"Politics and the English Language"
by George Orwell, 1946
Hmm. True? False? Desirable? Undesirable?
Actually, the full quote is
"In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics.'
All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of
lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia."
True? False?
Was politics conducted differently in other ages?
And if true now, could it realistically be otherwise in the future?
Aristotle, Politics, Bk 1, Ch 1, 10.
My gloss, based on Stone's discussion in his excellent
The Trial of Socrates, I. F. Stone, page 9
trans. Jowett available online here
trans. Rackhamavailable online at The Perseus Project
Pericles, Funeral Oration
in Thucydides
The History of the Peloponnesian War 2.40
quoted here
Trans. Warner -- the Everyman Library / Penguin Classics edition
I like this better than
Crawley (also here -- long file!) or Jowett
Nader and the Power of Everyman
by Hays Gorey. Page 251
"Men (and women) by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties:1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes.In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. Call them, therefore, Liberals and Serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, Whigs and Tories, Republicans and Federalists, Aristocrats and Democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still, and pursue the same object. The last appellation of Aristocrats and Democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all."
2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, tho’ not the most wise depository of the public interests.
Thomas Jefferson,
Letter to Henry Ludlow, 10 AUG 1824
Here
I should have added this to the site years ago.
Thanks to Jonathan Schwarz
posting at This Modern World 28 JUN 2006
for reminding me to finally do so.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (and women) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Here
Insurgents.
(They were, too.)
"Throughout the Industrial Age, and especially during the Mass Media Era — the end of which is threatened by the massively self-informing nature of the Net — politics has been about money. We've had a government of the money, by the money and for the money, most of which has come from industrial interest groups."
Consent.
Weblog entry of 23 JUL 2003 by Doc Searls
-- Links are mine -- ed.
"The legislative job of the President is especially important to the people who have no special representatives to plead their cause before Congress -- and that includes the great majority. I sometimes express it by saying the President is the only lobbyist that one hundred and fifty million Americans have. The other twenty million are able to employ people to represent them -- and that’s all right, it’s the exercise of the right of petition -- but someone has to look after the interests of the one hundred and fifty million that are left."
Harry S. Truman, speech to the Press and Union League Club,
San Francisco, California, October 25, 1956
Quoted here
"... "No government allows absolute liberty." The idea of government being the establishment of society upon certain rules or laws which require conformity to them; and the idea of absolute liberty being for any one to do whatever he pleases..."
from An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
by John Locke. Book 4:
Chapter 3, section 18
Atributed, apparently without foundation, to
George Washington
"Government is the thing. Law is the thing. Not brotherhood, not international cooperation, not security councils that can stop war only by waging it ... Where does security lie, anyway -- security against the thief, the murderer? In brotherly love? Not at all. It lies in government."
E. B. White
Quoted here
"We have a duty to look after each other, and we invent governments for this purpose. If we lose control of our government, then we lose our ability to dispense justice and human kindness. Our first priority today, then, is to defeat utterly those forces of greed and corruption that have come between us and our self-governance."
Political activist Doris Haddock -- "Granny D"
-- that sounds about right to me.
Pages on this site on / Agape /, / TZEDAKAH /
-- Pages on this site on specific political forms, styles, controversies, and techniques --
- Anarchism, Syndicalism, Labor
- Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism (Including Fascism and "fascistic" movements)
- Basileia
- The Bobo Synthesis and Crunchy Conservatism
- Bureaucracy
- Conservatism
- Constitutional Government and the Rule of Law
- Democracy
- "Fascism Lite"
- Federalism, Globalization, Decentralization, Regionalism, Internationalism
- The Greens
- Imperialism, Colonialism, Neo-Colonialism
- Jacobinism and Its Opposition
- The Left and Marxism
- Liberalism
- Liberalism and Conservatism -- At various places on this site, I state my opinion that "Classical Liberalism" and "Classical Conservatism" were originally the same thing: a brief explanation of why this is not the paradox it might appear.
- Libertarianism
- Meritocracy
- Minarchy (AKA "Miniarchy")
- Monarchy, Aristocracy, Feudalism
- Neoliberalism
- Plutocracy
- Progressivism and Its Opposition
- The Radical Right ("Theocracy")
- "Republicrats" -- (USA-centric; on the fact that the USA has functioned as a duopoly for most of its history but is now becoming effectively a one-party state)
- Statism
- Taking Action
- "The Nomenclature Mess"
- Political Labels: Counter-Intutive
- Political Spectrums
For specific political thinkers, activists, and commentators, see for now the general listing of - / Individuals of Note /
(This note dating originally from the late 1990s -- before politics had once again become quasi-medieval --)
The term "political" is often used nowadays to mean "egotistically argumentative", "superficially populist", "short-sighted", but it seems pretty obvious that no human culture can exist without politics in its original sense -- "the art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs" (American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd ed.). Any human society will develop a highest-order organizational sector, what we conventionally call the realm of the political.It therefore remains to discuss the form of this societal organization. My own sympathies lie toward a Green "minarchy", classical liberalism, federalism, constitutionalism or the "rule of law", syndicalism (though I'm suspicious of extreme anarchism, even under the name Libertarianism), and extensive democracy.
To form a more perfect Union, establish Justice,
insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,
promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty
The Founders of the United States of America summarize explicitly here what they thought they were doing. According to their natural-rights philosophy of government, this is what the Constitution of the United States, the government of the United States, and in fact the United States itself was for -- and by extension what any government is for.
I think it very appropriate to consider all societies, governments, and political proposals in light of these goals.
Observations on the appropriate size of governments from Kelley Ross:
Human Nature, Anarchy, and Capitalism
"There are, indeed, libertarian anarchists, and it is even possible to argue that John Locke's own principles make it difficult to avoid anarchy. On the other hand, neither Locke, nor Smith, nor Washington, nor Jefferson, nor Mill, nor F.A. Hayek, nor even Ayn Rand were anarchists.
To them "minimalist government" meant, indeed, government; and such a government needed to exercise maximal power but only for certain purposes, as never expressed better than by Jefferson himself, in his First Inaugural Address of 1801:
Still one thing more, fellow citizens -- a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.
Question: Do you think that government is necessary? Do you think we may progress beyond the tyranny of majority rule?
Noam Chomsky: I would be happy if there was majority rule. So the first thing is to progress to that. But what we have is rule by narrow minority that have succeeded in getting small amounts of power in their hands. As long as there are enormous private tryannies, that are unaccountable to the general public, a strong government that is at least accountable to the public at will is necessary for the advancement of fundamental rights. In a more free and democratic society in which private (sic -- there seems to be a word missing in the original transcript here) is dissolved, then big government should be broken down and decentralized, and possibly eliminated.
"Men are equally mad everywhere; they have made the laws little by little, as gaps are repaired in a wall. Here eldest sons have taken all they could from younger sons, there younger sons share equally. Sometimes the Church has commanded the duel, sometimes she has anathematized it. The partisans and the enemies of Aristotle have each been excommunicated in their turn, as have those who wore long hair and those who wore short. In this world we have perfect law only to rule a species of madness called gaming. The rules of gaming are the only ones which admit neither exception, relaxation, variety nor tyranny. A man who has been a lackey, if he play at lansquenet with kings, is paid without difficulty if he win; everywhere else the law is a sword with which the stronger cut the weaker in pieces.
Nevertheless, this world exists as if everything were well ordered; the irregularity is of our nature; our political world is like our globe, a misshapen thing which always preserves itself. It would be mad to wish that the mountains, the seas, the rivers, were traced in beautiful regular forms; it would be still more mad to ask perfect wisdom of men; it would be wishing to give wings to dogs or horns to eagles."
"When combined with the concept of t'ien ming, the "mandate of Heaven"‚ the moral order of the universe as encompassed by the imperative that the Emperor concern himself overwhelmingly with the welfare of the people, it's natural that jen as meaning "common people" eventually would come to include the moral obligations of the Emperor to the well-being of the common people."
Feed the hungry
Give drink to the thirsty
Clothe the naked
Shelter the homeless
Visit the imprisoned
Visit the sick
Bury the dead
Jesus goes on to say
"I tell you the truth,
whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me."
You want to argue about this, argue with him, not with me.
Some of you aren't Christians (I'm not.) I think that most of us would nevertheless agree that this is a pretty good list.
"That American productivity has slid since the 1950s is a fact. Annual productivity growth rates that were in the 3.0 to 3.5 percent range have fallen below 1 percent. As a result, many Americans have suffered a decline in their living standard. ...
"The underlying cause of our productivity decline is the growth in the size of government."
"The optimal tax rate (I don't know if anyone else calls this the "Laffer Rate", but that seems like a good name to me -- ed. I suppose it should be the "Scully Rate" here.) is no greater than 23 percent of GNP."
The optimal (growth-maximizing) average rate for federal, state and local taxes combined is between 21.5 percent and 22.9 percent of GNP. Taxes as a share of GNP were at the optimal rate in 1949 and have not been there since.
The optimal tax rates derived from this model are consistent with previous studies that conclude that an optimal size of government is 19 percent of GNP and that government spending of 20 percent of GNP maximizes productivity.19 All of these estimates imply that the economic growth rate and hence the level of GNP is far below what would have been achieved had the nation's total tax rate been kept at its 1949 level. ...
"Excessive taxation arises because of pressure from competing special interest groups." "
(emphasis in original -- ed.
-- article footnotes (nice) --
I'd be very interested to see how the actual numbers
from the last decade's boom compare with the hypothesis here.)
"Gandhi said an elected representative is one on whom you have bestowed your power of attorney.
Such a person should be allowed to wield authority only as long as s/he enjoys your confidence. When politicians indulge in power games, they act without principles. To remain in power at all cost is unethical. Gandhi said when politicians (or anyone else, for that matter) give up the pursuit of Truth they, or in the case of parties, would be doomed. Partisan politics, lobbying, bribing, and other forms of malpractice that are so rampant in politics today is also unprincipled. Politics has earned the reputation of being dirty. It is so because we made it dirty. We create power groups to lobby for our cause and are willing to do anything to achieve our goal. Not many among human kind have learned how to resist temptation, so who is to blame for the mess we find ourselves in?"
From a discussion (apparently by Arun Gandhi)
of Politics without Principles,
one of Gandhiji's Seven Blunders of the World.
"These new prospects did not originate from any clever slogans; they reflect the harsh contradictions visible in people's lives and shifting sensibilities across the nation -- the general disgust with corporate money's overbearing influence on public decision-making, the fragile desire for a new and more humane internationalism, the growing but unfocused anger at government's failure to act on any of the largest problems."Personally, I suspect a Bush win might be a very good thing for the progressive movement in this country. Yes, we will have four bad years, and probably some irredeemable consequences, but, as Mahatma Gandhi is supposed to have said (I can't locate the exact cite):
"What is the solution to anarchism?
The only peaceful solution to such disputes is to have one agency with the power to settle those disagreements, according to one set of objectively defined laws--a government. This is what corporations do under capitalism, when they have a dispute with each other -- they go to court (government)."
"As skeptics, we are accustomed to deliberation, evaluation of evidence, and the insistence upon extraordinary evidence in support of extraordinary claims. These traits are not important to the political process, which instead rewards appeals to emotion and the successful manipulation of human passion. ...
It seems to me that skeptics who wish to be politically active have a limited number of choices. They can affiliate with the growing libertarian movement, which has a historically informed view as to the limited sphere of action within which government can effectively operate, and accepts public choice theory as the one most compatible with existing evidence. This is what I have done. Another possibility is to work with the Democratic Party, using reason and historical evidence to show that government is not an effective tool for improving the lives of the poor in any meaningful sense. (sic) Still a third possibility is to work with the Republican Party, suggesting that the same factors that limit the effectiveness of government in managing the economy limit its effectiveness in personal affairs as well. This is the approach adopted by the Republican Liberty Caucus.
(Yet another option, and my own, might be to align oneself with the Green movement as the most humanistic and life-affirming. Documents such as World Scientists' Warning to Humanity show clearly that there is no absolute disjunct between a scientific attitude and Green concerns.)
But renouncing politics altogether is a luxury that skeptics cannot afford. When faced with the de facto increase in the politicization of American life, even in the face of a newly elected Congress that claims to champion limited government, skeptics cannot afford to sit on the sidelines. If we remain aloof, then by our silence we will have contributed to a world where people believe that they can have things without paying for them, that compelling charity is compassion, and that banning vice is virtue. Now, more than ever, American politics needs reason and clear thinking. If we do not provide it, who will?"
Unless the Supremes reverse their decision -- highly unlikely -- or a constitutional amendment is passed to reverse it -- even more unlikely -- the United States may now have officially left the community of modern democracies. Don't be surprised if, not too long from now, you find yourself being shaken down for bribes at police checkpoints or summarily arrested for espousing the wrong political opinion. These are very scary times, and things usually get worse before they get better. (Actually, they rarely get better.) "
"All governments run on wheels within wheels that they rarely let their own populace see. To protect reputations, to win elections, or simply through greed, career-minded officials have been known to bury damaging information. To gain a political edge, even friendly nations spy on each other; and to gain an economic edge, unfriendly nations arm each other. Power has always been a game of politics over justice, propaganda over truth, expediency over morality. Nations are no more moral than the people they represent.
Because many of us dislike hearing such things, all governments find it easier simply not to tell us."
"For an effective social safety net, most people think government has to guarantee jobs, wages, incomes, or all three. Each offers a good slogan, at least, but is more complex than it appears."
"... our home was invaded early in the morning. We were robbed at gunpoint and then kidnapped. These terrorists (sic: Kubby is talking here about being arrested by the police, and making the point that the tactics of "terrorists" and lawful authorities bear some similarity -- see the standard definition of government as "that sector of society with a legal monopoly on the use of force.") even tried, though unsuccessfully, to extort $200,000 (in bail) from us. Worst of all, these terrorists had badges, and were empowered by laws that were originally passed to be used against "drug lords." Despite the fact that we were lawfully exercising rights granted to us by a medical marijuana law we helped to pass, we found ourselves facing 19 criminal counts."Steve Kubby is the founder of The American Medical Marijuana Association and played a key role in the passage of California's Prop. 215, the statewide initiative legalizing medical use of cannabis."
After two and a half years and a quarter of a million dollars in legal expenses, a jury acquitted us and we regained our freedom, but little else (Kubby and family were in fact innocent, in the technical sense of the term. Personally, I'm kind of fuzzy on the whole "medicinal marijuana" thing [Here's Google on the subject]. What "safeguards" are in place to distinguish "medical" growing and use from recreational or commercial? I.e., I think that the police may in many cases be excused a certain skepticism in these matters.) (On the other hand, I think that cannabis use, production, and sale should be immediately decriminalized in all jurisdictions and all persons found guilty only of non-violent production, transport, sale, or use be pardoned immediately.). Even though we had proved our innocence, none of the terrorists involved were ever punished for this illegal raid, nor was any of the property stolen from us returned, not even the data off of our computers. But we survived and sought an escape from such terror in the freedom and wildness of British Columbia.
From the safety of Canada, we now watch in horror as America's police and military are handed the keys to the country. Because of our experience with "drug lord" laws being used against our family, we understand that, with the passage of the "U.S.A. Act", the Constitution has effectively been suspended and martial law imposed."
P. J. O'Rourke
I'm quoting this one from memory, folks -- don't have a cite.
quoted
here
Frankly, I think this is a fair summary of politics,
and I don't have any problem with this.
Everybody does want "a dollar",
(or a license, or a raise, or a tax cut,
or a subsidy, or a new road,
or their neighbor to get out of their face)
and it's the role of government to balance
competing claims.
UPDATE: I'm not sure whether this is intended to mean
"All politics is extortion"
If so, I don't agree with this summary.