understood everything. But this requires (and this requirement is still unfulfilled) that we do not view housework too narrowly or use it in a restricted sense, and that we relate it and indeed apply it to nothing less than the whole economy – in fact, to the world-economy. Only then will the explosive character and the significance of the so-called women’s question become recognizable in its generality. The women’s question is the most general – and not the most special – of all social questions, because all others are contained in it;…

[…because she’s putting them in it… – P.S.]

…because it, in contrast to all the questions to date, leaves no one out. This claim reflects not conceit, or arrogance; on the contrary, it reflects something inherent in the functioning of our society itself. For our society itself has created an historically unique (to date) situation, namely the situation that the women are always “the one below”. But only from below, hence at the bottom of the cask, can the whole be seen as the whole. Nothing is more important – actually nothing is more vitally necessary – than to support this tendency of analysis “from below.”

[…I agree… but what’s even more ‘below’ than women?… look beneath your feet… notice then… as we dissolve to dust… there is no difference… – P.S.]

The Connection between the World Economic Crisis and War danger: War Economy

 

The reasons that a really general theory of society and corresponding policy are necessary are nothing less than the currently beginning world economic crisis and the danger of war that is threatening us. I wonder more and more why this time no connection is being seen between crisis and war. In any case, the topic has not been raised up to now, not even in the rather broad peace movement in the Federal Republic of Germany, which is strange, because this connection has otherwise always been the subject matter of discussion. But today people are concerned only with moral or military-technological arguments. Why don’t people simply ask, “how come there now is suddenly a danger of war? The east-west conflict is actually nothing new!” Or, “What does it mean, we must tighten our belts? What has happened to the economic miracle for which we sweated a whole life long? What have you done with that?” These simple and fundamental questions of war and crisis are simply missing, at least in the public discussion. Why?

 

The answer is at first very simple: If there is a worldwide economic crisis, then it means that everywhere economic changes will take place. But can these be implemented without the application of violence?

[…is it clear that ‘power’ counts on suppressing the key discussions… to prevent our thought’s development from one generation to the next… to keep us treading water… while they continuously move… systematically… toward their dream’s installation… their fantasy of statis (how does Kissinger put it?… I listened to him yesterday – September 9, 2014 – hawking his book by the same name: World Order…) – P.S.]

Recently a German politician himself used the term “war economy”, and it is a kind of war economy towards which we are proceeding. I do not know what he meant by that, but I think that surely there is some objective background for this statement. To me it appears that changes in the world-economy are proceeding at full speed and are beginning to be noticeable more and more clearly also in the Western industrial nations. What is involved is not merely a cyclical crisis or a moderate structural change, but the beginning of a totally new phase of capitalist development, and nobody knows how it will look. It is characterized by the fact (which is exactly what is of primary importance) that it more or less does away with “free” wage labor. With this development, simultaneously, democracy, human rights, equality, freedom, and brotherhood are also called into question, not to speak of emancipation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

–––

 

* “A Manifesto for Global Capitalism?”, by Ellen Meiksins Wood

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[From John Boswell’s The Kindness of Strangers: The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe From Late Antiquity To The Renaissance]

 

(During the May 18, 2014 show, we finally remembered to add Alice Miller and Jeremy Bentham to the “puzzle pieces” we needed to see what ‘power’s plans are… and in the May 25, 2014 show we remembered John Boswell… for his The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe: From Late Antiquity To The Renaissance….)

 

–––

 

A capitalist manifesto

 

Imagine a manifesto for global capital, written by a guru of globalization. Its object would be to present a picture of the world in which opposition to globalization and to capitalism itself would be futile, a world in which the best we can do is go with the flow, lie back and think of Nike.

 

[We first considered these words of Ellen Meiksins Wood during the Waking Up Radio show of September 14, 2014:

 

“What would be the essential propositions of such a [capitalist] manifesto?… the nation-state has become a fiction… supranational institutions as the WTO and the IMF to facilitate capital flows, and the movements of labour… problems will be solved not by resistance to global capital, not by less globalization, but, on the contrary, by more…” – and I have to say… the perspicacity of Terence Hopkins is impressive. Recall our quote from him in Palmers’ Chat… in which he placed his finger on the key problem ‘power’ faces – in their determination to arrest our building confidence… and attempt to yet again meet it with suppression – which is… the use of the nation-state as a tool wielded from ‘below’ – Scotland… is the present case in point… and… the on-going uprising of the Indigenous… ditto… (We’re going to be thinking deeply… in upcoming shows… about this question of the ‘nation-state’.)

 

What would be the essential propositions of such a manifesto? It would probably begin by insisting that the globalization of capital and the integration of the global economy have so transformed the world that the nation-state has become a fiction, as capital flows have far outreached the borders and the powers of the state. The world is now essentially ruled by the impersonal laws of the global market. To the extent that capital flows, and the movements of labour, still require some regulation, we may need such supranational institutions as the WTO and the IMF. But their role is to facilitate, not to dominate. To be sure, there are still a few flaws in the system, such as the disparity between rich and poor. But such problems will be solved not by resistance to global capital, not by less globalization, but, on the contrary, by more. Those who resist the relentless movement of capitalist globalization are doing much more harm than good.

 

We can come back in a moment to challenging this picture of the world. But let us first ask this: if the purpose of this analysis is to discourage opposition, at what point in the argument is resistance to global capital most effectively disabled? Of course, the general lesson we are supposed to draw from it is that capitalist globalization is an irresistible force and that opposition to what is practically a law of nature is futile and counterproductive. But an even more significant element in the argument is that it denies that there is any concentration of power in the global economy.

[Exactly… ‘power’ must hide to exist… Bentham schooled them well on this… and Plato (implicitly…) before him ( ‘power’ is ‘power’ is ‘power’…) – P.S.]

Either power is an inappropriate category in defining the globalized world, or power is so diffuse and immaterial that it might as well not exist at all. In either case, there is no target for opposition.

[Precisely the point of all of ‘power’s ‘modern’ propaganda – and what elaborately crafted propaganda Empire was… which should flatter the folks it was trying to convince… – P.S.]

In this respect, the manifesto would be the equivalent on a global scale of much older ‘pluralist’ arguments in political science, challenged by Marxist theories of the state way back in the 1970s. According to that old liberal orthodoxy, there were no concentrations of class power in the liberal democratic state, only an infinite diffusion of countervailing powers throughout society. Now, we are told, even the state itself is effectively powerless, and political domination, no less than class rule, is a thing of the past. All political forces and organizational forms once designed to challenge the power of capital at the level of the state are even more irrelevant than they were in an earlier pluralist world, as irrelevant as the nation-state itself.

 

Such a manifesto would seem to imply that there is no effective possibility of opposition. The diffusion of power in capitalism has, to be sure, always presented a problem for oppositional forces. It has never been as easy to trace the class power of capital to a visible source as it was in pre-capitalist societies, where the capacity of economic exploitation rested on ‘extra-economic’ political and military powers. In capitalism, not only are the ‘economic’ and the ‘political’ separated, but the impersonal forces of ‘the market’ do much of capital’s work. Nonetheless, as long as there was some identity between national states and national economies, struggles against capital could be directed not only against specific employers ‘at the point of production’ but also against the capitalist class at a point of concentration in the state.

[And now – post-World Social Forum… post-‘Occupy’… – we see ‘power’ trying to hide… no longer in ‘strong’ industries… or ‘strong’ states… but in ‘strong’ individuals… ‘talent’ that seems ‘by nature’ to have got that way (i.e., ‘strong’…) – P.S.]

It was, in fact, the essence of Marxist critiques of pluralist theories that the state did indeed constitute a point of concentration of capitalist power. But even if the state did once represent such a concentration of power and hence also a target of opposition, in today’s globalized world, we are told, such possibilities of opposition no longer exist. What good are struggles at the point of production, when capital is organized in huge, transnational corporation? What good are political struggles when the nation-state is dead?

 

If it is really true that capitalist power is now a mystical force, immanent in the world and completely disembodied [she is using the language of… and restating the argument of… the book Empire… – P.S.], everywhere and nowhere, it is the end of anti-capitalist struggle. Of course, the most sensible thing would be to embrace this ubiquitous force. But, in any case, resistance is futile. No amount of whistling in the dark about the insurrectional energies generated by globalization can change the fact that for us the game is over. The only opposition available to us is symbolic gesture and spectacle…

[Does this shoe fit… the massive protest against the inaction of the global-statesmen in the face of global warming… that we just witnessed on September 21, 2014 in New York City? (I’m writing this on September 23, 2014…) I’ve heard nothing to suggest otherwise… – P.S.]

…or the internal refusal that gives a kind of spiritual freedom to the prisoner in chains. If there really is no material point at which the power of capital can be challenged, and with all forms of political action effectively disabled, the rule of capital is complete and eternal.

[And of course recent events… from the election of Barack… to the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt… to the Occupy Movement… to Ukraine… and the massive scale and the deep… diffuse… forms of resistance occurring globally… in this moment… show otherwise… – P.S.]

This counsel of surrender would be the message of a manifesto on behalf of global capital. It is also, like it or not, the message of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s Empire. This monumental and ambitious book has been read by supporters and critics alike as a relatively optimistic manifesto for oppositional forces in the globalized world. It has been praised as an eloquent voice for anti-capitalist movements. But for all its insistence on the possibilities of insurrection and the power of the ‘multitude’, it is much less persuasive as a call to opposition than as an argument for the futility of oppositional politics; and it has rather more to say abut the irrelevance of old oppositional struggles and forces than about the possibilities of new ones.

 

“In this smooth space of Empire,” Hardt and Negri tell us, “there is no place of power – it is both everywhere and nowhere. Empire is an outopia or really a non-place.” What does this mean for the possibilities of opposition? We are told – in sweeping generalities – that, precisely because the power of Empire is everywhere and nowhere, “the virtual center of Empire can be attacked from any point.” What precisely this means remains unclear. But, as the argument proceeds, it is difficult to see what kind of opposition it allows, apart from spontaneous gestures on the part of an inchoate ‘multitude’, which, instead of resisting the processes of globalization, can somehow reorganize them toward new ends – though by what means and to what effect (apart from creating new ‘subjectivities’) remains a mystery.

[For each new generation… ‘power’ but redesigns its old cons. Just as she pointed out the basic equivalency between Empire’s key message and that “of much older ‘pluralist’ arguments in political science, challenged by Marxist theories of the state way back in the 1970s…” so too can we see in this pseudo-optimism in non-resistance (“…instead of resisting the processes of globalization, [we’re supposed to] somehow reorganize them toward new ends…”) the false encouragement of pseudo-resistance of Mr. Steele (discussed in the Waking Up Radio show of July 27th, 2014… – P.S.]

We are told in rather more concrete terms what kinds of opposition are not possible. Political movements and organized working-class struggle are fruitless, especially local and national struggles (Hardt and Negri are very critical of anti-capitalist movements that focus on such struggles), because their traditional targets no longer exist. The simple fact is that, since there is no locus of power, there can be no real counter-power.

The idea of counter-power and the idea of resistance against modern sovereignty in general thus becomes less and less possible…. A new type of resistance would have to be found that would be adequate to the dimensions of the new sovereignty…. Today, too, we can see that traditional forms of resistance, such as the institutional workers’ organizations developed through the major part of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have begun to lose their power. (quote from Empire)

[It’s interesting to contrast the shrouding effect of Hardt and Negri’s false pronouncements with the invigorating effect of Terence Hopkin’s… in his examination of Marx on this same issue:

 

“True, the growing density and connectedness of world-economic networks on the one hand, and the displacement of class contradictions from the marketplace to the workplace on the other, would ultimately make nation-states “obsolete” from both points of view. In outlining this tendency, however, Marx was only defining the situation that the capitalist world-economy would asymptotically [“asymptote: a line that continually approaches a given curve but does not meet it at any finite distance. From the Greek ‘not falling together’…”] …that the capitalist world-economy would asymptotically approach in the very long run. The farther the class struggle was from the projected asymptote, the more it would take on a political / national character. Even the proletariat, the class which in his view had neither country nor nationality, had first of all to wage a national struggle.” (Terence Hopkins, “Rethinking the Concepts of Class and Status-Group in a World Systems Perspective”)

 

(Discussed in the Waking Up Radio show of September 21, 2014 – “…Even the proletariat, the class which in his view had neither country nor nationality, had first of all to wage a national struggle.…” “Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word…” – and is planned for discussion during the September 28th, 2014 show as well…) – P.S.]

And so on. For all Empire’s lofty sentiments about new forms of contestation, this will be music to the ears of global capital. We are left with a mystical force opposed, if at all, by immaterial resistance.

 

But let us at least grant that Empire has its heart in the right place. Unlike our putative manifesto for global capital, it really does intend to celebrate, not to deny, the possibilities of contestation. The trouble is that its analysis of Empire denies us any such hope, no less effectively than the globalization manifesto does, and in alarmingly similar terms.

[…a ‘manifesto’ that robs us of our hope for freedom… cannot have its ‘heart in the right place’… because it has no heart – that we can see this is not just because we have the benefit of hindsight… that we’ve seen the World Social Forums… seen ‘Occupy’ catch fire globally… tied to massive and on-going anti-privatization mobilizations… seen one-third of the population of Egypt in the streets… seen… the beginning of the fulfillment of Nikola Tesla’s prophesy: that once we can communicate instantaneously with each other globally… we can no longer be lied to about each other – as easily – and global unity becomes a goal that’s achievable… if we can ‘disarm’ the global-state-statesmen…

 

…it is the absence of Plato’s Tribesmen in one’s analysis… that limits its effectiveness – and which would… in this case… have allowed us to see the propagandistic thrust of the argument – to recognize that the result: our demoralization… was in fact… the intention – and therefore to state unequivocally… the absence of ‘heart’ of Hardt and Negri – this book did not ‘achieve’ ‘celebrity’-status by accident… – P.S.]

The problem begins with the very first premise on which the whole argument of Empire is based. “Our basic hypothesis,” write Hardt and Negri, “is that sovereignty has taken a new form, composed of a series of national and supranational organisms united under a single logic of rule. This new global form of sovereignty is what we call Empire.” Its primary symptom is “the declining sovereignty of nation-states and their increasing inability to regulate economic and cultural exchanges.” This does not mean that sovereignty has disappeared together with the nation-state. It has simply changed its character. With the growth of transnational corporations, and global networks of production and circulation, “which have undermined the powers of nation-states, state functions and constitutional elements have effectively been displaced to other levels and domains.”

 

There is, of course, an important point here – which many other commentators have also made – about the ‘internationalization’ of the state: that nation-states, like other institutions in the global system, are now responding not simply to the demands of national capital but to the ‘logic’ and requirement of global capital. Although we should not underestimate the persistence of national capital and, for that matter, the roots of transnational capital within it, this is certainly a point worth making. It does not require us to assume that the nation-state is effectively dying; and I have even heard Michael Hardt explain, in a public lecture, that globalization did not exclude the nation-state. The point, he insisted, was simply that the state was now subsumed in the logic of Empire.

 

That said, the essential argument of Empire is something else: at the very least, it requires us to accept that there is an inverse relation between the degree of globalization and the importance of the nation-state. And herein lies the problem, because surely the critical point about the ‘internationalization’ of the state is that the nation-state is useful to global capital not to the extent that it is unable> to “regulate economic and cultural exchanges.” On the contrary, it is useful precisely because it can intervene in the global economy and, indeed, remains the single most effective means of intervention. The essence of globalization is not the declining capacity but the unique ability of nation-states to organize the world for global capital. This reality, and global capital’s inescapable need for territorial states to make possible its navigation of the world economy, is lost in the argument of Empire.

 

The book even seems indifferent to the coercive power concentrated in the state. That indifference is reflected in a conception of ‘sovereignty’ that allows Hardt and Negri to speak of the transfer of sovereign power away from the state, even though (a point on which Empire remains silent) it remains the dominant instrument of coercive force.

 

The first premise of Empire’s argument, then, is that the movements of sovereignty are parallel and conjoined with the movements of the economy, the networks of production and circulation. Give or take the odd time-lag or failure of synchronization, the two go hand-in-hand, so that the more global the economy becomes, the more global, too, will be the reach of sovereignty.

 

This account of the connection between the economic and political moments of capitalism displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how the system works. The consequence of this misunderstanding is that Empire never confronts the realities of power or the possibilities of ‘counter-power’ in the world of global capitalism. This, in fact, is the most striking characteristic of the book: that, while purporting to be a study of power in the new world of global capitalism, its argument depends on evading the issue of power.

 

–––

 

Economic hegemony and political sovereignty

 

Capitalism is distinctive among all social forms in its capacity to extend its dominion beyond the limits of political authority, by purely ‘economic’ means….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

–––

 

* “TBA, 2014 Show …”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[From Jean-Leon Gerome’s The Slave Market, (early 1860s)]

 

(During the May 18, 2014 show, we finally remembered to add Alice Miller and Jeremy Bentham to the “puzzle pieces” we needed to see what ‘power’s plans are… and in the May 25, 2014 show we remembered John Boswell… for his The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe: From Late Antiquity To The Renaissance….)

 

–––

 

* “TBA, 2014 Show …”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[From John Boswell’s The Kindness of Strangers: The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe From Late Antiquity To The Renaissance]

 

(During the May 18, 2014 show, we finally remembered to add Alice Miller and Jeremy Bentham to the “puzzle pieces” we needed to see what ‘power’s plans are… and in the May 25, 2014 show we remembered John Boswell… for his The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe: From Late Antiquity To The Renaissance….)

 

–––

 

* “TBA, 2014 Show …”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Francisco Goya’s Third of May, (1808)]

 

 

–––

 

–––

 

 

 

Thandiwe's Word:

ithedawn@gmail.com

...on the challenge of beginning to create the alternative:

 

“The imagination has to be stimulated – that imaginative part of ourselves that manifests our dreams, through that fire, that passion, that is our art. Asking questions stimulates that process of figuring out, visualizing, and manifesting what we want. But we need each other's help in order to do that – to manifest our power – and we've been cut off from helping each other.”

 

 

 

© Nas2EndWork (the NEW)

http://www.nas2endwork.org