Crony
Capitalism, The Closest Thing to Anarchy, the Reciprocal of Tyranny
Dr. Gerry Lower, Keystone, South Dakota OpEdNews.Com
We of the western cultural persuasion seem to be absolutely convinced
that the absence of law and order is anarchy and disorder, that legalism
is the opposite of anarchism. We are certain that the entire social fabric
would immediately unravel without laws, punishments and enforcement. We
think this way because we blindly assume that law is the only viable means
of maintaining social order.
This, of course, is utter human nonsense, since it is to take the
intellectual position that the Oriental cultures, traditionally based in
ethics rather than law, never existed, that there is no such thing as
family and public opinion (or that Oriental ethical systems are irrelevant
to the western world's notions of order).
If you placed your pocketbook on the street corner in downtown Baghdad and
walked around the block, there is a very high probability that it would
still be there upon your return. It would be the fear of Guilt for having
broken the religious legal code and, perhaps, fear of having one's hand
chopped off as punishment that would keep your pocketbook in place. One
would have failed to be obedient to God's law, failed to maintain proper
conduct, and one would be deserving of whatever punishments a vengeful God
might dictate.
If you placed your pocketbook on the street corner in downtown Tokyo and
walked around the block, there is a very high probability that it would
still be there upon your return. It would be the fear of Shame for having
brought dishonor to oneself and one's family (who taught by example that
one ought have respect for people and their property) that would keep your
pocketbook in place. One would have failed to maintain proper comport,
failed to maintain proper relationships and one would be deserving of
whatever humiliation Society might dictate.
How can this be in Oriental cultures? How do these traditionally
"atheistic" cultures accomplish this, if law is so absolutely
essential to maintaining decent human behavior and social order? Clearly,
it is possible to achieve the same social outcome, i.e., minimization of
theft, in both the traditional west (in the absence of ethics) and in the
traditional east (in the absence of law). The point is that purely legal
systems (JudeoRomanism) and purely ethical systems (Confucianism) are both
able to maintain a modicum of order in society, as they were intended, in
complementary opposite ways.
In the Orient, we have family and public opinion, taught by example
("do as I do, not as I say"), as the bottom line, keeping in
mind that an absolutist ethic demands respectful and loyal behavior
regardless and can easily become a "tyranny of goodness," which
demands that one be loyal, even if those overhead are liars and thieves.
In the Occident, we have law, taught by word ("do as I say, not as I
do") as the bottom line, keeping in mind that an absolute legalism
demands respectful and obedient behavior regardless and can easily become
a "tyranny of law," which demands that one be obedient, even if
those overhead are liars and thieves.
It would seem, in this comparison, that family and public opinion are the
stronger approach, not requiring so much in the way of hired enforcement,
legal systems and prisons. In fact, even today, following its
westernization and capitalization, Japan has, proportionately, about one
tenth as many citizens behind bars as does the U.S. The simple truth is
that it has always been far cheaper to raise a child to be a thoughtful,
caring citizen than to incarcerate and rehabilitate a screwed up adult.
We see the proof right here in America, where we are the "most law
ridden people on earth," where we are the "most violent and
self-destructive nation on earth," and where we have the largest
proportion of our citizenry locked behind bars, many youthful violators
for non-violent crimes. The problem is one of living in an amorphous
society where there is so little allowable honesty and truth that the
family, the community and the public haven't much of a collective opinion
about anything. We call the result "gridlock." Insofar as it
takes a village or a nation to raise a child, we have not provided much in
the way of either, all for our lack of agreement on what constitutes a
democracy and what counts in a democracy. This sin of greed and omission
has done a poor job of raising our children.
Western legal systems and eastern ethical systems are complementary
opposites, representing cultural extremes established millennia ago in the
interest of establishing and maintaining the social order. In both cases,
these ancient approaches, unfettered by human knowledge, led to a good
deal of book burning and feudalism, a tyranny of law in the west and a
tyranny of goodness in the east.
The lesson to be learned is that it is Tyranny, not Anarchy, that the
people ought be most concerned about, most afraid of, and here is why.
ANARCHY is when individuals "lord" it over society and
its justifiable needs (e.g., The Lord of the Flies").
TYRANNY is when society "lords" it over individuals and
their justifiable needs (JudeoRoman imperialism and colonialism, right
wing "compassionate" conservatism).
Either way "the people" are out of it.
Anarchy is not the absence of law and order. ANARCHY IS THE RECIPROCAL
OF TYRANNY.
Individual anarchy itself, "Lord of the Flies" style, has little
cultural and historical precedent since a society where each and every
individual is out for only himself would not last for very long and would
not constitute a "culture" or a "society."
Contemporary crony capitalism is about as close to an individual anarchy
as is possible to achieve in reality, with individuals uniformly in
competition with each other over the necessities of life, food, shelter,
education and medication. In preservation of this relatively mindless
individual anarchy, religious crony capitalism employs JudeoRoman
justifications to rationalize the use of deceit and deception in
nourishing despotic control over the people, their press and their minds.
Jefferson declared open war, not on anarchy, but on all forms of tyranny
over the human mind. In this sense, America's fathers were intellectual
"anarchists" in that they dispensed with papal and monarchical
authority in favor of Democracy and "the will of the people."
They dispensed with all forms of external authority so the people might
think for themselves. But, they were not anarchists at all in the sense
that they worked for a common, agreed-upon cause, Democracy and freedom
from religious tyranny and oppression.
To place the highest emphasis on human values and human knowledge, to
place the highest value on the nourishment of human rights rather than law
or ethics, is not to open the doors to anarchy, it is to close the doors
to tyranny. It is to open the doors to Democracy, as a proud example of a
collective anarchy, when the people take control of their own government.
Dr. Gerry Lower lives in Keystone, South Dakota in the shadow of Mount
Rushmore. He is published in the areas of molecular pathology/oncology/epidemiology,
medical theory/philosophy/ethics, and global philosophy and ethics. Gerry
has recently returned from Ukraine where he presented several papers on
the values of science and democracy at the Kiev Medical Academy. His
primary concern is the development of a rigorously-definable global
philosophy and ethics suitable for a global democracy. This article is
originally published at opednews.com.
Copyright Dr. Gerry Lower, but permission is granted for reprint in print,
email, blog, or web media so long as this credit is attached. |
