Posted 11 months ago on May 23, 2014, 6:49 p.m. EST by nakedsex
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
1 ----- A difference of opinion is a virtue of diversity, but it happens that conflicts arise, and the state of nature provides no transcending protections to an individual from the coercive imposition of others. Such imposition denies that which is essential to our humanity: self-determinative autonomy. We are therefore beholden to engender a state which can entrust having our mind over matter, with a coercive power acceptable and legitimate to the extent that it secures freedom for the individual.
2 ----- People have an inclination to live in society, and this realm of enlarged thought is what develops our capacities for imagination and critical thinking. But we also have a tendency to isolate, since we also harbor a wanting to direct everything in accordance with our own ideas. This very resistance awakens our powers effectively, but it also causes us to become evil and unhappy. These traits eventually make human beings conceive to the need to formulate a civil constitution as a condition of peace.
3 ----- The ability to reason is what releases us from the clutches of disposition and enables us to choose our own way of life by drawing upon imagination and moral personality. The public exercise of reason is premised on the freedom of expression, and the notion of having a reasoning political public is the necessary means of enlightenment.
4 ----- The constraining of thought comes naturally from civil coercion, as form follows function or vice versa; since the enlargement of our thinking is perpetually wrought by the influences of our experience. External constraints to limit our being must consequently limit our freedom of thought, eroding upon that solution which alone provides our means of overcoming all the evils in our condition of civil life. Therefore a just state would have to be one that delimits the freedom of people.
5 ----- Either democracy is enshrined, or individual rights are enshrined and placed outside the reach of democratic politics. It isn't difficult to visualize how tyranny is oppressive by formulating the impressions of a singular will. However direct democracy, the most romantic concept of mutual rule, is difficult to realize and the shear physics involved create a perversity. Furthermore, democracy in this kind of strict sense is necessarily a tyranny, because it establishes an absolute executive power.
6 ----- Politics is a euphemism for control of the collective means of violence backed coercion, the essential core around which society exists and interacts, and an entirely democratic society (such as public ownership of the means of production), would mean entirely political. No custom or culture would moderate interactions, and nothing would protect inalienable truths because everything would be subjugated by a plurality of other people. To maintain such a condition of total political governance would require the use of force to prevent any spontaneous several acts not democratically sanctioned.
7 ----- Consider also how anything creative would require everyone to agree with you, completely defeating the purpose of being an artist since you are unable to create anything that other people don't understand. Nobody would control their own work if everyone controlled it. You couldn't pay people to help you if they choose, making arrangements such as this to achieve the specifics and artistic vision that you have; this would be no private ownership. You could say trust me, but everyone has a tendency to think they know best.
8 ----- The ideal of absolute democracy is a concept that doesn't take into account the physics of diversity, and this has fooled people all throughout history. It requires everyone to be utterly like-minded, which can be infuriating, trapped and denied independence. When applied to huge social structures the conflicts are devastating, playing out with violence and terror. Absolute democracy is akin to anarchist beliefs of a non-hierarchical society, relying entirely on the enlightenment faith of free citizens. Government is used because we sincerely need it, and when our diversity can in fact coexist by true understanding, these things won't even matter.
9 ----- Throughout history we have seen democracies fail for this reason, being an absolute power given to the most irrational animal, groups of people. The public might decide that a factory cannot pollute. But the public might also decide that a factory can pollute because they would rather have more stuff for everyone. There have been studies proving that in general people are not good at doing difficult things for the sake of distant effects. How then, can democracy ever be a reliable tool to solve real problems which go against the comfort zones, disposition, or even the perceptibility of the mass of people as an animal?
10 ----- Many of us hold an intuitive assumption about the making of decisions, that a decision is somehow more moral when those affected have participated in its making. However the real constraints of decision-making in fact preclude the possibility of complete participation, or that of agreement. Attempts to participate expose individuals to the full force of our collective incapacity to manage moral and value conflicts, often leaving us disenchanted with humanity.
11 ----- Compared to a rabble of assertive personalities, hierarchy is a necessary structure to enact efficiency, or even solidarity. Indeed, the metaphor has been illustrated that the variety of people in society is similar to an insane person in need of a straitjacket. The practical anarchist will believe that people such as themselves are ready, even though society as a whole may not be. But that's a perfect example of the conflict inherent in diversity, essentially saying that: if they were surrounded by like-minded people, the world would be perfect. Truly, the day we are all the same is the day we are ruined.
12 ----- There are multiple centers of power in a liberal democratic republic and indeed in most social orders, and this pluralism of powers captures an essential aspect of the conception of a democratic society. People are treated in accordance with principles akin in spirit to the laws of freedom which a people of mature rational powers would prescribe for itself. We thus reject the concept of a unifying popular will and we take sovereignty as irreducibly heterogeneous. In effect, for democracy to function it requires that individuals as well as the group would both have trumps to play.
13 ----- That which breaks the natural world are the extremes, and the universe requires a relationship between Ying and Yang that can balance an equation. We need democracy to keep liberty serving the people, and we need liberty to keep democracy from becoming oppressive. Without free speech we become weaponless to deception, and without critical thinking democracy is nothing but a justification. When we speak of democracy it's for the reason of wanting society to reflect a profound understanding. It has been said that the public is far too vulnerable to manipulation for an effective democracy, but profound understanding doesn't come from public desire, it comes from the inevitability of truth.