Sunday, June 17, 2012

Blog 16 Midsummer New Year of Johns Eve 2012

Where to Look for The Golden Egg.

What was unique about the conversion of Vladimir of Rus was that  according to Matthew Raphael Johnson in his book “The Third Rome”, it set into motion a juridicial version of the boyars desire to override “ethnic nationalism under a universal canonical structure [an institution, which] is something particularly Byzantine, and the Orthodox Churches, self governing but still holding to an identical canonical and dogmatic structure, [remains] to this day.”

Dismissed by neo-liberal free traders and federalists, who would unify (Europe, for example) into one centralized power ruled from Brussels. The model of the “Byzantine Commonwealth” was, and remains to this day in the mindset of the West, an example of a militarily weak government.

Be that as it may, the strength of this Commonwealth was in the fact that it was also a stable government if military violence was kept under control and the saints were not slaughtered en masse and otherwise intimidated.

How does one keep violence under control?

In our time, it appears to be a silly and ridiculous question, because we cannot imagine living in a not-violent habitat.

Nevertheless, a not-violent habitat is not only imaginable, but actually existed before the forced conversion of Vladimir to the boyar way of thinking.

This is to say that the unrest and conflict in the days of Vladimir is suspect of being the result of a rebellion against the king by the boyars. What the boyars had in mind was what today is known as a Parliamentary democracy. That is, a democracy that is limited to a select group of people, whether they be princes, boyars, or parliamentarians as a result of ‘democratic’ elections in which the majority does not shares in equal rights. This movement of the boyars-princes began in the West or, specifically, in the European northwest.

We may now see, how direct democracy and egalitarian economics, as practiced in a forest environment (where one’s material wealth was determined not by money, but was the direct result of the labour one put into building himself and hisn a hut, or house, or barn, or a woodshed) differs from private property accumulated by rent and interest. If the latter resulted in a surplus, the same was to be, over a period of time, incorporate into a corporate individual, who then quite literally become a ‘giant’. The rest of human kind remained of course less equal than the giant.
The evolution of ‘parliamentary democracy’ did not spring in one gigantic leap from a brutish countryside boyar to a member of  the Bilderberger group , whose members, though not directly involved with governance, nevertheless use their money to influence politics to the benefit of their pseudo aristocratic members.

Cynical realists may argue that given the pro-pseudo-‘democratic’ trend, which has lasted and ‘prospered’ for about a millennium, must be let run its course. It is, of course, doing just that; no one can quite tell when the movement will run out of momentum. Except for one thing:

More and more people are noting that the ‘wealth gap’ between the income of the 99% of the population (it not includes the middle class, not only the ‘lowly’ workers) and the members of pseudo-democratic parliament is increasing. Few people today are naïve enough to think it a mystery why. It is also apparent that the trend, while yet continuing, is running out of momentum, which must increasingly be artificially rescusciated by threats, deeds of war, and secret agreements such as Trans Pacific Partnership being formulated in the interest of private corporations.

Over the last thousand years, the ‘giant’ has grown into a ‘corporate giant’, who is juridically protected by a quasi Constitution. “Big John Christian” (too big to go bankrupt) will not sacrifice itself for the sake of the local or localized culture whence it may originally have arisen. John Giant is compelled to grow and to becoming more gigantic yet. So mighty has John become, that he even allows himself to be humoured by the adjective “Bad” added to his name. Protected by laws, Big Bad John has reserved the right of all violence for himself, whether the violence be merely that of the police or military.

No comments:

Post a Comment