Friday, October 10, 2008
The Source of Social Illness
Before we go further, as in any scientific analysis, we are obligated to define our terminology so that we all understand and are certain what we are referring to:
With the term social illness we mean the social condition in which out of all the social groups within a society only one or two prosper, typically in a minority/ minute percentage of the whole, amassing a huge surplus of energy and money while the crushing majority of that society subsists or even expires due to assorted hardships on a material and psychological level.
With the term outbreak we mean the direct and speedy exacerbation of social illness to the point that social development is fully suspended.
With the term social development we mean the progressive course of all the groups in a society so that the average level of living, education, free time, medical care and freedom is systematically improved both in quantity and in quality. The product of social development is always the enrichment of philosophy, culture and additional pathways for the evolution of Humans from the basic, lower levels of existence to the higher ones which go beyond consumerism, materialism and the ascription of high social standing to objects.
Whenever there is social illness, social development is reduced depending on the level of infection/ affliction of society. In cases of outbreak, we have the suspension of social development and very often backtracking. Sociologically, modern society begins with the organization of politics and production in more or less the guidelines existing today. This, depending on the region, can be places since the 18th century and onwards at least. Since then and until today there has been noted periodically great social development (enlightenments, philosophical movements, existential theories, psychological and sociological programs, political and cultural movements, etc) which is abruptly stopped or even cancelled out from outbreaks of social illness (such as the industrial revolution and the social illness it incurred, the creation of economic science, the creation of checking mechanisms using blackmail or torture, the creation of mechanisms of categorization on a mass level, etc).
Many times we see tangible proof of this backsliding when we ‘re-discover’ situation, theories, philosophies, solutions and scientific methodologies/ answers which had already been discovered in earlier eras and due to social illness had been eradicated to a great level, forcing society to re-research and re-conquer that which society already was aware of before the outbreak (e.g. the concept of syndicalism and social equality were re-discovered many times during the course of history since antiquity until now, with such examples as the slaves’ syndicalism with Spartacus at the helm, the medieval craft unions in Europe, the syndicalism of the slaves in the USA, the syndicalism of women primarily with the suffragettes and afterwards with the feminists, etc). This means that due to the social illness from which society does not seem to ever be rid, society is forced to stagnate, battling for the same issue constantly and never securing it, in a form of ‘one step forward, two steps back’.
So, what is the source of social illness and why doesn’t it seem to be ever cured, just periodically go in remission?
Following the logic of the babushkas we have been in these articles, society is nothing more than the sum of the influences and actions of the people comprising it. An illness is because of either environmental factors causing the affliction, or to internal factors bringing about the same. If the factors were environments then with the change in the environment the illness should be eradicated or be differentiated.
In the case of society we can say with assurance that the factors are not environmental because in all the historical periods we have exactly the same symptoms with exactly the same behavior of society (i.e., the stagnation forcing society to oscillate and not develop). In another of our articles we will mention and analyze the truth of the matter for every historic period even before the sociological boundaries of the existence of modernity.
That means that the source of social illness, since it is not environmental, is internal. Therefore, just like in every organism, a part of society causes toxicity suspending the healthy development as we have mentioned above. Most philosophical and political/ sociological theories agree on this point and differentiate on the social group within society they hold responsible for this condition.
In essence, all theories built in the proper scientific methodology have grasped part of the truth and therefore are not wrong (from fundamentalism to Marxism to person-centered liberal social theories). But if we try to pick one as the only truth and reject all the rest it is certain that we will err and fail. Since all the theories are not wrong but non is by itself able to correctly justify everything, in order to be able to reach the answer we are looking for (i.e. the reason for social illness) we must take them all into account in order to compose the complex, multifaceted image of society, as multifaceted as humans themselves.
Each of the theories incriminates a different social class/ social group/ social phenomenon. That means not that one is wrong but that the incriminating element exists in all of society, that is in all the social classes and groups. If this is correct, which facts indicate it is since historically we see the same symptoms in all social groups even if they are isolated within society, then we will have to look for the source of social illness not in society’s organization but in its members.
The members of society are of course people, and we will see here how the smallest babushka is the one responsible for and affecting the biggest one, either positively or negatively. When we say smallest babushka we mean each individual wherever he/she is regarding social class, and when we say the biggest babushka we mean all of society which we have been analyzing up to now. That is, smallest babushka is the homeless person, the doctor living in suburb so-and-so, the ship owner owning an island and the emperor owning palaces in different conquered cities besides his/her basic one. A big babushka is the social group of all the homeless, all the doctors, all the ship owners and all the emperors/kings. It is a big babushka (bigger than the smallest) because all the ship owners together impose (theoretically) on one ship owner a way of life and a way of using/ handling his/her resources. That holds for all the individuals without exception, and that is why even the most ‘powerful’ man is a another smallest babushka which can at any moment be swept away by the immediate bigger social group it belongs to. (e.g. the Austro-Hungarian empress Elizabeth and her son Rudolf before her were murdered with the support of their social group, which was the nobility and other kids, because they were following a more liberal policy than what their social group wanted. The same happened with king Alexander of Greece who was murdered for the same reasons of going against his social group which was comprised by the high profile politicians/ plutocrats of the era and with the last nuclear czar family of Russia Romanov which broke several taboos and threatened with a tendency towards liberalism which was stifled by the rest of the members of this social group, such as the wider Romanov family and other nobles)
What can we therefore conclude based on the above regarding social illness and its source?
That which we can conclude since there are the same symptoms of imposition and persecution in all without exception the social groups in between their individuals, the social illness is not because of something nameless but because of a very specific type of person who acts in the same way regardless if he/she is very rich or a beggar.
Which are the parameters characterizing immediately the individual whose behavior maintains and aggravates the social illness?
It is important to understand that these people are not defective by birth or genetically different than the rest. They are individuals who have been schooled or are being schooled as we have described in previous articles: to seek the creation of Free Bondsmen because they have been saturated with the conviction that they are completely incompetent and weak and can’t survive on their own force, skills, intelligence, status and value and therefore they must convince all the rest of being inferior. If they manage that, the people responsible for the social illness feel that the actually strong and valuable will be blind/ weak because of insecurity and they will prefer to maintain the individuals-carriers of the illness instead of expelling them. We have described the entire exact procedure and motive behind it in our initial articles regarding Free Bondsmen and up to the article on the Shadow Puppet Theatre.
In essence, no matter which social system/ regime we try to apply, it will fail to eradicate the social illness if there are no defense mechanisms isolating and marginalizing these individuals-carriers of the illness with an end of expelling them. That would happen because in all the social systems/ regimes these individuals-carriers of the illness would try at all costs to twist the social rules in each system/regime so that they would impose the exact same condition: their maintenance and demand of their being worshipped/ satisfied in their insatiable demands by the rest of the social group. (This is very evident in all the social systems from kingship to communism where in record time the basic condition was crystallized into having a tiny group oppressing financially and politically/existentially the huge group of the rest of the people, simply changing the terminology and rank titles from system to system).
This behavior by these individuals is possible to change if we catch them in time and reverse the upbringing which has been done. These individuals are everywhere and serve as defense mechanism and resistance to the interest of the most obvious social criminals such as e.g. a dictator, a feudal lord or a big capital holder / owner of a multinational corporation. They are the individuals who will support the illing condition when all the rest are fighting to reverse it. That is why these individuals are highly dangerous and must be identified and kept at bay at all times or subject them to treatment (if they so wish it), because they are highly contagious and subversive with regard to social health (which includes family health, professional health as well as personal health). These individuals have some general/ universal behavioral patterns which we can keep in mind so we can diagnose them accurately, regardless of their education, cultivation, age and status:
1. these individuals find it fun or funny to deliberately humiliate the other person.
2. these individuals take pleasure in embarrassing the other person.
3. these individuals only act out behaviors 1 & 2 when they are certain the target is weaker than them or have guarantee that the target, though stronger than them, will not go against them/ react.
4. these individuals are indifferent to or take pleasure in/ get satisfaction in/ feel safe when/ they witness pain/ distress/ suffering/ psychololgical violence that either they cause or a third party does (animal, human, social group).
5. these individuals cannot ever allow third parties not to include them in situations/ acts/ successes/ profits/ gain despite the fact they are not entitled to it.
6. these individuals do not ever produce work unless they are rewarded with multiples of the worth of what work they produced and which often has been embezzled/ gotten from third parties.
7. these individuals never help, even when they are paid to give this help except when they are made to do it and even then they do the absolute minimum.
8. these individuals have no problem/ moral boundary and they are willing to do anything provided they are guaranteed immunity and secrecy.
9. these individuals systematically and at every moment they can to daily belittle and demean everyone around them with direct and indirect ways, from the indirect accusation that everyone around them is dumb and/or weak/ugly/ unwanted/ useless up to the official ‘diagnosis’ condemning people to the above categories if these individuals are ‘scientists’ or ‘professionals’ or ‘politicians’.
10. In order to impose themselves, these individuals gather around them an assortment of followers and bodyguards of all shapes and sizes, gather as many status symbols as they can and which matter to their own social group and/or all of the social groups, and demean everything that matches and which others have, camouflaging their own lack of worth/ skill/ power/ intelligence behind this parapet of jewelry, cars, houses/ property, a crowd of subordinates, servants and followers.
These individuals displaying the above symptoms are high risk for our selves, and our family members who are not displaying these symptoms and consequently for the social illness which causes all these phenomena of decay, from social crisis to assorted wars.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Home Economics
Where the ancient Greeks right to believe this for a home maker who busied himself with his own affairs and ‘did not meddle’?
Of course they were right. This man who was not taking the time to check on and ensure that every aspect of the administration of the state was going well, and all the actions taken were to the interest and not the exploitation of the Demos/People did not comprehend the very simple fact that his own private affairs would be negatively influenced since he would have left to their own fate the public ones, such as organization/taxation of the Demos and the foreign policy with other Demoi.
This person already was and is in every Democracy a liability and inhibition, as well as the back door through which all the elements causing corruption, corrosion, impoverishment and personal decline financially enter.
Yes, but for this reason I elect representatives who will defend my interests and those of my Demos/State so that I can see to my own affairs and not occupy myself with other things.
Anyone who has ever hired household help to clean and generally maintain the house, leaves his/her home leaving the help inside without supervision, and upon return finds out that the household help stole the mistress’ jewelry, the cash and stocks of the master and all the electronic appliances of the children, instead of receiving sympathy from the neighbours for what befell him/her, he/she will probably be asked the rhetorical question ‘and where were you to supervise?’, accompanied with smirking behind his/her back.
That is to say, any employee we hire to help out requires close and continuous supervision as well as guidance and surveillance. Otherwise, it is mathematically certain that the employee will inadvertedly oversee, neglect or badly fulfill his/her duties and in the worst case, the employee will embezzle, abuse and even steal all of the business from his/her rightful employer.
Therefore, given that we choose the representatives who are going to serve the work of maintaining and improving the state which equals to maintaining and improving the quality of life of all without exception citizens comprising it (minister = ypourgos in greek, which means one who assumes the duty, and Democracy = demos + krato, which means that the People has the Power of State), we are obliged and we need to supervise and check that all works correctly and towards our interests so that we won’t become victims of embezzlement and theft of our power, fortunes and lives.
Yes, but how can I know how to check upon all these people who have special knowledge and experience in politics and I will probably mess it all up?
If it were true that to run a state, internally and externally, special knowledge is required which you need to study, then a regime based on the People would never be able to yield results or even have a specific shape and targets. That is to say, in order to run a state you need common logic, assertiveness, specific targets and simplicity in the methods employed to achieve these targets. The ancients whom we so admire for the creation and work of democracy, only demanded one thing as requirement from the citizen in order to consider him able to lead the state and in general to have valid opinion: age. They demanded, that is, from the individual to have lived enough so that experience is amassed from which consists the knowledge of life (to have worked, to have faced business and financial matters and to have acquired the views needed to avoid dangerous conditions that he has in the past faced).
So, each citizen who has managed to maintain a household through all the hardships of every day life is fully equipped with all the knowledge required to be able successfully tidy up any state and maintain it. If, in addition to that, he/she has managed to raise back up on his/her feet after disasters of all kinds, financial dead ends and unforeseen events within and outside his/her family, then this person is a highly qualified person for the position of leader of the state and should be in high demand just like one who has a Ph.D. from Harvard.
Ok, what about the ones leading/ruling now? Don’t they fulfill these requirements?
No, they don’t. People like K. Karamanlis, G. Papandreou (and his father and grandfather), K. Simitis, K. Mitsotakis and his family do not fulfill these requirements as they are products of dynasties sustained and destining their offspring to ‘rule’ and not to work, exactly like the dynasties of kings and the aristocratic classes of Dukes and Princes in any totalitarian regime.
If we analyze the CVs of all these people, we will see that any work they mention is short lived and hard to check whether the position they held (in universities, in committees, multinational corporations, banks, etc) was acquired thanks to their skills and abilities and not thanks to their names, as these positions are not open equally to everyone as skilled but ‘anonymous’ professionals, and all of the positions are positions of status (either towards students or towards other employees being managed).
This sort of work does not prove survival potential of these individuals within modern society if deprived of their ‘safety net’ of their surname. It also does not even prove their capacity to use the occasional skills they have since they are not actually left with the responsibility of the enterprise in which they worked, so that we can check and see if they’d cause it to go bankrupt or not.
On the contrary, they have beyond doubt shown that even economics specialists have failed to balance the state’s income and expenses, something that women holding the household, with an education level of the first grade only and far direr conditions faced, have been successfully doing for decades.
And what can we do since everyone is inept and from abroad we are suffering even harder financial crises?
When no household help can clean our house, we do not keep paying the inept help. We clean our own house on our own and we do not pay. If, in addition, the inept help has broken or otherwise destroyed property, then we oblige the help to reimburse us before we let him/her go.
The same holds for the cases of the people manning the state machine. All of them have assumed specific obligations, accepting the rules of the enterprise which the state is, and are not only under contract but also under oath to serve and uphold the rules and their employers (the People). Since facts show that they have not done that which they committed to claiming they have the capacity and skill to do it, they are oath breakers and highly unsuitable for the job and so they should reimburse the People who entrusted them because they cheated (i.e. they committed the crime of fraud), materially and morally and afterwards they should withdraw for ever and familially from Public Life.
And what will happen to us without representatives? Who will help and save us?
Primarily we will have to realize that so far nobody has been helping us and certainly nobody has been saving us- on the contrary, everything that can be done to destroy us and annihilate us has been done so that society will return to the era of the Turkish occupation and that of Feudal Europe, where there was no property and man belonged to the few who had snatched/embezzled it.
We don’t need representatives. In the worst case, we need administrative AND NOT RULING Employees. The employee is the one who serves for pay his/her employer. In no occasion can the employee take initiative and order his/her employer. The only thing the employee can take is orders on specific matters and not a ‘blank check’ to do whatever he/she likes for a period of time.
The only one who can help and save us is our own self AND A COMMON FRONT OF DEALING with problems, just like the common front maintained as we speak by the politicians far and wide against the citizens, which is the only thing which has kept him in their positions despite all the treacheries and scandals, like the one of K. Mitsotakis’ tergiversation or the shame of the family history of the Pangalos family.
If the severity with which we check upon associates and employees in our businesses was commonly transferred in our reaction to the actions of these people it is certain that our every day life would instantly improve.
If we stopped fearing that we are not able and assumed our responsibilities as citizens, supervising every step of the policies followed in every sector of the state, then all the utopian scenarios would be possible.
And how can I check on things I don’t even know what they mean or what they are there for?
An immense and obscure jargon/terminology is one more way of intimidation and indirect way to get across the message that the average citizen does not have the capacity to understand that which the politicians do. This is completely unfounded and false since to anyone who is explained every single term, understanding is immediate and certain.
It is therefore an obligation and right of the Citizen to demand explanations. If a message is hard to understand then it is 99% possible that there is foul play towards the citizen who is asked to agree to something he/she does not understand (this is punishable by law in all other cases). Every issue of the state must be presented in the spoken language and with a full capacity of having explanatory questions posed: this in essence is already in effect since the Citizen has the capacity to file any question to any Public Authority and receive and answer (Greek law states that if the answer is not satisfactory or within the limit of 60 days since filing, the Public Service pays a fine). Therefore, the concept that someone should be ashamed for wanted to ask is being cultivated by the ones who simply do not want to give answers, just like we have in the past described happens by those who cultivate and want Free Bondsmen.
I have no time to occupy myself with something like that.
The reason you do not have the time is because you are rushing to meet and face all the problems which you wouldn’t have if you invested this time into checking upon the ones causing them to you. Just as in every thing, if we consider it necessary for survival we find the time to do it, just as we find the time to sue a fellow citizen who is harming us. In the same token, why not sue or warn or check on or supervise those fellow citizens who you fund and pay to make your life easier, not more torturous?
Yes, but in some things this is impossible, such as e.g. secret diplomatic moves or the laying down of the financial policy.
This is not accurate, false and hightly destructive. It is as if you do not look out to see where the pilot will fly to because you do not know what an airway is. There are many very practical methods through which we can check not only where the pilot will fly, but also in which way he will do it. That is, we can and must check on diplomatic moves and the laying down of financial policy qualitatively and quantitatively with simple methods which will truly reflect and represent what the People want and not what a few parasitic and abusively rich business people and high profile personalities want.
And how does one do that?
We will begin to present this methodology sector by sector with next week’s article, beginning with financial policies.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
REGARDING THE HOME, THE DEMOS AND ITS COMMISSARIES (2)
In the last part of this special article we laid down the basic principles and way of handling that a ciizen must possess not so much to be a correct citizen or some such philosophical ideal but in order to be able to protect him/herself from the vital and highly important threats and dangers of everyday life within the setting we call ‘civil life’. Just like in every process of learning and teaching, after the explaining of the logic and the basic principles, it is necessary to apply them practically so that we will understand and realize that we are not talking about something theoretical and untouchable or utopian but about the actual process to which we owe our existence at this time in a lawful state, and the only thing we have to do is apply it actively instead of pushing it aside for fear or manipulation. This actual process we described in the first part gave humanity concepts such as ‘Human Rights’, ‘Free Education’, ‘Welfare State’, ‘Social Insurance’. ‘Freedom of Thought and Speech’, ‘Self-Determination’, ‘Equality’, ‘Right to Vote’, ‘Constitutional Right’.
Every single one of these concepts and the applications derived from them is the result of the stance, attitude and action of people and later groups which followed faithfully the 10 Axioms of the article’s first part. We can infer/deduct this easily with a simple overview of their actions and a reading of their writings, if there are any. It is very important to keep in mind that before the establishment of such concepts as we mentioned the social situation was extreme, relentless and fully prohibitive towards elements opposing and following the 10 axioms, and worse than it is today. Even so, simple, everyday people who had lived for several decades in the obscurantist situation before the establishment of the concepts we mentioned decided that the conditions of their everyday life were unacceptable and against the law of Nature and God and as such, they were obliged to take measures so that they would be replaced with normal ones, congruent with God.
The most important of all which we must keep in our conscience is that these oppressors with the right of life and death over these people, with impunity and with superior technology not only could not overcome these people who were following the 10 Axioms but instead were forced to take to flight and disguise themselves and hide so that they would be as invisible as possible so that they would elude the attention of people who took away from them the authorities they had embezzled, so that they would use time and manipulation to take them back, swindling and deriding behind masks.
If we make an overview of World History from 1890 to present day we will see exactly this course of the process:
Stage 1: People follow the 10 Axioms, evaluate situations around them and decide to achieve certain goals towards the reinstitution of proper order according to Nature and/or God (as is presented through scriptures and not additional interpretations, explanations, analyses and decisions from a group of priests or other ecclesiastic agents).
Stage 2: People follow methodologies which are highly effective and in the same time express the level of their decision to reinstate order without fear or relenting to the bravado and threats and actions of the opponents seeking to maintain the situation existing.
Stage 3: People achieve the goals which have been derived from the 10 Axioms and the evaluation of situations, with the establishment of authorities and concepts as well as laws guarding their now-vested rights.
Stage 4: The opponents who lost their authorities which they had been embezzling as well as the privileges with which they were living parasitically, live in utmost secrecy and allow for a period of lull during which the laws and vested rights achieved in Stage 3 are upheld and are in force, so that the level of alertness of the people will lower because of a feeling of security and lack of need of control and guarding of their vested rights.
Stage 5: Very gradually and while the vested rights are not being guarded any longer, these opponents infiltrate positions of power, administration and responsibility via their representatives which they buy and who are traitorous and against the people and their vested rights, but present themselves demagogically as defenders and protectors of the people and their rights. While being in these positions, they gradually begin corrupting them and misleading the people from the ideas, the goals and the 10 Axioms which gave them the power they possess and which ensures increase of their well being and freedom through the introduction of fabricated needs which are phased in as progressive. Additionally, unfounded and irrational threats without object (e.g. ‘we will be characterized as inferior to others’ regardless of whether we are actually are or whether we are living with better quality of life than these others).
Stage 6: The social situation before Stage 1 comes back with acrimony and directly with driving and humiliating changes in legislation, institutions and social class, this time with a projection of the very concepts/values which were achieved and established in Stage 2 as ‘sacred’ and as such devalued, since now they have no impact or meaning to the people who are suffering, convinced they are weak and alone and powerless. For example, Freedom is projected as the most sacred and ultimate concept and motivation of the state / superpower of the U.S.A but in the name of Freedom and for the enforcement of it there is censorship within and out of USA borders, non-response to the wish of the American People in matters of life and death (such as an end to the war in Iraq and the return of troops home), the totalitarian international behavior which often manifests with invasion in foreign countries either with presumptuous diplomatic orders mixed with threats for internal affairs of every country for which they have no right to have a say, or with pure act of war and bloodshed of non-combatant population. All of these are actions of totalitarianism and menticide but are presented as expressions of the concept of Freedom, making the idea of Freedom from ridiculous to hated. In this manner the people are disarmed from their weapons since they are manipulated and taught to hate and abhor them.
A characteristic example from Greece are the concepts ‘Bread, Education, Liberty’ which have become associated with ‘anarchists/ communists’ and the ‘Hellas of Christian Hellenes’ which has been associated with the junta, dictatorship, totalitarianism, ridicule, inhumanity, exile and beatings.
If we examine closely these two mottos, actually analyzing the concepts they are promoting and projecting we will see that they contain the concept of welfare state, of critical thinking, of the need of belonging, the healthy system of evaluation regarding morals and daily dealing with our fellow man as well as the daily Greek life style which defended the bodily and mental health of the individual needing to adjust to everyday conditions according to the position of the country on the globe, as well as the ensuring of the survival of the people through the ages even under the state of occupation of other nations and cultures, as was proven historically with the Turkish and later the German occupation.
With the propaganda and the social unrest which intentionally associated these mottos either every directly opposite concept to which the Greek person rebels (without allowing the analysis of what these concepts under attack describe and defend), the Greek People was robbed from the weapons which helped its survival through the ages and the preservation of the enlightened spirit which was bequeathed from antiquity and which promotes and has been promoting Freedom of Thought with the goal of the well being and happiness of the individual.
In the same time, the Greek citizen sustained a cultural rape from others presenting themselves as Greeks who, however, were and are opposed and serving those who Greeks have always been throwing off: propaganda in the form of books, published newspaper stories and others such as ‘The Misery of Being Greek’ by N. Dimou or the song ‘Fuck’n Greeks’ by D. Savopoulos or additions to daily vocabulary of words like ‘big greek’ (Ελληνάρας) which is synonymous to a bad mannered, uncivilized, coarse and debased person who is sly and conniving, teach the Greek person and manipulate him/her into hating and being ashamed of his/herself and his/her name and identity, and all that is related to it which in this case is all the wealth of philosophy and intellect keeping him/her Free and Intact for eons. So the Greek person looks for another identity for which he/she will not feel ashamed and hooks him/herself from the one foisted with arguments such as ‘that’s what progressive people do’, ‘that’s what Europeans do’, ‘that’s how you will be in and not backwards’.
Today, in 2008 society internationally and globally is at Stage 6 and rapidly returning not only to the totalitarian conditions and regimes (devaluing the concept of Democracy and Liberalism in the process) but also to the low level of thought with the overabundance and introduction of customs and beliefs which obfuscate such as running to mediums and astrologers, having faith in convictions and supernatural beings such as demons, vampires and ghosts, application of dark magic and voodoo (as it is projected through the mass media and not the actual light-side philosophy of the particular creed) and a plethora of other fatalistic acts and philosophies promoting fear and desperation because of the sense of lack of control in our hands (internal vs. external locus of control).
Today in 2008 we have just entered a process of economic depression which is eradicating the middle social class so that there will only be ‘aristocracy’ and ‘lower working class’ (lumpenproletariat) as in the age before Enlightenment and earlier. This depression which internatially is ruining lives and families and in one stroke eradicates the work and striving of generations is fabricated and imposed exactly as we have described in Stage 6, since it does not stem from the law ‘of supply and demand’ of economy (i.e. lack of supply means raising of the prices, high supply means lowering of the prices). With today’s technology but also on the basis of the energy resourses of the planet, there is a surplus in food and services (as one can tell from the level of unemployment of professionals as well as the vast quantities of food which, though fit for consumption, are destroyed and do not enter the market) which covers more than enough the demand and therefore there should exist a drop in prices.
Despite the fact that even officially it is announced that the reason for the high price rate is not supply and demand but profiteering (of course not on the part of simple traders or producers of goods but the rest of the parasitic elements in society and the market), people like prime minister K. Karamanlis and his counterparts/colleages in the European Union claim and declare that there are “no magic solutions” in the problem of high price rates. If we apply in the process of our evaluation the principles of critical thought and the 10 Axioms we listed in the first part of the article, we will easily conclude that the people who rose up or were imposed with special, highly expensive election campaigns as well as unclear procedures of election, sponsored overtly or covertly from private individuals who are hiding behind Corporations are incompetent, inexperienced regarding the management of funds and un-free, since they are funded and are depended from their sponsors. They therefore have every interest to well represent each businessperson/ individual who has taken it upon him/herself to sustain them.
That which we must realize again as our ancestors of Stage 1 is that we don’t need nor require magical solutions, since these problems did not arise “magically” and out of the blue. As in every business or household (which, according to the logic of the babushka we follow, is a miniature state with the entrepreneur or home maker in the position of the prime minister, but with more difficulties than the real one who has the capacity to shape conditions and resources as he/she wants within the state) so can the problems within a state be resolved immediately (within weeks) and remain solved in the interest of every individual, of course with the necessary proviso that the goal of the people assuming the reins of the state truly do target this and not to turn the state in an enrichment machine for the few.
In our next article we will show the truth of the above words by beginning to describe the methodology of the proper governance which will solve all of the above and more without the minutest deprivation/destitution on the level of middle and upper middle social class, which is the best level of living for every normal individual regardless of profession (from farmer to doctor and from tradesman to professor).
Thursday, January 17, 2008
The Shadow Puppet Theatre
So?
So, in the majority of interactions (from a simple conversation on the phone to a famous trial to a typical visit to be informed about students’ performance at school) there is a ‘competition’ about who ‘will come out on top/ will score/ will shut up/ show the proper place/ will trump’ the other person.
What does this mean?
This means that we willingly deprive ourselves from many things we could have gained while in the same time we burden ourselves with negative feelings which we could have avoided as well as entire ideas or points of view about the cosmos which take ground in our conscience absolutely and without discussion.
How do we manage that?
Two contestants are not the same as two cooperators. The contestants have very different goals and motives than the cooperators:
A. The contestants seek for one to win over the other regardless of the achievement or not of a goal that is useful to the general public.
B. That means they seek to prove that their point of view is in every way superior to that of the other contestant.
C. That means that in order to win they will have to deny or shoot down every single one of the opponent’s views regardless of whether they should or shouldn’t, or they will lose.
D. That means that the process is not a process of advancement and improvement for either of the two contestants but one that is destructive for at least one of the two if not both, which is usually the case.
On the contrary,
A. The cooperators both seek to prevail/ win/ achieve/ conquer a goal which is generally useful to a particular group.
B. That means that they are ‘open’ and seek to enrich or finetune their views so that they will better and more effectively reach their goal.
C. That means they gladly accept, seek and incorporate all the sides and angles which with the correct composition and evaluation create the point of view or the method which will bring about the achievement of their target regardless of whether these sides and angles come from their own thought process or that of their cooperator.
D. That means that the process is one of advancement and improvement for both the cooperators and it additionally offers chances for improvement and progress for each one of the cooperators individually. Also, the gain for each one on a social, personal and existential level is in great multiples than the uncertain gain one would have through a process of antagonism and undermining of the other.
Therefore, when we force ourselves but also other people to continually antagonize and compete with each other in order to discover who is the winner- free bondsman and who is the loser-subjugated free bondsman, what we certainly induce is the perfect absence of any type of progress and improvement of individuals and certainly (as we have already demonstrated with the babushkas) the complete absence of progress, development and improvement of society and social environment.
Additionally, as we see from our everyday interactions with other people that with antagonism and competition (relationships that ‘don’t work/ don’t flow/ don’t hit off well/ don’t do it/ lead nowhere/ suffocate/ stifle’ as well as a sensation of helplessness and weakness that ‘there’s nothing to be done/ that’s what everyone does/ what can one do?/ nothing can be corrected/ the way we’ve fallen…/ it’s no use’) we induce fully the mathematical progression towards degeneration and spoiling of our person as well as the social whole.
Yes, but emulation/competition helps progress, doesn’t it?
No, it doesn’t. Not because the basic idea and concept is wrong, but because just like in so many things it is interpreted and applied in almost complete disaccordance between the idea and its application.
What do we mean by this?
Let’s analyze what we mean by beginning as we should always begin: with the definition of ideas, that is to say précising what this ‘emulation’ means and what it doesn’t.
Emulation: “Ambition to equal or excel.
Effort to equal or surpass another”[1]
To emulate: “Strive to equal or match, especially by imitating;
Compete with successfully; approach or reach equality with”[2]
We therefore see here that ‘emulation’ as a term has two facets which are not actually clear or in complete accordance between them:
If I strive to be your equal or surpass someone, I definitely am not or do not consider myself equivalent to that person.
If I try to compete with someone, not only am I not interested in my improvement or his/her own, but on the contrary, I am interested in beating him/her in all counts, exactly like the soldier during war: my purpose is victory regardless of my quality or that of my opponent.
Therefore I will do anything to achieve victory without any thought on ideology or means or even if this actually harms, undermines and negates my real capacities. This fact is greatly illustrated in the more and more reported cases of athletes who are arrested or confess to using substances or other tactics which will give them a momentary edge in their sport without being interested whether they would have truly conquered the level of skill and ability which is symbolized by the medal they are pandering to. There are also swingeing cases of champion athletes who have suffered great problems of health (bodily, psychological and social) after their withdrawal from the sport in which they were competing.
Both occurrences prove the great size of the destruction by competition and ‘emulation’ induced in all levels.
This is the one side of emulation which is applied but never accurately spelled out.
The other side of emulation refers to how all sides are equal (or potentially so) and are governed by a mutual need for some improvement through competition, but this improvement (in terms of its kind and level) almost always is vague. However, through competition or emulation we cannot have either equality or individual or group improvement with actual gain on all levels, but on the contrary we have the onset of complete disaster as we saw above. On the contrary, we saw that in order to have equality and group improvement on all levels cooperation must exist.
Yes, but through emulation several breakthroughs were achieved. Isn’t that what we are told?
This is not actually true but actually a distortion of a basic truth about all breakthroughs (positive and negative alike) that have been achieved throughout humanity’s course.
A breakthrough is the result of two basic ingredients: need and experimentation. A need of either the individual for answers/solutions or of the group’s for survival. Experimentation for the satisfaction of this need by at least one and most of the times several more individuals who try out several approaches towards the goal, learn what they should pay attention to, avoid, correct and/or improve and so are led to the breakthrough which affects positively or negatively the entire social group.
There never was found a breakthrough or solution through a competition the goal of which was to evaluate, spotlight and reward one sole individual but did not have any other purpose.
Yes, but there are competitions of innovations or talent which do bring forth breakthroughs or talents.
This is inaccurate as well and the misinterpretation is mainly due to the tendency there exist not to use exactitude when we express ourselves and end up using one term for several similar but profoundly different concepts. These types of competitions which do bring forth breakthroughs of talents are not competitions but the greek word ‘συναγωνισμός’ which can best be described in English as ‘co-run’. What do we mean by that?
A target is presented to all participants with specific parameters and full freedom is allowed in the method and way of achieving this target. Cooperation and exchange of ideas is possible and in the most successful co-runs it is a given. If this does not exist and what we are measuring is not the achievement of the target but the individual itself in an evaluation context, then the competition is truly a competition which, just like we showed above never yields a breakthrough or a talent either objectively or in its full expression ( either the ‘talent’ is nothing but a result of techniques meant to impress and not actually there or, when there is actual talent, it is canalized and hemmed in until it is stifled by the social and financial pressuring emanating from the competition). Let’s just consider how much success or gain is to be had from competitions like Eurovision, American Idol or even the Olympic Games, beauty pageants and soccer/football/etc: no objective gain or success is to be had either for the spectators or even for the contestants since many times the material gain (because there actually is no other) is given to a contestant not because of his/her skill or ability or talent but because of the misleading/limiting criteria and the subjective opinion of one or more judges.
In future articles we will analyze exactly how something which can seem objective in essence is subjective and fabricated.
So, who benefits from the competitions?
The one who first comes to mind is the winner of the competition. In competitions like the ones we mentioned the winner wins glory, fame, financial gain, positions coveted in society, etc.
But is it true that the winner wins these?
In reality the winner doesn’t win all these things because they are not the natural and logical result of his/her achievement (e.g. to run fast is not in essence an exploitable ability by the person who has it, that same speedy runner, in a way that will ensure his freedom, independence and autonomy in today’s society) but a non-controllable by the competitor reward which is controlled by other agents and by other criteria which have nothing to do with the winner’s talent or competence (that is to say, the competitor cannot use his/her achievement in order to gain or earn what he/she is given beyond the limits and stipulations of the specific contest alone, and so therefore he/she cannot use their achievement to survive if that is not allowed by others.
Consequently he/she is forever in a dependent and uncertain position which he/she may or may not keep even if he/she retains or even improves the achievement if others do not want it to be so). In this manner the winner does not feel the assurance and certainty of a winner who, having achieved this goal moves on to higher ones belonging to more advanced developmental levels, but instead senses the uncertainty and insecurity of a person who is sitting on an unstable chair upon a time bomb- since his/her win is nullified with the obligation and pressure put upon him/her.
Who is really the one who has control?
Certainly it has already been hinted at that the one who has control is the one who is not competing. The one who is not competing is not the one who watches passively and without interacting with contest parameters which are specific and objective. That is just the spectator who cannot but be a receiver of a situation with which it is irrelevant whether the spectator agrees or disagrees and whose opinion is never asked as a true lever affecting the competition. The spectator is hurt by the competition as much as the contestant is because he/she is given the false and misleading message that they have no effect or influence in his/her environment (social, personal, state, work) and he/she is being taught to take blows and rape of his/her personality and his/her opinion without him/her trying at all for a substantial reaction.
The spectator just like the competitor learn through the contest to be free bondsmen (since they believe they were the ones they chose freely to do what they do and react the way they react) and instead of being full personalities with multiple facets they limit themselves to being two-dimensional and shallow expressions of themselves just like the figures of a Shadow Puppet Theatre.
In the same token, the same occurs in the case of the judges of the competition who are similar to the cloth against which the figures of the Shadow Puppet Theatre press in order to be visible: They aren’t free to judge the contestants as they would like but just like every free bondsman is free to judge as they are enforced to, regardless of their opinion (much is the historical evidence where judges were forbidden to yield a winner because for political, financial or other reasons it was necessary to pick another winner, more accommodating to the promotional campaign of those truly controlling the competition). Otherwise, their own position and reputation is subject to and controlled by others who truly control the show.
So who does truly control and benefit from competitions?
In our Shadow Puppet Theatre, that would be the Shadow Puppeteer. He/she is the one who controls all the figures and stretches the cloth they press on as he/she likes but cannot be seen nor does he/she present him/herself, though his/her voice is heard, camouflaged as the voice of the figures he/she is holding.
How can we discover who the Puppeteer of the several different competitions is?
Through asking some very simple questions which we will list next time.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
The Free Bondsman
The Free Bondsman
This present blog was created and will exist as a clear and lucid attestation and documentation coupled with scientific analysis on the conditions and forces which create in the individual the following contradiction in terms of behavior and personal identity:
In modern society, especially in the European and Western societies the citizen in particular and the person in general has become A FREE BONDSMAN.
What does that mean and to whom is there blame directed?
The blame (and consequently, the accountability) is directed to far more factors than it seems and it is NOT solely or strictly the responsibility of the citizen him/herself and of the individual him/herself as it is generally preached by the socialization principles of every person.
Invisible but very powerful forces of manipulation on a personal, interpersonal and social level create an impermeable grey area in which everyone is at fault and by virtue of that, nobody is.
But before we begin analyzing the direction of blame and the systematic fogging of the awareness of every well-meaning and conscientious person concerning the process of action-reaction permeating our everyday lives, we must first define what the Free Bondsman really is:
The definition for ‘Free’ is:[1]
a) Able to act at will; not hampered; not under compulsion or restraint
b) Not held in servitude
c) Without obstructions
d) Unrestricted and Unconstrained
On the contrary, the definition of ‘Bondsman’ is:[2]
a) a slave
b) someone who is bound to serve without wages
c) someone who signs a bond as surety for someone else
And to better understand (a) in the definition of Bondsman, a ‘Slave’ is: [3]
a) a person who is held in servitude
b) a person who is not ‘Free’
c) a person who is owned by someone else
Therefore, how do we define The Free Bondsman?
The Free Bondsman is defined as the person who theoretically is free to act at will and evaluate, judge and think of matters without pressures, blackmail or compulsions about what he/she wants to be and how he/she wants to behave. This person truly believes that he/she is truly free and acting or behaving at will, without compulsions, but “within logical limits” .
The Free Bondsman is often inhibited by admonitions and blackmail of the type:
“This is not logical/rational/wise this does not make sense”
“This is simply not done”
“What will the people say?”
“What will _________ say?”
“You only think about yourself/ you are so selfish”
“you are cruel/thick skinned”
“You won’t be the one to say what is right”
“You must have a leader/ herder/ ruler in order to exist well”
“You aren’t able to make this decision/ you can’t make this decision”
“You can’t decide for yourself”
“Nobody will pay attention to you/ heed you even if you do speak out your opinion”
“Let someone else do that/ stick their neck out”
“That’s what everyone does/ this is the way it is/ this can’t change”
etc.
So, when the Free Bondsman reaches the limits of the accepted ‘free’ behavior, in come the shackles of social blackmail and out goes the alleged freedom. There only remains the Bondsman, not at all free, who obeys rules and orders because of fear and the emotional but also actual blackmail enforced on him/her.
In our society, Free Bondsmen are as free as the fish in an aquarium with an artificial background depicting the ocean: they can go anywhere within the constraints of the glass wall-limits and they can see the virtual ocean but they cannot ever experience it…
…ever? Not really. A small team of Free Bondmen have managed to break free of their aquarium, become Free Individuals and ever since they stand up against the efforts by third parties to force them to go back to “their place”.
The process to do the same is simple but not easy, unless we are determined to follow it through. In this case, it is not only simple, clear and manageable, but also really exciting.
And how does one make the first step?
Before we do anything and decide upon anything, we learn what the real setting is and what the real conditions we live in every day are.
We then see who is responsible for what.
We realize the true power all of us without exception have and use daily. As proof of this, just consider the fact that nobody is ever interested in controlling, affecting and subjugating a feeble and generally weak being. On the contrary, a good bondsman/ employee/ inferior/ subject must be extra strong and in possession of many and varied abilities in order to be of use. The feeble and the weak subjects are executed or left to wither and die as they are of no use.
To whom?
That is something we will begin to explore in the next article.
Have you ever felt in this or a similar way? Send me an e-mail with the description of the emotions and the situation pertinent and we will analyze it either here or in private if you prefer that.
