Your definition of globalism as “concentration of power away from the people” is not a necessary definition at all, it totally rejects my definition of cooperative globalism among democratically participating nations in structures such as the UN; but worse, your definition other than being quite simplistic and black and white is basically just the definition of government as such. By definition to have a government at all is to concentrate some power a distance from “the people”, and as I’ve already pointed out and which I believe has so far gone unanswered is that the political power of “the people” is largely the negative power to throw out bad leaders and is also the smaller positive power to abstractly ground political leadership in the populace at large, through voting and consent of the governed.
“The people” did not write the US Constitution. A very small group of highly educated and dedicated people did. This whole hypostasizing of the category of “the people” into some kind of political God is troubling to me, to say the least.
The political elitism is troubling to me. The Fathers wrote the Constitution to give the people a voice, not to command them. The constitution grants very few powers- very few legitimate commands, to the central government. This political elitism reaches it greatest formulation in the global state: you believe the masses cannot learn to take care of themselves, that they must be administered to.
" A democratized group of nations is a real possible form of globalism (globalism is not inherently “totalitarian” any more than government itself is)."
Yeah your democratized group of nations is possible if those nations tell their populations to fuck off in order to cut deals between each other, because otherwise difference in national identity and interest will cause nations to drop out of the arrangement. As our government has told all of us to fuck off- and essentially giving hundreds of billions of our dollars away to other countries in the form of military aid is in fact telling us to fuck off.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:16 pm
I am still troubled by your bit about how politics is like engineering, we can’t let Trump in because he doesn’t know politics. More political elitism.
These political elites and lawyers- they’re fucking useless: their skill, their equivalent to engineering, is working through hundreds of pages of over complicated legalese like our 1,000 page tax code. True, Trump doesn’t know that. But he knows how to throw that fucking tax code in the trash and write one about a page long, which would level the playing field and prevent corporations from amassing their inordinate wealth. The State- I made this point pages ago- got involved in the Braudelian stage of capital through this process: they make it so that you need massive amounts of cash to hire the lawyers necessary to figure out how to get you out of paying so much in tax. A smaller buisness cannot afford that. So the big business just keeps getting bigger. And this is possible because of the bullshit politician crafted piece of brilliant fucking engineering we call the tax code. These politicians are really good at doing something that’s fucking really meaningless, managing a 1000 page tax code that shouldn’t even fucking exist and which we can just throw out when Trump gets in. It’s like being a professional at- what’s as useless as a politician, I don’t know; it’s like being really good at something really inconsequential and unnecessary.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:25 pm
Parodites, what do you think about a synthesis of on the one hand the will to reduce US government to bare essentials as the fathers intended, and on the other the will to implement a US type constitution as a default code for nations that are pining for a sane form of government?
Rule by example conquers in the best way, it commands excellence simply by the fact that only an excellent being attracts exemplification. Excellence isn’t a qualitative but a quantitative one, as excellence applies in potential to all proper qualities, it is merely the full (quantity) explication of them. At least, this is a way of arriving at the convenient truth that all men need to be free to be excellent, and that we can never convince someone by logic, but only by example.
Capable simply refuses to be convinced by a man who gives this example; I respect him for that, it is also an aesthetically righteous resistance to the most convenient path. The price of this is apperently a misunderstanding of our intentions; Capables philosophical mind is set against relativizing and taking opportune routes unless they can be made with the full being. I imagine he has met a great deal of people in person both who vote for Trump and are abject, and on the other hand those who are decent and compromised by Trumps rhetoric. This is democracy, the true battle to the death for values. If Clintons vices are less pertinent to his experience than Trumps vices, then at least I must concede that Trump needs to alter certain things. I do trust Capable as an instinct. His political ideas are incomplete simply because he has not seen the necessity of my scheme, which needs a Trumpian victory (small dissolution wars) or a Hillerian defeat (a large failed unification war ending in renewed chaos, possibility, remaining of the lucky nations who are rich but have no nuclear arsenal) I would not have been so bold in the title had I not figured out the line of the best prospect from value ontology. There is going to be a global agreement, but it is not going to be of a political nature, rather a purely juridical one; the court in the Hague. Global Justice must be done to the worst criminals - to set an example. That is all. For the rest, all private and national agencies across the globe have all the resources to do what they need to do.
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:37 pm
The US must formally agree to some conditions for the Tribunal (the work of which has not been without hypocrisy, but has still inspired fear in the right type of people - a unique feat) - it must admit to some responsibility for its actions abroad. If it does this, a league of world leaders will have emerged in the US first, then China and Russia, then Europe (nuke-alliances are regional), India/Pakistan/Iran/Israel, the whole axis of - as well as Japan/Korea (I assume the Northern half will either go to China or to the Southern logos, which is a supremely privileged US vassal state where life is quantitatively much better than in the US (but infinitely more monomanic), Brazil, and whatever rising nation is exploiting its population or resources cleverly and according to the standard of self-valuing so as to produce true power, which is vitality. All nations are led both in foreign politics and self-cultivation in example by the virtues of the supreme nation, the United States of America, which will find, in this role, in all its American fellow nations happy second-equals. America as a continent has never seen its pride compromised, so it is robustly fit for the task, and I can’t see any other historical necessity than that some axis from Washington to Sao Paulo will come to take the world in a grip that will become its spine over the course of the next centuries. Formally all nations are equal, and Russia and China are giants by all measure, but the sort of agreement by rapport that can be formed along that ten thousand mile mountainrange is invincible by its pure aesthetics.
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Last edited by Fixed Cross on Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:40 pm
… US type constitution as a default code for nations…
Yes I agreed a while back in the thread that American constitutional philosophy should first: be perfected in a true independent US free from intrusion by foreign interests, cultures, and governments. (the Constitution was only the first brick in the edifice) Then: exported to the rest of the world. But that first part has never been allowed to happen, due to globalization. We must re-assert our independence politically and economically with a Trump victory, strip the central government, and continue working out our political system until we are satisfied with it for our own populace.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:43 pm
Sounds like a plan.
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:44 pm
We simply do not yet possess the political scheme required to bring about the global system Capable envisions, (I recognize it is not the same as the current globalist regime) for our constitution itself has failed us in this country, that’s why the central government has been able to overstep its sphere to this extent. Until we develop that scheme, acting on the intention for a democracy of nations- however noble that intention may be, will likely prove disastrous, at a time when there is no more room left for disasters of the global variety.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:57 pm
And one other thing about the fact that Trump is not a politician or legal expert, and that isn’t the worst thing in the world- some would say it is good:
Our first president was a general. He killed guys. Not a politician or lawyer. With an equivalent of an elementary school education.
He seemed to do alright.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 12:50 am
“We simply do not yet possess the political scheme required to bring about the global system Capable envisions, (I recognize it is not the same as the current globalist regime) for our constitution itself has failed us in this country, that’s why the central government has been able to overstep its sphere to this extent. Until we develop that scheme, acting on the intention for a democracy of nations- however noble that intention may be, will likely prove disastrous, at a time when there is no more room left for disasters of the global variety.”
Here Heideggers virtues comes in, the bridge concept, the self-midwifery of mankind, mastering-emerging, physis; detail through scope.
To have seen which mechanisms must end up ruling is literally to speak from the future. Science speaks from the future of objects. Philosophy from the future of man. God is a cheap philosophical trick; globalist unificationism is a result, we now break up the scheme into gods - and multiple futures. Man is writhing in clasutrophobia, the idea of a unified, shared destiny of all is as terrifying as hell has ever been to the subconscious psyche; it knows what madness that entails, and is reminded of the primordial chaos of drives…
What I means practically is that the principle has to be conceived simultaneously as a project for the US and for the world, because this is the most reliable way of honing it to perfection. Simplifying dramatically; Only in this sense is it bold enough to be American, which means ‘not silly’.
Simultaneously conceived, or conceived to apply universally, but not implemented anywhere before it is verified in its effectiveness at home. Prudence in boldness, boldness for prudence; the Doric spirit of the US.
Expand minimalization [myhth - Zeus subduing Kronos/time (and by implication liberating Ouranos/potential)]; philosophy commanding being-as-time, bringing about the powers of value. To value power here - value the cycles, ‘the way things go’ - affirmation of recurrence - not feverish and idealistic but calm and empirical. Real cycles, clockwork.
To begin with, what we can actually accomplish globally as Nietzsche’s favorite men, forgers of myth and morality,
‘Eternally’ recurring feasts.
We wont be able to organize shit without them. This the Fathers knew and implemented well.
A feat in the sense of Halloween or Thanks giving or Christmas is a formal and symbolic recognition of valuing, in terms of the self-valuing of the entire nation. It is a true institution of love, and it cultivates what I will plainly call the good. The more festivals the better - the Romans had one nearly every day.
These arent coincidences in the normal sense of the word; they are engineered co-incidences, producing this Heideggerian emerging, the Greek physis.
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:42 am
I don’t entirely go along with Nietzsche’s conception of the affirmation, but the idea that the dialectic literally makes the negation of Being the essence of Being, is my starting problem with it. The dialectic is entirely re-active. It does not touch the ground of Affirmation. Because it is entirely reactive, the dialectic is concerned with change- it is the essential formulation of change and incorporation. But:
[ The eudaemonia
of man, the perfected happiness of humanity, must lie in what Aristotle deems
pure activity, that is, activity outside of time, activity that is not passive before the goad
of any other kind of activity, rather such exogenous re-active forces are located in the
poetic compulsion toward beautiful forms or in the religious instinct, and we have only
philosophy to turn to for this perfect activity. A timeless, motionless activity is simply an
activity that does not cause change, that does not influence any other activities into
becoming reactive to it: philosophy is this perfection. ]
By my definition, dialectics is simply not philosophy. In fact… it seems to be the opposite. The dialectic makes all concepts become reactive to it, absorbed into it, and submitted to its process. It needs other concepts to become reactive to it in order to function, and thus it seems to be a diminishing force, a force exhausted by its own strength, a force incapable of affirming its own positive being.
True philosophy does not require the reactive submission of other powers to itself, in order to exist.
Not only does philosophy not force other powers to become reactive to it, true philosophy forces other powers to become active, affirmative of themselves and their own positive being: (this is why I can support Trump and delight in things contrary to my own philosophy- my philosophy has liberated all powers within myself to establish their independence and affirmative character, their plurality rather than dialectical synthesis)
[ Once freedom is set into motion its tendency is to communicate itself as Schelling says,
to induce everything that it touches to exercising its own liberty and, just as the stars
begin to appear in the firmament, so the stars in the moral heavens rouse themselves one
by one, each seemingly as a champion to every other, to finally annunciate that perfected
eutaxy of powers over whose image we are set upon ourselves in capitulant deliverance- to
a philosophy, if we but light that first star, that is, the urge for immortality, for
continued Being, for existence. ]
This is what I want VO to be: and dialectics seems to be literally the opposite.
And this perhaps not coincidentally fits what I want politics to become as well, with a return to independent nation states.
As you said above: "we now break up the scheme into gods - and multiple futures. Man is writhing in clasutrophobia, the idea of a unified, shared destiny of all is as terrifying as hell has ever been to the subconscious psyche; it knows what madness that entails, and is reminded of the primordial chaos of drives… "
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 3:02 am
The whole point of the dialectic is that two things, like Being and Nonbeing, are opposites, because each contains within itself the seed of the other. So when you combine them in synthesis, what you’re doing is eliminating their difference: difference here is only an existent quality, not essential. The culmination of the dialectic in absolute spirit lies in the extinguishing of all difference and identity from thought, a full enclosure of the logos from the mythos: it lies in extinguishing everything that life is, for life is identity, self-valuations, self-determinations, boundaries, difference.
If every thing contains within itself the seed of its own opposite or negation, and thought itself- should thought be dialectical, can only synthesize them by eliminating their difference, when we are left with absolute spirit with no identity, how can there possibly exist self-valuation?
" Not only does philosophy not force other powers to become reactive to it, true philosophy forces other powers to become active, affirmative of themselves and their own positive being… "
This is what I mean by reification.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 3:17 am
In my system, two datums enter into conceptual opposition, not by expressing the seed of their own negation in the other, but in mutually affirming Being in its purity, from two independent vantage points (epistemes*); thus Luther talked about how the evil man affirms the being and potency of god but in an inverted way, while the good man affirms it just the same. Then there is a stage of negative reflection in which that basis of mutual affirmation is negated, namely Being in its pure affirmative character, thus both the good and evil man sin they simply respond to it differently, and sin is the negation or absence of the divine potency. Then the good and evil man atone for their sin and reincorporate that purity of Being’s affirmation which they both were grounded in, though now it enters into the world through their atonement in a new form- it has been reified. And so the history of thought is the history of this constant withdraw and re-participation of the divine, Being, in the material world, as it changes forms with each reification.
" Instead of ascribing the imperfect core of Nonbeing to Being, its opposite: we ascribe everything to Being. Being contains, not the core of its own conceptual opposite or nonbeing, but the plenitude, the pure Affirmation. Then when it externalizes itself, this process, instead of producing the paradoxical negation of the negation, produces an infinitude of Being(s.) Being becomes surrounded on all sides by innumerable other(s), not just its own “conceptual opposite.” Then two of these other(s) reify their conceptual tension through a stage of negative reflection, which destabilizes them by reincorporating the original affirmative Being: they reify Being in its otherness as a new term born of their negation, they internalize the externalization of Being’s plenitude as otherness, for the other- as pure otherness- as consciousness or spirit, as humanity specifically: that is what human consciousness is. This is how the infinite God creates the finite consciousness of man in which he participates like one solitude within another solitude, ie. love, without ever diminishing the duality of god and man, of solitude and solitude. My process of reification describes not change, but generation; not transformation into something’s opposite, but how Being in its pure affirmation, setting behind the universe and history, finds a way to constantly participate in that universe it is conceptually isolated from, participate in the very plentitude it itself generated; how the infinite Being of pure affirmation re-submerges itself in its universe and re-emerges within it through the reification as a guiding episteme to continue driving history forward, to continue generating the expressed plenitude of other being(s) we see around us."
In other contexts I refer to the episteme alongside the passive ground:
" The perfect, timeless activity of philosophy is that which supplies the passive ground of
value or meaning, it is in other words the creative act, but philosophy is not constituted by
the value it creates."
The timeless perfection of philosophy, which acts without causing change- without forcing other things to become reactive to it, instead prodding them with Being’s affirmative content to become activities themselves, to express their self-valuation, is accomplished in that it supplies the passive ground of a value upon which these things can begin actively expressing their own affirmative being to Being. But it is this very passivity or ground, which allows being(s) to express their affirmative content to Being, that prevents being(s) from ever fully ridding themselves of their identity, of becoming their opposite, or dialectically synthesizing and re-unifying with their source in Being. Thus:
[ Politics is in essence the
organization of imperfect activities upon the innermost passive ground, upon a meaning,
a value, an aspiration- a ground that is supplied by philosophy but does not constitute
philosophy. In Nietzsche this passive ground as is supplied by philosophy is called simply
Power, for every moral and philosophic value constitutes a quanta of power, a certain
specification of potential energetics. The actualization and configuration of this power
and potential with other quanta of power, with other values, is Will, which takes the form
of politics both in external society and inwardly as a rank ordering of our evolutionary
drives: the Will to Power specifies the dimension within which these configurations are
made, within which the imperfect reactivity of forces exogenous to philosophy are
organized on the passive ground of philosophy, whose highest realization is the eternal
return, a complete re-action and involution. Insofar as kinesis is a movement of the
imperfect toward the perfect, following Aristotle’s definition, the kinesis of the polis is a
movement from present material conditions toward eudaemonia or happiness, from
reactivity coordinated within an organism toward the timeless perfected activity of a soul,
but since this movement takes place on a passive ground it can never arrive at its object,
for the polis, in its organization of re-active forces, creates the very dimension of time or
kinesis which it wants to escape from- a dimension we call history. History is the
reckoning of its own end. Thus Nietzsche proposes transvaluation as the form of this
reckoning, whereby the circle of time is turned back around in the vicious circle of God.]
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:08 am
So the relation between a (b)eing and (B)eing can never be negative in this scheme, which is the central anti-dialectical core. That relation, of being to Being, is pure difference, after Deleuze. It can only be positive, generative, irresolvable. It is the excess. What Kierkegaard called: qualitative disjunction. What N. called Will to Power- each philosopher had a name for it: being strives toward that Being, strives to destroy itself and overcome itself to shed its identity and become the All, the Affirmation itself. … To become the Affirmation itself… That is what self-valuation is in my terms. Yet, it cannot succeed: the very kinesis this will institutes condemns it to its identity, to the passive ground, which Nietzsche grasped as the eternal recurrence. So in my philosophy Nietzsche is absorbed and reinterpreted: the Will-To-Power is simply the fact of this asymmetry between being and Being, which urges each being to affirm its being as Being and become the All, the Affirmation.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:28 am
Yes this is Beings nature as I also see it, a violent glory bursting into tragedy, which is the sap of culture, but this history of philosophy is superseded here - in this particular philosophy where pure affirmation is embodied as difference; where a paganism comes out of the affirmation both of god, pure affirmation, and Being, pure difference; instincts are born here that can endure this condition of asymptotic approach to perfect self-valuation to the point of discovering a new bliss, which is an order created by the continuous presence of also asymptotically rising wills - my mind had instantly connected this to the notion of the Doric order, which was always the chosen structurality of aesthetics to guide my intellectual politics towards a world. Somehow my mind works like that, with stone and light and iron, materials.
In this light Capable and I did design the Pentad; to separate pillars in the most separating form. (The path of Venus as seen from the Earth happens to have that structure - I don’t know why. Well I do, valuing, maximization of difference — exaltation is the backbone of all dynamis.)
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:47 am
Really I’d love a debate on the merits of Trump where the following terms are banned for all involved: racist, sexist, bully, Hitler, fascist, egomaniac, megalomaniac, demagogue, I could think of a few more. Then we’ll see where we’re at.
" I found one point Parodites made and you just reiterated which I have yet to respond to, namely that global government would amount to giving power to be tyrannical, that in order to fight global warming we would necessarily be handing over tyrannical power to a global level government. I disagree because while yes global government could be used for tyrannical ends, this is the case with any government; it requires that we carefully craft the structure of government such as the Founders did in the US, and not just abandon the entire project. Again this falls back on the fact that I’ve already outlined my idea of how global government could work, a kind of UN like setup but with more force of law and some kind of basic shared military apparatus. Decisions would be voted on by representatives, not made by one tyrant."
Yes but a new world order- an actual shared military apparatus over the earth: that would be a lot harder to overthrow, should things sour. And my point will continue to be: the national identities in play are too different to reconcile their populations with the interests of the respective nation-states. I have also pointed out how the EU will never be like the US for geographic and economic reasons. In order for it to function, one nation will end up having to compromise the interests of its own citizens on the behalf of a foreign nation: outside governments will be able to influence us, etc. I don’t want any outside force to influence the US government. I don’t want a vote cast in Brussels to have any effect on anything in the US, as it once effected Britain, because the culture of Brussels isn’t the culture of the US. It doesn’t make sense. Someone in Europe doesn’t understand the situation and culture of someone living in the US, these populations are completely separate from one another, why would we want to pool their political force into a few common representatives who could not possibly consolidate the differences in these populations? In the US, ideology is not consistently spread out: if we take a consensus of the whole population on rather gay marriage should be legalized, it will probably come out yes, but there are many states where, if that vote was taken from their sole consensus, the result would be no, as the populace there has a different culture and they’re more religious: this dis-empowering at the level of local communities would be magnified a thousand times in the system you’re describing; a thousand-thousand times. Entire small nation-states would have their political force cut to nothing, and lose their sovereign right to self-determination. This is why mandating a federal legalization of gay marriage is an unjust execution of central authority; the states have a right to self-determination. Without an amendment, the Constitution does not grant the power to define marriage to the central government. And this is the way it should be, to preserve the integrity of national ethos at the most fundamental level, local community. Do you not see, even if you think gays should be able to marry as I do, that if we do not follow that course, and we allow the central government to magically produce these “implied” powers, that there is nothing to limit it? It will continue growing and growing, expanding its power, as it has done so.
A sik þau trûðu
Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?
- Virgil.
It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar
Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09
PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:13 pm
Increasing military strongholds and centralization does not seem the best way of moving away from fascism to me either.
However, reducing US leverage in the world is unacceptable as well, as the system will collapse. What needs to happen first is increasing the leverage, by electing a strong politician, a man with an actual love for his country, and the experience of building things by bridging ideological gaps, a restoration of the areas that have been made into less than humane by the post cold war chaos politics by inserting working economic infrastructure, opening markets - so as to eventually ennoble the populations so as to actually want a secular minimalist government.
