SECTION TWO : Political Systems
There follows a brief guide to the various political systems available from the
menu of human philosophical and political experience. I have divided the
systems into two distinct groups reflecting the key differences.
THE SOCIAL ENGINEERS - COLLECTIVISM
This group considers mankind the raw material from which to construct a
society. The forms of society differ, the means by which its design is arrived
at differs, but what they all have in common is the notion that one/some/many
men should rule the others - whether it be king, dictator or majority.
AUTOCRACY
/ DICTATORSHIP / DESPOTISM
An autocracy is characterised by a supreme, uncontrolled, unlimited authority,
or right of governing in a single person, as of an autocrat. It is very similar
to a dictatorship. The key here is that the autocrat has absolute power. An
autocrat requires a massive amount of force (in an army for instance) to exert
control over an unwilling people. A benevolent autocrat is a contradiction in
terms. A (rational) benevolent person recognises that benevolence is not
something which can, by its nature, be forcibly created. A benevolent leader
would seek to undo the social engineering and return the society toward the
sovereignty of the individual. Iraq under Hussein is a good example of
dictatorship, as was Russia under Stalin.
COMMUNISM
Strictly speaking, communism means a scheme of equalising the social conditions
of life; specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of
inequalities in the possession of property, as by distributing all wealth
equally to all, or by holding all wealth in common for the equal use and
advantage of all. The means to achieve this is by collectivisation of all
private property. Although meant to indicate the means of production, to be
consistent communism requires that no individual may own anything exclusively,
privately. Not the product of his work (thus his mind), nor any personal
material benefit he may achieve as a result of it. All material is centralised
and distributed by legislators, the intention being to achieve equal utility
(of material) by all. Freedom of expression tends also to be mediated by the
state for the same reasons and to maintain the 'integrity' of the collective.
You can find a Marxist book in a US bookstore but you cant find Ludwig von
Mises in a Cuban library
In practice communism fails dismally. The only way it can be achieved is if
every single member of a communist society is in absolute agreement with the
above arrangement - and that the legislators are not open to corruption in the
form of personal acquisition or favour. We have seen in section one that is it
proper for man to own the product of his mind, or that acquired by accident of
birth. If such is taken in any way other than voluntarily it is robbery.
For a fuller explanation of communism please refer to the communist manifesto
and observe the manner in which human beings are to be moulded and shaped
according to Marx and Engels' beliefs.
CONSERVATISM
A political philosophy that tends to support the status quo and advocates
change only in moderation. Conservatism upholds the value of tradition, and
seeks to preserve all that is good about the past. Irishman Edmund Burke, in
his Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), compared society to a
living organism that has taken time to grow and mature, so it should not be
suddenly uprooted. Innovation, when necessary (in the states' judgement),
should be grafted onto the strong stem of traditional institutions and ways of
doing things: "it is with infinite caution that any man ought to venture
upon pulling down an edifice which has answered in any tolerable degree for
ages the common purposes of society.". Conservatives are usually social
engineers by default (status quo).
In many ways this is reflected in the British Conservative Party, which broadly
supports the industrial Britain's' free market enterprise and a degree of
individual autonomy, but also the expropriation of property to feed both an
aristocratic and a welfare status quo. It is a philosophy against radicalism of
any sort, regardless of merit. A 'pleasant' system in an already free country,
it could be a dangerously rigid one in less free country. Current Conservative
party leader William Hague appears to have some classical liberal beliefs which
may rejuvenate the party, although not much as happened as yet!
DEMOCRACY
There are two major modes of democracy. 1. Government by the people; a form of
government in which the supreme power is retained and directly exercised by the
people. 2. Government by popular representation; a form of government in which
the supreme power is retained by the people, but is indirectly exercised
through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically
renewed; a constitutional representative government.
The latter form is that which exists in the UK. The reason I have included
democracy as a form of social engineering is because democracy does not limit
its power. It is possible (though unlikely) to achieve the same results as a
vicious nazi state through democracy. The problems with democracy deserve
separate discussion here are that
a majority can 'vote away' the freedom of a minority. To use an extreme example
imagine that you live in a village of 100 people and 99 of them vote to take
your house. Despite the 'landslide' democratic victory there is no change in
the morality of the theft they vote for. To a lesser extent this is what
happens when one person votes for tax raises. The whim of a majority is no more
moral than the whim of a dictator, just less likely to result in an extreme
atrocity. The other problem is that it pits one interest group against another.
Where the government decides to use one persons' private property to pursue a
goal with which he/she does not agree, the two parties oppose. Democracy can
rapidly decline to a series of adversarial groups seeking to have the
government favour them, at the necessary expense of another. Thus we have young
v old, healthy v ill, employed v unemployed, road user v non-road user, county
v county, race v race and so forth. where the government serves only as a
policeman there can be no such adversariality.
FASCISM
A relative newcomer (1919 - Mussolini) fascism is characterised by elements of
pride in the nation, anti-Marxism, the complete rejection of parliamentary
democracy, the cultivation of military virtues, strong government, and loyalty
to a strong leader. Whereas in communism the individual is second to the
society, in fascism the individual is second to the state or race. It is not 'right
wing' per-se, but is virtually the same as national socialism (Nazism), it
therefore shares much with Marxism in its view of mankind as a collective. We
all know what can happen when sufficient people in a state are in eager support
of national socialism, hence its widespread repulsion.
IMPERIALISM
The policy that aims at building and maintaining an empire, in which many
states and peoples, spread over a wide geographical area, are controlled by one
dominant state. Much of the twentieth century history of the Third World, for
example, is of the dismantling of the legacy of nineteenth century European
imperialism. An imperialist state can also be any other type of collectivist,
but not a type of individualist, nation. In Britain the growth of classical liberalism
can be said to have contributed to the negation of the belief in imperialism as
being 'good'.
MONARCHY
Form of rulership whereby a queen or king, empress or emperor holds absolute or
limited power, usually inherited. In this century most European monarchies have
become constitutional or limited, such as with the British Monarchy. Such
monarchies often represent a strong symbol of national identity in (some of)
the people's minds (but exist at the expense of all). In some countries in
Africa, the Middle East, and Asia monarchs still continue to hold absolute
power. Under these conditions the state is similar to autocracy.
PLURALISM
Government carried out by a process of bargaining and compromise between a
variety of competing leadership groups (business, labour, government, etc.).
Advocates of pluralism claim that it best serves the democratic ideal in a
complex modern society, in which individual participation in every act of
decision-making is impractical. According to pluralism, individual rights and
interests are protected by a sort of extra-constitutional checks and balances:
No single group holds the dominant power position, power is always shifting,
and individuals can have influence on policy-making through being active in one
of these power groups. Some claim that America is such a pluralistic society;
other theories say that pluralism is in fact a myth and American society is
elitist. Despite this pluralism is not limited, other than by the common sense
of its participants. Therefore it is still, in essence, collectivist and
adversarial. See Democracy.
PLUTOCRACY
Government by the wealthy, or by a government primarily influenced by the
wealthy. This system is as open to the social engineers as any other, and is
against any principle of individual liberty. One of the criticisms of the US
political system is that some wealthy people and organisations exert enormous
influence over political power. This is not to be mistaken for a criticism of
the free market or of wealth but as a criticism of unlimited political power.
SOCIALISM
Sharing the same collective view of mankind as communism socialism is a
political system in which the means of production, distribution and exchange
are mostly owned by the state, and used, at least in theory, on behalf of the
people (whose 'good' is decided by the legislator). The idea behind socialism
is that the capitalist system is intrinsically unfair, because it concentrates
wealth in a few hands and does nothing to safeguard the overall welfare of the
majority, we will see later that this is fallacious. Under socialism, the state
redistributes the wealth of society in a more equitable way, according to the
judgement of the legislator. Socialism as a system is anathema to most
Americans, but broadly accepted in Europe - albeit in a much diluted fashion.
Socialism is a system of expropriation of private property (regardless of how
this was earned) in order to distribute it to various groups considered (by the
legislator) to warrant it, usually the unemployed, ill, young and old and
significantly, those with political pull. Since all property must be created
before being distributed modern socialists allow some free market enterprise to
exist in order to 'feed' from its production. This seems to admit that the free
market is the best way to produce wealth. The current British government
(Labour) purports to be quasi-socialist but is in practice conservative
(non-radical) with additional taxation and state intervention. I believe that
genuine socialism has not fared that well in Britain due to a sense of
individual sovereignty shared by many Britons, expressed in such sayings as
"an Englishman's' home is his castle". http://www.wsws.org/
is an informative site regarding modern socialism. See also communism
THEOCRACY
A state or government which is run by priests or clergy. A recent example of a
theocracy is Iran immediately after the overthrow of the Shah in 1979, when the
Ayotollah Khomeini gained power. Theocracies are becoming more common as
Islamic fundamentalism grows in strength, but its influence is almost non
existent in the West, with the exception of the USA where the 'religious right'
have some influence. The social engineering is derived from the mythical
content of the state religion and could include any number of atrocities
against the individual.
A THOUGHT FROM FREDERICK BASTIAT
To end the section on collectivists I would like to quote French Liberal
philosopher frederick Bastiat from his superb piece of work "The Law" which is
available on the internet;
" if the legislators left persons free to follow their own inclinations,
they would arrive at atheism instead of religion, ignorance instead of
knowledge, poverty instead of production and exchange. According to these
writers, it is indeed fortunate that Heaven has bestowed upon certain men --
governors and legislators -- the exact opposite inclinations, not only for
their own sake but also for the sake of the rest of the world! While mankind
tends toward evil, the legislators yearn for good; while mankind advances
toward darkness, the legislators aspire for enlightenment; while mankind is
drawn toward vice, the legislators are attracted toward virtue. Since they have
decided that this is the true state of affairs, they then demand the use of
force in order to substitute their own inclinations for those of the human
race."
Although I do not share Bastiats' specific religious belief I find his logic
and clarity to be superb, basically all social engineers are convinced that
they are better suited to run your life than you are.
THE INDIVIDUALISTS
ANARCHISM
/ NIHILISM
A doctrine that advocates the abolition of organised authority. Anarchists
believe that all government is corrupt and evil. Anarchism was a force in
nineteenth century Russia, associated with Prince Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921)
and Mikhail Bakunin (1814-76). Types of anarchism range from pacifism to
violent revolution. While most often anti-capitalist (and tending to more
collectivist philosophies), there are pro-capitalist strains, depending on the
view of private property. The major problem with anarchism is in maintaining
the freedom of the individual. Without an organised objective system of law an
anarchic society might be at the mercy of the criminal and the powerful, with
only personal and communal self defence to rely on. Many questions on anarchism
are addressed by this FAQ
LIBERALISM
(CLASSICAL)
A term which has changed its meaning, in the nineteenth century in Europe, the
great age of liberalism, the term stood for freedom from church and state
authority and the reduction of the power of royalty and aristocracy, free
enterprise economics, and the free development of the individual. Liberalism
advocated freedom of the press, religious toleration, self-determination for
nations. It was liberalism that established parliamentary democracy. The
Founding Fathers of the USA might be termed liberals. Liberal 19th century
Britain became an industrial power, and a source for much of the worlds'
technological innovation, despite the prevalent class structure, due to the
freedom and property rights enjoyed by the people. The current Conservative
party (in its current leader) retains some classical Liberal ideology, albeit
without the apparent philosophical courage to challenge opposing doctrines.
In the twentieth century, liberal parties were caught in between conservatives
and socialists, despite being fundamentally different, and their influence
declined. Today, liberalism stands for something rather different than it did
in the nineteenth century. Now it tends to mean more government rather than
less and is characterised by a diluted socialism and/or populism (doing what it
believes most people would (or should!) want it to do).
LIBERTARIANISM
A philosophy of freedom, particularly from any unnecessary restraints imposed
(or indeed any restraints) by governmental authority. It is central to America:
liberty is one of the inalienable rights described in the constitution
("life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"), and it has always
been what America sees itself as standing for, although it can be argued that
America has become more of a typical European nation (economically and
politically) and has greater freedom simply because it has yet to decline to
European standards.
Libertarianism, in detail, is best described by Libertarians; (free-market.net/) (libertarian.org/). There is a libertarian party in Britain, which
is active and contains many useful resources. The problem that libertarians
need to address (and many do) is that of crime. A national system of Law
requires a national government/police, which can pose problems for
Libertarians.
OBJECTIVISM
Similar in 'appearance' to libertarianism, objectivism is different because it
is based upon a specific philosophy of reality as first detailed by Aristotle
and further extrapolated in the mid to later part of the 20th century by
philosopher Ayn Rand, well known for her best selling fiction novels which
encompass her philosophy in dramatic form. Objectivism supports individualism
with reference to the nature of reality and this differentiates it from being
just another political opinion. It is not an easy philosophy to understand, or
for many, to accept.
A controversial philosophy due to its assertive stance it is well explained in
this FAQ and in
other links at Yahoo
CAPITALISM
Contrary to popular belief capitalism is not a 'system' as such. It is the
consequence of individual liberty and corresponding property rights (the right
to own that which you create, or are born owning). Capitalism is readily blamed
for various inequalities despite having never been practised in fact, with the
closest examples being 19th century USA and to a lesser extent 19th century
Britain. A fuller description of capitalism is given in this site
Many people appear to have a very different idea about what is meant by
capitalism. It is not a system of force imposed by people. It is a lack of such
a system. It is what happens when people are free from the force of other
people. In order to have people 'free' of the force of natural conditions
something must be done to make those conditions better for mankind. That is
exactly what people have been doing with the invention of the wheel, of
machines, the production of energy and everything that followed. All of this is
the product of mans mind, without it mankind is returned unprotected to nature.
Capitalism itself forces nothing.
Capitalism doesn't aim at equal ends because they do not occur where people are
free to choose their own paths. Those better off do have more opportunities
(not more freedom), but that in no way gives one person (or group) the right to
rob them of these opportunities and give them to another. Life can be very hard
for an impoverished man in a desert compared to a rich man in a European
landowners family. That does not give anyone the right to rob the European and
give to desert dweller.
THE
REPUBLIC
A republic is a political system whereby poltical power is explicitly is
granted with consent of the people and ruled according to law. The purpose of
the government is to protect the rights of the people and in discharging that
purpose it derives its just power from the consent of the people. Hence the
words "we the people". It is not a democracy, nor is it populism or
pluralism. Infact it is quite a strictly limited system where the people
essentially delegate (note - delegate, not forfeit) the protection of their
individual rights to a government of their choosing. The limitations would be
made explicit in a constitution and an excellent example is the US constitution,
which sadly is largely unknown by the American people and constantly undermined
by their governments.
A THOUGHT FROM AYN RAND
To finish the section on Individualism I shall add a quotation from 20th
century philosopher Ayn Rand;
"If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others,
it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave
labour. Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the
violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right. No man can
have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an
involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as "the
right to enslave.""
Spot on! Most people will agree wholeheartedly with this, yet at the same time
be voting for taxation and social programmes which contradict this. How can
that be?
Lets move on to Section 3 -
the proper role of government.
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/mailto:deg19x@yahoo.com
mailto:deg19x@yahoo.comhttp://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/comment.shtml
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/comment.shtmlhttp://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/GuestBook.shtml
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/street/pl38/GuestBook.shtml
var code = " "; document.write(code); 
http://www.webstat.net/
http://www.webstat.net/