I want to share with you this deep and far-ranging conversation I had with Indy Rishi Singh for a podcast called Political Hope. (Spotify, Apple). We could sure use some hope right now, at a time of vicious partisanship, entrenched power structures, intensifying paralysis, and political deadlock.
Hmmmmm.....me thinks you're describing a democratic republic of decentralized power like that conceived of by the framers of - now what was that document??? - oh, yes! That pesky Constitution of the United States
Yes, in most cases, nearly any random citizen would be an improvement for most government offices. It should be like national service and ideally go to those who have zero interest in power.
I've often thought a rotation of citizens, (some would be granted exceptions as needed) instead of elections would be far preferable. With clear limits on time served. It would certainly group citizenship to service across the board and require we know what's going on, since we could soon be serving. Is this possible? Sure - but much has to come down first.
How about the example of the J-6th protesters? Because the media and establishment were both against their cause, they are set up by federal agents who let them in and painted as insurrectionists by the media. Now many are in jail in solitary confinement without basic human rights like personal grooming, medicine, food that won't kill them (for celiacs), clean water. Kept for months in solidarity without charges, they are then given court appointed lawyers who don't see them before trial and work with the opposition to prosecute them. One prisoner was beaten so badly by guards (who invoked his race at the time) that he lost an eye. Some prisoners are losing a great deal of weight as they are not allowed to buy additional food. One committed suicide. These are people without criminal histories who were employees and business owners before the eff bee eye decided to destroy them. If this is what happens to protesters in the US, democracy is DEAD.
Looks good. Like democracy may be something that cannot be instituted. My mentor said it may be messy but we'll learn a lot. Looks like your article provides a lot of examples. I do want civility and the greater good as values. My preference. Not a fan of domination. What if we saw democracy as a living mutual endeavor...for the greatest good not the few? We actually are not a democracy. A republic. Not a fan of representatives of wealth. Many thanks. Participatory. Engagement. Good will.
Governments need to be far more transparent and the media needs to learn how to be proper journalists and cover stories with no bias. Imagine if trump had become dottery like Biden is, the media were very hard on trump and he could take it, Biden can’t even work out what he’s doing on stage half the time, yet only a few outlets mention it, mostly in other countries.
How can we make informed decisions about anything when the media is just a government puppet pushing propaganda.
We do not need a democratic government. We need a DISCERNING one. That means that everyone is humble enough to admit that we don't know how to solve the enormous and complex problems we are facing but that the Invisible Forces that brought us this far will see us through, just as in the past. This takes letting go of our own agendas, getting quiet, listening deeply to the "other," in trust that we are all in this together and only together will we come through. Eventually, with this "Spirit of poverty/unknowing" in conversation with one another we will begin to see not necessarily the solution but the next step in the right direction. There truly are invisible forces at work for our good.
I really liked this interview. The metaphor of our usual way of doing politics as being like algebraic operations when our desired end-state is like a transcendental number certainly resonates.
Regarding many of the other points raised in the interview, I think much of it can be related to an observation I came across once which is that "A healthy peasant class (i.e. a class of mainly small and mid-scale subsistence farmers) is the greatest protection against social disease and against the unhealthy dominance of industry and commerce over society." Presumably this is because: 1. That class exists largely outside the economy, 2. Not being especially wealthy themselves, that class is more likely to ally with the urban working class than with the urban capitalist class when push comes to shove, and 3. If the urban working class feels the need to protest, that class can provide them the support to do so out of their abundance, whether it means offering food, space, time, or whatever is necessary.
In the US, somehow or another this mutually supportive relationship between rural communities and urban communities seems to be almost entirely absent, perhaps because the US doesn't have much of a peasant class to speak of. (If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.) Instead, agriculture tends to be quite centralized and most farmers grow food for a profit rather than for subsistence, so we get a situation where (between this and a lot of propaganda/racism/etc) the rural communities feel more sympathy with and tend to support the urban capitalist class over the urban working class, which causes the "social diseases" of capitalism to spread unchecked instead of being contained.
I don't know what the solution to this would be. Seizing land and redistributing it to those who would use it for substence rather than for profit is certainly one approach (to establish a new and robust peasant class), but I don't see it happening very easily now that we're already in such a mess. So what else could be done? So much of the injustice in the US I would say carries on unrectified because there is so little culture of mutual support at no cost. Little things like hitchhiking, which is still popular in many countries, or being able to camp on private land so long as you are away from private residences and leave no trace, as in Sweden. Without these things in America, once the poor find themselves under someone's boot, they have little means of fighting back. They can't risk large-scale strikes or boycotts or even the time and resources required to organize. So the situation just keeps getting worse for them. And, of course, then when the capitalists/capitalist-run government come for the rural communities, there is no one available to defend them either because those who would find themselves powerless.
One of the issues we have in the West is that none of the 'leaders' function as champions of the people. They're managers, intended to keep us just docile and confused and apathetic enough to avoid dislodging the parasite class.
Mass movements are one strategy for pushing back when things get egregious, but they have their limitations. They only trigger when conditions get really bad; otherwise, the pathocrats just carry on doing their thing. They're inherently disorganized. They're also fairly easily crushed: see the yellow vests, the Canadian truckers, or Occupy. They take a lot of energy, involve a lot of disruption, and only sort of work sometimes. I'm sure Modi or his successor will try the same thing in a few years under a different name, with better public relations, and perhaps moving piecemeal rather than all at once in order to diffuse opposition.
Traditionally, societies have been organized with a chieftain or king, who acts as a rallying point, and keeps the peace between the peasants and the nobility by acting as the champion of the former. Perhaps our problem is that we don't have that.
I look at politics as the people deciding on policies within groups small enough for the consequences of their decisions to come back around. Electoral (or even by-lottery) representation is 'personalitics'. We think that someone else should take responsibility for thinking about what we should do. In small enough groups, we can learn from our mistakes and government can just be the functionaries carrying out our decisions.
I've changed my mind so much about energy since realizing how the green agenda is being used by the WEF. Germany is in real trouble with oil and gas cut off, 3/6 nuclear plants shut down (with the others slated at the end of 2022) and even hydro from Sweden and Finland slowed to a trickle. They're telling them to gather wood from the forests, while wood burning stoves and cut wood is gone.
So while Modi has Operation Green Hunt to get everyone off the land so they don't interfere with mining concessions, I've begun to wonder if indigenous protests against mining are being allowed to succeed. Cynthia Chung has a very good article looking at this as part of a depopulation effort. It's worth checking out:
In case it hasn't fell on your radar, Of By For is a non-profit advocating for exactly what you mentioned: democracy by lottery. I recently watched their documentary (in tears at the beauty), which is soon to be released, about a citizen's panel on covid in Michigan. Beautiful to withness the beauty of human nature when given the right context: people universes apart truly listening to each other.
Sounds profound as always Charles - but maybe democracy or at least the word democracy has passed its due date. You are a great wordsmith- can you call your new understanding of democracy something different??
I have always thought a lottery system like they choose the jury in a court case. We send ordinary citizens to made decisions at all levels- municipal, provincial and federal. They set the course and have very smart researchers do the work of figuring how to implement. This precludes that we have adjusted the money system to work equally well for all, which might mean just completely change the value system like Captain Kirk said, on Earth we no longer use money, we want people, individuals to be the best they can be. (paraphrase).
"A truly democratic future cannot rely on incorporating democracy into systems and institutions of governance. These always become anti-democratic."
I like to distinguish between governMENT and goverNANCE. Government is what happens within the constraints imposed by the state (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity) Governance can refer to any group of people who voluntarily self-assemble to regulate their own affairs using, ideally, democratic means of doing so. Of course, democracy does not imply majority rule.
GoverNANCE itself need not become anti-democratic. It is goverMENT which tends always to become anti-democratic.
" Maybe democracy resides in unofficial, informal civic structures, extra-legal vernacular institutions, and place-based communities."
Yes. This is what we need. I follow Russell Brand and this is what he is saying, too. How do we convince others?
Hmmmmm.....me thinks you're describing a democratic republic of decentralized power like that conceived of by the framers of - now what was that document??? - oh, yes! That pesky Constitution of the United States
Yes, in most cases, nearly any random citizen would be an improvement for most government offices. It should be like national service and ideally go to those who have zero interest in power.
I've often thought a rotation of citizens, (some would be granted exceptions as needed) instead of elections would be far preferable. With clear limits on time served. It would certainly group citizenship to service across the board and require we know what's going on, since we could soon be serving. Is this possible? Sure - but much has to come down first.
How about the example of the J-6th protesters? Because the media and establishment were both against their cause, they are set up by federal agents who let them in and painted as insurrectionists by the media. Now many are in jail in solitary confinement without basic human rights like personal grooming, medicine, food that won't kill them (for celiacs), clean water. Kept for months in solidarity without charges, they are then given court appointed lawyers who don't see them before trial and work with the opposition to prosecute them. One prisoner was beaten so badly by guards (who invoked his race at the time) that he lost an eye. Some prisoners are losing a great deal of weight as they are not allowed to buy additional food. One committed suicide. These are people without criminal histories who were employees and business owners before the eff bee eye decided to destroy them. If this is what happens to protesters in the US, democracy is DEAD.
Looks good. Like democracy may be something that cannot be instituted. My mentor said it may be messy but we'll learn a lot. Looks like your article provides a lot of examples. I do want civility and the greater good as values. My preference. Not a fan of domination. What if we saw democracy as a living mutual endeavor...for the greatest good not the few? We actually are not a democracy. A republic. Not a fan of representatives of wealth. Many thanks. Participatory. Engagement. Good will.
Governments need to be far more transparent and the media needs to learn how to be proper journalists and cover stories with no bias. Imagine if trump had become dottery like Biden is, the media were very hard on trump and he could take it, Biden can’t even work out what he’s doing on stage half the time, yet only a few outlets mention it, mostly in other countries.
How can we make informed decisions about anything when the media is just a government puppet pushing propaganda.
We do not need a democratic government. We need a DISCERNING one. That means that everyone is humble enough to admit that we don't know how to solve the enormous and complex problems we are facing but that the Invisible Forces that brought us this far will see us through, just as in the past. This takes letting go of our own agendas, getting quiet, listening deeply to the "other," in trust that we are all in this together and only together will we come through. Eventually, with this "Spirit of poverty/unknowing" in conversation with one another we will begin to see not necessarily the solution but the next step in the right direction. There truly are invisible forces at work for our good.
I really liked this interview. The metaphor of our usual way of doing politics as being like algebraic operations when our desired end-state is like a transcendental number certainly resonates.
Regarding many of the other points raised in the interview, I think much of it can be related to an observation I came across once which is that "A healthy peasant class (i.e. a class of mainly small and mid-scale subsistence farmers) is the greatest protection against social disease and against the unhealthy dominance of industry and commerce over society." Presumably this is because: 1. That class exists largely outside the economy, 2. Not being especially wealthy themselves, that class is more likely to ally with the urban working class than with the urban capitalist class when push comes to shove, and 3. If the urban working class feels the need to protest, that class can provide them the support to do so out of their abundance, whether it means offering food, space, time, or whatever is necessary.
In the US, somehow or another this mutually supportive relationship between rural communities and urban communities seems to be almost entirely absent, perhaps because the US doesn't have much of a peasant class to speak of. (If I'm wrong, someone please correct me.) Instead, agriculture tends to be quite centralized and most farmers grow food for a profit rather than for subsistence, so we get a situation where (between this and a lot of propaganda/racism/etc) the rural communities feel more sympathy with and tend to support the urban capitalist class over the urban working class, which causes the "social diseases" of capitalism to spread unchecked instead of being contained.
I don't know what the solution to this would be. Seizing land and redistributing it to those who would use it for substence rather than for profit is certainly one approach (to establish a new and robust peasant class), but I don't see it happening very easily now that we're already in such a mess. So what else could be done? So much of the injustice in the US I would say carries on unrectified because there is so little culture of mutual support at no cost. Little things like hitchhiking, which is still popular in many countries, or being able to camp on private land so long as you are away from private residences and leave no trace, as in Sweden. Without these things in America, once the poor find themselves under someone's boot, they have little means of fighting back. They can't risk large-scale strikes or boycotts or even the time and resources required to organize. So the situation just keeps getting worse for them. And, of course, then when the capitalists/capitalist-run government come for the rural communities, there is no one available to defend them either because those who would find themselves powerless.
One of the issues we have in the West is that none of the 'leaders' function as champions of the people. They're managers, intended to keep us just docile and confused and apathetic enough to avoid dislodging the parasite class.
Mass movements are one strategy for pushing back when things get egregious, but they have their limitations. They only trigger when conditions get really bad; otherwise, the pathocrats just carry on doing their thing. They're inherently disorganized. They're also fairly easily crushed: see the yellow vests, the Canadian truckers, or Occupy. They take a lot of energy, involve a lot of disruption, and only sort of work sometimes. I'm sure Modi or his successor will try the same thing in a few years under a different name, with better public relations, and perhaps moving piecemeal rather than all at once in order to diffuse opposition.
Traditionally, societies have been organized with a chieftain or king, who acts as a rallying point, and keeps the peace between the peasants and the nobility by acting as the champion of the former. Perhaps our problem is that we don't have that.
YES! "Maybe democracy is less about the nature of government than it is about the ungovernability of the people."
As an archetypal astrologer, this so resonates with the image of a coming "Aquarian Age." Thank you for this, Charles.
I look at politics as the people deciding on policies within groups small enough for the consequences of their decisions to come back around. Electoral (or even by-lottery) representation is 'personalitics'. We think that someone else should take responsibility for thinking about what we should do. In small enough groups, we can learn from our mistakes and government can just be the functionaries carrying out our decisions.
I've changed my mind so much about energy since realizing how the green agenda is being used by the WEF. Germany is in real trouble with oil and gas cut off, 3/6 nuclear plants shut down (with the others slated at the end of 2022) and even hydro from Sweden and Finland slowed to a trickle. They're telling them to gather wood from the forests, while wood burning stoves and cut wood is gone.
So while Modi has Operation Green Hunt to get everyone off the land so they don't interfere with mining concessions, I've begun to wonder if indigenous protests against mining are being allowed to succeed. Cynthia Chung has a very good article looking at this as part of a depopulation effort. It's worth checking out:
https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-eus-fit-for-55-farm-to-fork-and-0ff
Dear Charles (and fellow readers). Please have a look at https://joinofbyfor.org/
In case it hasn't fell on your radar, Of By For is a non-profit advocating for exactly what you mentioned: democracy by lottery. I recently watched their documentary (in tears at the beauty), which is soon to be released, about a citizen's panel on covid in Michigan. Beautiful to withness the beauty of human nature when given the right context: people universes apart truly listening to each other.
Sounds profound as always Charles - but maybe democracy or at least the word democracy has passed its due date. You are a great wordsmith- can you call your new understanding of democracy something different??
I have always thought a lottery system like they choose the jury in a court case. We send ordinary citizens to made decisions at all levels- municipal, provincial and federal. They set the course and have very smart researchers do the work of figuring how to implement. This precludes that we have adjusted the money system to work equally well for all, which might mean just completely change the value system like Captain Kirk said, on Earth we no longer use money, we want people, individuals to be the best they can be. (paraphrase).
"A truly democratic future cannot rely on incorporating democracy into systems and institutions of governance. These always become anti-democratic."
I like to distinguish between governMENT and goverNANCE. Government is what happens within the constraints imposed by the state (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity) Governance can refer to any group of people who voluntarily self-assemble to regulate their own affairs using, ideally, democratic means of doing so. Of course, democracy does not imply majority rule.
GoverNANCE itself need not become anti-democratic. It is goverMENT which tends always to become anti-democratic.
Sometimes the best thing to do with governments is to just ignore them and go on doing what we want to do in our neighborhoods. See: https://rword.substack.com/p/can-a-leopard-change-its-spots