DaremythSyd

Mesaje blog cu tag-ul 'tyranny':

• The Need for Power as Derived from Human Nature and the Soci

  Introduction
  
  The governmental machinery is subordinated to the will of those that administrate it. Individuals, not commercial organizations or hierarchies ensure the progress of civilizations. Each great civilization depends on the quality of the individuals it produces. Any association, corporation, and so on, if it does not directly or indirectly strive to gain power it chases chimeras. The terms, ‘power’, and ‘domination’, can be looked upon both through a complex analytical point of view attempting to define as accurate as possible their various meanings beginning with their etymology and ending with the complex dimensions the concepts my gain, but also the concepts can be analyzed in a more obvious and simplistic manner, under Cicero’s concept: “Anything well thought is expressed simply”. I will attempt to illustrate an idea without falling in complicate debate stretching out into epistemology.
  The terms ‘power’ and ‘domination’ are linked, because from the basic social order, the family, and towards superior international organizations, power and domination are the elements which shape and define the infrastructure of world order. In the given paper I will attempt to underline the fact that power and domination are elements rooted in human nature, by this denying the concept that human nature is zoon politikon, but selfish and rational, a ‘versus’ situation between Aristotle’s concept and Nozick’s, a ‘versus’ situation between contractualist concepts.
  
  Human Nature
  
  From an anthropological point of view, the basic social order, that of the family, is the result of necessity, the need for procreation and the evolution of the social order is the direct result of the necessity for protection. The future development redirects the weight of the balance from the need for protection towards need itself, any sensible thought can understand that growing human associations develop higher necessities. Therefore, the direct desire to satisfy various necessities push the individual to build better social orders. His basic needs become symbiotically linked with the need for a society. Let me make something clear. Any social contract was signed to escape from the state of nature, whatever the reasons, be them safety from violence (Hobbes), private property (J. Locke), and so on. By this, one can simply understand that it was the selfish need that determined man to build society, and he did it because a society is the sensible way to achieve all his necessities as fast as possible. The individual is selfish and sensible and the only moment when he is unjust is within the society because he will attempt to gain the power by which he can dominate and satisfy his necessities. Power is the byproduct of human nature, of selfishness, reason and sociability. No individual is good. An individual is good because he finds himself in no situation where he can act singularly on his selfish need . Self preservation is a good example: when attempting to save someone from drowning, the savior must render the victim unconscious for at the moment when it will get grip of anything it will strive to climb up, no matter the consequences. Injustice brought by power is socially developed. Righteousness is innate, be it because it is spawned by reason, as Kant would say or born out of love for one’s self, as Rousseau would state, the individual cannot be unfair with himself, therefore, unfairness is born within society. But righteousness is not good or bad, the concept is larger than that which is good.
  Therefore, man is selfish, than sensible , the characteristic of human nature as being zoon politikon is determined by the previous two. Tyranny is not good or bad, moral or immoral, it is unjust, and one can accuse a tyrant of acting within the virtue of being human.
  
  Anarchy vs. Order
  
  From this point of view we can extrapolate and determine that anarchy is fairer than order. All individual strive to achieve, by nature, satisfaction of all necessities trying therefore to gain the power to do some, implicitly dominating the means. Hypothetically thinking, when two parties are in conflict, both equal in strength and both being right in an equal proportion, and presuming that there is no peaceful way to solve the conflict, in order to restore order, which is preferable, a third party must change the balance, it must pick a side and conquer the other. Though order is restored, which is better (lack of conflict, stopping bloodshed, saving resources, etc), on side has suffered a direct injustice. Anarchy would have been fairer, yet order is better. On these grounds, we can understand that society is built on avoiding conflict, and today, the best way to do so, and to strive to achieve power, the current state of affairs is better than any of the last; as Churchill stated: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried”
  
  The Existential Ataraxia
  .
  In the world today, power may be achieved in more ways than ever, yet domination only subtly.
  Legitimacy is the main ingredient for domination. Power must be legitimate in order to be accepted. Legitimacy shapes and evolves with society, from divine right to the rule of law. Legitimacy is the reason to accept domination because it is a direct link to a higher power be it that the higher power is law or God, legitimacy can be fear for some, or the sensible reason for which one must not oppose. Our civilization is close to be built upon perpetual weakness. Any people are easy to govern when they have little to see beyond that which the dominant force offers. By dissolving the factors which can determine individuals to be daring, limiting the exercise of free thought and by this free will, appetites become equal and tamed, horizons become narrow and easily achievable, a law for each movement, power is secured. It is like a maze with doors where the rat is free to move at its leisure, yet its apparent free will is guided by the opened and closed doors. But this isn’t at all something determined by higher forces, just indulged. Lack of conflict gives birth to a sort of existential ataraxia. People are satisfied and, as Mark Steyn states at the beginning of his book: “America Alone”, people show their virtues by feeling good for feeling bad: “Do you worry? You look like you do. Worrying is the way the responsible citizen of an advanced society demonstrates his virtue: he feels good about feeling bad”.
  
  The Balance Between Personal Morality and Public Morality
  
  The best way to achieve uncontested power and domination is to make sure that no one contests it. The rules are set and society has so advanced that any type of revolutionary thought is at least pointless.
  Of course, this is not a case of things being good, bad, better or worst. People are free enough; in fact that is the reason for apathy and nihilism, and perhaps, that is the natural way of things.
  What I am trying to underline is that there is virtue in gaining power and domination. Individuals can be classified and categorized, to a certain extent - because man is an unknown variable in the existential equation – in conformity with their necessities and aspirations, and these two elements are developed by perception of themselves and the surrounding world and perception which is the factor that opens or closes horizons is developed by knowledge, understanding, wisdom and Kant’s autonomous will. Higher knowledge offers an understanding of the possibilities and they are all bind together by the will to do, within the parameters set by the current social order.
  
  Conclusion
  
  The need for power is determined by human nature, because with power, man can satisfy necessities. The development of society created the need for domination in order to uphold power. The evolution of society created a complex system of ways in which power and domination can be achieved, but (maybe from a superficial point of view), the basis for both power and domination stand just the same. The many types of authority and legitimacy all lead to the same result, a twisted utilitarian way in which as many as possible can have power and exercise it in the sphere of influence dictated by the possibilities granted by the balance between personal aspiration and the parameters set by the social order. Obtaining power, therefore, is achieved with a compromise between the individual aspiration and the social parameters.

  • 6 decembrie 2008
  • 0 comentarii
  • nici o evaluare