POLITICS
Abstract:
This
filognostic manifesto, a manifest on the love
for knowledge or
filognosy,
elaborates on the themes of The Order 0f Time
with the subject of work and unemployment as its
lead to answer the fundamental questions of war
and peace. The purpose is to arrive at a clear
lead for the politics of state in relation to
the cultural and natural order of time and
timemanagement.
In
the first
chapter
we see how through a recapitulation of history
we realize that we are in an evolution of the
practice of the values of liberation.
Next in the second
chapter we
see that about the right to speak we have to
conclude that there is no political solution to
begin with, but that about reference, form and
authority we should hold on to change, time and
selfrealization in stead of fixations, lordships
and political power.
In
the third
chapter
we come to realize the fallacies of the vedic
root, political dialectics and
religious/scientific concepts of attachment to
conclude that a concept of reform and progress
is needed that doesn't make another world but
unifies the two worlds projected by any system
of material identification.
In
the fourth
chapter
we realize that there is a system of
holistic healthcare possible to account for this
abridging of the gaps of duality.
In the next fifth
chapter
the question of authority is answered clarifying
that the show is factually run on properly
balancing divisions of time that factually
employ everyone and that a holistic answer to
the dualistic fallacies must be founded on a
realistic system of status-orientation and
commitment that is reflecting the principles of
the soul.
In
the sixth
chapter
answering the question who these people of
liberation are there is concluded that 1) such a
system of liberation is maintained by a
multifaith spiritual discipline figuring as the
standard to work for offering the relative of
all individual and social ego, and that 2) the
state and money should be the servant with
becoming someone instead of somebody in
sacrificing for an informationculture of
filognosy (loving the knowledge).
In
the seventh
chapter
the practical problem of implementation is
discussed concluding that to the problem of
representation, authority, economy, transport
and social control we need five revolutions
called the revolution of respectively holism,
soul, the digital, locality, and time .
In
the last eight
chapter
it is concluded that the problem of war can only
be solved by giving up the illusion of
unemployment and that for the defense of peace
one has to fight for 1) the rights of all living
creatures for housing in the broadest sense and
2) the sanity of respect for the culture,
progress and filognosy (love for knowledge) of
the soul by helping the dropouts and sick to
regain their trust and commitment.
|
PART
1
|
PART 2
After
having discussed some formal issues of history,
reference, action and political management in
the
first section
the following questions of leadership,
obligation, practice and protection
remain:
Contents
Section
2:
5
Who
is the master of the game, the employer
?
5.1
The
divisions and content of a balanced
life.
5.2
The interests of the soul.
6
Who
are the people of
liberation.
?
6.1
How
must any system of liberation be served
and
maintained?
6.2
What
makes the difference of
enlightenment?
6.2.1
The state should be the
servant.
6.2.2
It
is more important to be someone than to be
somebody.
7
How
should this practice of worldorder really
look like ?
7.1)
First
we have the problem of
representation.
7.2)
Next
we have the problem of
authority.
7.3)
Thirdly
there is the problem of
economy
7.4)
Forth
there is the problem of traffic and
transport.
7.5)
The
fifth problem is that of social
control
8
How
should we fight to protect and defend this
worldorder and peace?
8.1)
Housing.
8.2)
Sanity
and
health.
CHAPTER
5
5
Who is the master of the game, the employer ?
At
2.2 and 2.3 we saw that to conclude to the form
of God and the question of authority, there was
no form acceptable but that of change, time,
itself and that representation of that change is
a matter of personal responsibility and
individual cultural preference, not of political
choice. The best politics can achieve is the
democratic freedom of each to take
responsibility for one's own free time. A system
with a certain timerespect as we know with
standardtime does not excuse one from the duty
of taking responsibility for settling ones own
time when the obligations to the system, however
good or bad that might be, are fulfilled. From
behavioral science it was concluded that to walk
on two legs, to make a difference with the
system is a natural and healthy way to maintain
ones sanity. To be alternative and rebellious
can be a hobby so to say. It is quite common for
modern man to have several jackets of adaptation
in the closet of ones behavioral repertoire. So
the kuhnian concept of paradigmatic revolution
might apply to formal society and its system of
reward; always there has to be either this
time-option of order or an other. But the
personal reality of every worldcitizen is
different: there are many options formal and
informal to choose from that are not in conflict
but complemental. Two calendars can very well
exist without any conflict as one might settle
ones choice of going out in the evening or
watching television while the other calendar
sets your business appointments during the day.
From this one could say that life, reality is in
fact the master of the game and that one-sided
options are the slaves that have to obey that
holistic master. Individual people living after
the state-order may think one-sidedness is all
right, for the mature option of
selfdetermination though this one-sidedness
might not be enough. The fact is that most
people live one-sided options of life when it
comes to time management. One has one Lord, one
fix of time and serving two would be impossible.
From this religious point of view we might not
understand the necessity of alternation for the
sake of individual sanity and collective peace.
Of course: one religion is enough. Usually one
attends to one school of thought at a time. But
this very reality of onesidedness obliges to go
deeper than just an alternative against ones own
religion.. Within the alternative alternation
needs its own life. It becomes a complex.
Because so many are overly stressing
accomplishments in the mode of standardtime
others are forced to live in its shadow of an
eternal time of 'leisure' called unemployment.
And that time has the same characteristics as
the time casting the shadow: it is of the same
mode of consciousness, the same rhythm. But in
the shadow the price must be paid that the ones
repressing the necessary alternative don't want
to pay. Those unemployed who are forced to live
an alternative may have the anger, the
frustration, the curse and the madness of the
system that does not want to know its own
shadow. They even might become UCK terrorists if
the social climate permits that. Unemployment is
a challenge for the strongest to live not only a
more balanced life, but even a holy life of
service to God. Bluntly stated: one either goes
to the psychiatrist or one joins a religious
order for the sake of peace. The religious order
has to do exactly the opposite of what the
materialist option does: work as a volunteer,
live a celibate life, have no possessions and
regulate the desires (of making it for oneself)
in abstinence. And everybody knows that this is
wrong. Nor the materialist life is healthy or
sane. it ends in welfare diseases and armed
conflict, nor is the religious life sane and
healthy. Wanting to go to heaven, losing all
love for the paradise that is the world, all
kinds of material duties are neglected: one
doesn't eat wholesome, one has no appreciation
for the sacrament of marriage or the games of
love with the other sex, one does not enjoy like
any child can in the art of manufacturing, arts
or literature of the ego save for the bare
necessities of belief (the superego). The
conclusion before was that the goal is holistic:
balanced between the two interests, the truth of
life must be sought in the middle position. That
is wisdom, that is reality. Therefore there are
two main options to explore:1) what are the
divisions and content of a balanced life?
and 2) how do we guarantee and understand the
interests of the soul that should prevail
over the interest of the ego?
5.1)
What are the divisions and content of a
balanced life?
About
this there is a lot of dispute. First of all we
have to distinguish the different fields of
work. From the filognostic example of The Order
of Time one has a clear idea of dividing the
interests of true employment for the sake of a
balanced life. As we saw before, could those who
do not serve this division be considered the
factual unemployed and dropouts, especially when
they work too hard or pray too much. They are
the real problem of a balanced life: the saints
clinging to their penance as well as the slaves
of the system who cling to their overdoing
materially. Nor the pope, nor the president are
capable of drinking a (malt-)beer with the so
called unemployed down town. And still this is
the purpose of the ultimate order of society:
leaders are just other employees that also have
their evening off and also need to have a good
time in free association with their brothers and
sisters in freedom and equality. Only then there
will be a reasonable restoration of the concept
of social control; only if leadership and fame
do not make any false authority or other
perversion of the social interest any longer.
From images/fields.gif
can be learned that the fields of work concern
that of the physical, spiritual, individual and
social kind. The totality of employment is about
work for the physical body, the spirit, ones
individual interest and the interest of the
(world)community. One has from this holistic
concept of labor to be as well a materialist, a
fundamentalist, a capitalist as a communist at
the same (or better the dynamically different)
time. Still this is the sober wisdom of a
scientific option or vision of reality:
everybody needs sleep (sleep materialist !),
everybody needs a break (have this cup of tea
moralist!), everybody needs to have a job (do it
voluntarily warrior of labor!) and everybody
needs somebody (go out you lonely man, couple or
family !). Only if the materialist makes it a
good habit to go asleep, the fundamentalist is
willing to 'drink his tea' with others taking a
break, workers don't (over-)do it for the money
only, and lonely people seek others in free
association, only then there can be sanity and
balance for a worldorder of a holistic diversity
of cultures. The scientific of this view is in
the simple truth that everyone does go to sleep,
works for himself, does take a break with it and
does live for other people too. The psychology
of this division is in the problem of the equal
distribution of time: either one sleeps too
much, works too hard, does too much religious
exercise or is too egoistic fleeing from the
other man. Proper distribution of time and force
makes the greatest strength and accomplishment
any athlete can tell us. Thus logically having
24 hours a day one should sleep six, work six,
spend six hours taking a break for God's sake
and have six hours for other people. To the
calender this should in fact also be so: a
holiday with others , a day for work, a day for
your hobby and a day for the pleasure of the
body and the brain. Either of these single
options makes a prison that one can hate and
become sick with. These six hours and four days
constantly tend, in a normal modern person, to
be mixed up into ignorance. To the clock too
much of socializing will make you an adulterer
or private dictator, too much of sleep will make
you neurotic or insane, too much of work will
make you sick and feeble and too much of God
will make you an intolerant miserable demon of
morality. To the calendar too much of holidays
will depress you, too much of work will make
your life of service a lie becoming destructive
to the interests of others, too much of the
hobbies will make you an egoist and too much of
God will make you an hypocrite.
We
must not ask politicians to settle this for us:
no one will accept the government to dictate any
of these forms of behavior. At best the
government can permit a 30-hour work week and
tax overwork instead of rewarding it (what it
costs to pay all the social security to the ones
pushed out of society with it!). At best they
can reward people going out according to an
alternative calender of their own with reduction
cards or free subsidized services to promote
public business on all (alternated) days of the
week. At best they can support holidays that are
neatly spread over the year. And at best they
can publicly close offices at sundays and
saturdays and permit people a random day for
personal study. The government may embrace
behavioral science reinforcing what they want,
but individual people may not be legally forced
to work less than they want, spread their
holidays, go out every saturday or close their
shops on sundays. The government must simply
mind its own business of taxcollecting and
setting the limits and sanctions.. That is all
they can. And if they do it right there will be
less police and less armed conflict and a better
quality of and freedom in social control. The
only thing they really must do is give the
proper example: all the holy scriptures and
historybooks tell the same story; bad leaders
make bad states, good leaders make good states.
They themselves must assure the continuity of
the leadership and happiness that the people
should follow by spreading their own recess, not
meeting in the weekends, take a break of culture
during the week and take a sabbatical day of
study regularly in stead of a year.
5.2)
How do we guarantee and understand the
interests of the soul that should prevail
over the interest of the ego? Simply balancing
good with evil within ourselves with a clock and
calendar is just part of the solution. To the
solution there, of course, must also be a clear
moral lead. This is the authentic demand that
the call for authority makes. The question is
who or what is actually leading in this.
Evidently the logic of a sane and wise sense of
reality should be in charge, whoever would be in
charge of it in science & religion,
government &the military, trade &
commerce, and labor &sports. From platonian
philosophy we can borrow a division of three
principles of the soul. From that we can upgrade
it from the vedic root to the modern postwar
interfaith options of worldorder. "The Republic"
proposes to divide the soul in three fields of
interest: that of gain, honor and knowledge
making up the rich man, the brave man and the
wise. These would be ruled by money, distinction
and truth. Vedically this aligns to the basic
division in the tree modes of material nature:
there is the indolence of material interest of
tamo-guna(ruled by Shiva, the God of
destruction), there is the mode of passion
rajo-guna (ruled by the Creator, Lord Brahma)
and thirdly there is the mode of goodness
sattva-guna (ruled by the Maintainer, Lord
Vishnu). Considering these three modes basic to
the nature of the soul the Greek are correct in
their division of the principles of the soul.
People have a fee choice to lead a destructive,
constructive or conservative life. No political
system can ever defy the innate structure of
human and material reality. This is the
theoretical ground for the tolerance and conduct
of the state. But this seems quite abstract.
What could filognostically be the practical
value of this philosophical/vedic ground? Taking
it seriously the division of the soul represents
levels of development. It is the gross scheme of
individual progress for cultures and people.
From material interest the aspirant of the
'divine life' has to learn to control his
passions of ego and creation in order to attain
to the wisdom and goodness of a more
conservative position. Many radicals later on in
their lives turn out to be conservatives. Thus
seen this is not betrayal of the cause but
simply the consequence of getting older and
wiser. Revolution, rebellion and destructive
lifestyles are quite common for young people,
creative lives quite normal for the married
people educating children to be adapted and
selfrealized, while the more dull and
authoritative moral life of the conservative
type is quite common for the elderly. This is
the reality of human life in progress and for
conceiving a worldorder this is of paramount
importance: there has to be a formal concept
that takes these different natures, authorities
of God in respect. There must be a life for the
aspiring young people who want to make money and
lead a materialist life. There must be a life
for the married loyal people who live creative
lives taking all responsibility with passion and
excitement. And there must be a life settled for
the elderly with their conventional approach.
Vedically this is expressed in the so called
varnashrama system discriminating in vocation
(varna) and status (ashrama). This
varna-ashrama-system has been abused as a false
distinction of honor and class in a caste-system
losing the vision of divinity. This has been
corrected by vedic reform reformulating the true
nature of devotion: there is equality of class
in devotional service with the alternative
system of selfrealization. In that alternative,
class merely means that one can have originated
from labor, trade, governing or the intellect
but that it is more decisive to be recognized to
the above mentioned division of the soul than to
the division of labor one departed from. Thus
the authority of the division of the soul
pertains to the level of commitment (see
images/commitment.jpg
) to
the guardian order of apollonian interest as
formulated in "The Republic': one distinguishes
the aspirant or beginner that is mainly
materially interested in the benefits of the
apollonian order of society. Next there is the
one who is recognized after ten or twenty years
of serious commitment and enduring service.
Those are the honorable creative arrived people
that actually are the backbone of working
society. Next there is the experienced wise
person that lives a detached life and passes on
the knowledge of the appollonian order of life.
They safeguard the society against the passions
and irrationalities of the less selfcontolled
honorable people. In turn the people of the
second commitment educate and make place for the
ambitious and aspiring younger generations that
live for the gain of also experience and
recognition of their revolutionary and
rebellious innovations and services. Thus varna
or caste makes only sense with the
ashrama-system of commitment. There are actually
four ashrama's as there is also the intermediate
status between that of being married and
detached of being withdrawn that is of
relevance.
Because
of the fact that there are two worlds - that
actually should be one- knowing the spiritual
apollonian order of philosophical guardians, as
"the Republic" states it and the world of
material interest that is in constant devolution
necessitating rebirth, there must be a
separation of ashrama or status and commitment
or evolutionary principle of soul. There are
three levels of commitment in gain, honor and
wisdom that do not depend on age but on the
merits of the soul to the order (the 'other
world') and four ashrama's of individual status
to which one belongs depending on ones age (also
in the material world). Married or not, after 40
years of age woman should nor aspire any longer
for offspring but live withdrawn while man
should do so after their 55th birthday. This
discrimination has a biological basis: woman
lose heir fertility and as such the man can be
15 years older before platonian philosophy
speaks of an unwanted individual bond of
marriage (also the illegally living together is
not wanted by them although they appreciate
woman and children as a 'common good'). This
makes woman withdrawn and thus wise earlier than
man. And thus can a younger woman in principle
be the teacher of an elder man in what wisdom
would be. At the same time the man must learn to
keep a bond with woman getting older and thus he
cannot maintain his sexual preference and
potency as the dominant lead in their lives
after their 40th birthday either. Thus the
culture of man is more of conscious sexual
abstinence than that of woman. Hence the
predominance of man in religion in general. From
that school men must train their sexual potency
to be in service of their selfrealization in
stead of being the servant of their material
interests.
This
system of status-orientation in vocation, status
and commitment (compare images/dentity.jpg
or
see
fig 2 below)
even applies to people who never married: they
also have their creative period of having
material byproducts or mental children from
which they also have to overcome their passions
of material interest and ego. The system is in
conclusion quite a universal crosscultural
reality that should be taken serious in
considerations of settling for a formal order of
state for the whole world. It is the basic
notion of identity that gives people the
recognition and intelligence of their own
preferred natural mode, vocational calling and
civil status of life. Only from such a system
one may expect the proper respect for the person
in all his possible stages and orientations in
life, enlightened, reborn and employed with the
apollonian order of filognosy or not. Also
unenlightened one has a profession, a civil
status and a mode of nature that exercises
authority over the soul by means of employment.
The order may seem unimportant and meaningless
to a materialist but is of essential importance
to the ones cherishing employment to the
predominance of soul and wisdom. Also
psychoanalytic interpretations of youth trauma
in terms of the wisdom of the elderly are thus
better understood as forms of ignorance not just
to ones own life, but also to ones awareness,
commitment and service to the very nature of the
also employing order that is ultimately of
liberation. As such unemployment in
consideration of service to either of the two
worlds one can live in, does not exist any
longer and must be counted under the chapter of
illusion.
CHAPTER
6
6)
Who are the people of
liberation?
Politically
they are often called: unemployed profiteers or
opposition, religiously they are usually called
devotees, believers & sinners,
philosophically they are called guardians and
naturally they are simply called a possibly
human species of the animal kingdom. In the
previous section we declared unemployment an
illusion having to face the fact that there are
two worlds: the world of the enlightened and the
world of the ones living in material bondage:
either one is employed for the material
maintenance of the state, or one has to find
ones own way of health and service without the
material motive. The problem of unemployment
ends if not only making money but also serving
peace with social security is considered work.
If the unemployed person realizes that
politically he owes a offering of service being
a profiteer, that religiously he is indebted as
a sinner and devotee, that philosophically he
has to guard the wisdom of peace and liberation
and that naturally he has the same rights for
food and shelter as any animal, then that person
can be considered liberated despite of being
materially unemployed. Politically the two
world-theory pertains as said above to the level
of commitment: one is insider or one is an
outsider; politics, trade, intellect and labor
can all be liberated in service to the system at
hand that would represent the interest of God,
goodness and all the eternal values of
liberation. From the political point of view
though liberation might become a struggle for
power and a relative affair. In reality it is a
struggle for the emancipation and enlightenment
of absolute importance to the human concept of
soul. Although the original vedic meaning has as
evidenced by the small history of the values of
liberation (fig1)
been lost in the historic decline of the yuga's
and forms of state, time and again a new rebirth
was there about not being caught by the
illusions of the individual (group-)ego and and
its regression. The reality found scientifically
is that of evolution: there is an increasing
complexity in the material world because of
which simplistic dominance of one worldconcept
is in fact impossible. Never will the world be
ruled by any specific system. Nor religious
schools, nor political opinions, nor
intellectual understanding nor the wisdom of
eternity will singly rule the world. Species of
animals might disappear, but new strands of
mankind manifest and fight for their own right
of existence. Forms change, but the diversity
(read degree of freedom) once attained can not
be unwound. This entropy of an irreversible
diversity is a natural fact. It simply has to be
accepted. It takes away all illusions of control
and power. Scientifically one is reborn if one
becomes a guardian of wisdom which practically
means that one accepts and sees reality as it is
without further judging about good and bad. This
reality is described in modern popperian english
philosophy as being of three worlds: the world
of the self, the world of the body and the world
of culture. These three worlds make the complete
of consciousness. The brain derives its sense of
reality from these three basic modes of
perception: one is aware of ones identifications
of self relating in ones own body externally in
the culture there about. Or reverse: one is
aware of ones own culture in relation to
individual physical bodies in relation and
attachment with a metaphysical kernel of
liberation, intelligence and enlightenment
called the witnessing self. Or from the middle
position: one is physically aware of a
difference between an outside world that is
cultivated and an inner world of experience and
remembrance. The question is now: 1) how must
any system of liberation be served and
maintained? Only after answering this one
can have a clear idea of employment,work, peace
and progress. Without it one is doomed to the
categories of illusion: unemployment and
conflict. To this question of employment there
automatically has to be answered the question of
status: if there is no unemployment then 2)
what makes the difference of enlightenment
in the levels of commitment that would ward of
the illusions of power and dictature?
6.1)
How must any system of liberation be served
and maintained?
As
we saw in the previous sections there is the
necessity and reality of a scientifically
founded holism that would care for the proper
respect for all the different systems of
liberation in their historical right of
existence. This foundation was uncovered in the
cartesian method that would ultimately try to
incorporate as many elements as possible as a
methodic declaration of principle. We also
realized that there is the new medium of the
internet that could be recognized as an
opportunity to have an altar of Apollo, a
computer in each home that could define the
duties of sacrifice to the scientific God
respected as the apollonian reality principle.
We also realized that we needed a new term to
define the progress of the individual in his
sacrifices: filognosy. Simply stated a
philosopher mastering the psychology could be
found liberated in the proper love of knowledge,
the filognosy, that is free from polemics and
illusion (noncompetitiveness and truth in
apollonian respect). At the same time the
psychologist could only become liberated
embracing the philosophy to such a degree that
he would attain to the respect of filognosy. The
purpose of his philosophical enlightenment would
be that one has to progress from opinion and
belief towards understanding and applied science
in such a manner that it is free from repression
and thus holistically would make a reality of
filognosy as a science of goodness,
understanding, belief and freedom of opinion.
From the evolution of the values of liberation
this would culminate to the virtues of The Order
of Time proposing to honest sharing and caring
being loyal to the actual discipline of the
filognosy at hand. And this is the ultimate
point the answering of the question leads to:
How must we live the discipline of maintaining
liberation and service to the complete holistic
reality?
Religiously
this question is answered quickly: one has to
learn it from a spiritual leader, school or
religion. Such a system will provide for the
rules to find the proper concentration and
endurance to realize what the continuity of the
personal soul is all about. Religion gives a
warning and has fiercely fought against all
false teaching creating chaos and disaster of
detachment without a proper alternative. Many
sects ended in selfdestruction because of
missing this point: one knew to say the material
world of sin goodbye, but one missed the
discipline of grace and respect that would
preserve the holism needed for peace with and in
the world. The Gita states that the true and
pure devotee sees God in every living creature.
Also the platonian philosopher states that the
guardian of state is of the mode of goodness. No
passion of false authority would torment him and
bring his soul down. The Christian has to keep
love for the fellow man and live in fairness and
empathy. The modern politician realizes that
democracy is necessary to keep the dictature out
of the parliament: no one can have the majority
or the game is lost. Everything must be settled
by coalitions in wisdom. For not losing (the
democratic) balance one needs a discipline and a
concept of grace and gratitude. This discipline
safeguarding against false teaching and
undemocratic dominance is thus borrowed from the
religious schools: they would proclaim from the
values of basically truth, loyalty, penance and
compassion the monastic vows of celibacy,
obedience, non-possessiveness and non-violence.
One should not chase (wo)man, be loyal to the
vow of commitment, acquire no private
possessions and respect all living creatures
with a vegetarian life-style. The two worlds of
spirit and matter are born from the necessity of
grace: the leaders would follow the discipline
and the common people would be weak in it having
sex to their desire, eating meat, making money
and losing their loyalty in divorces and
estrangement. Any teaching should be based on
this discipline or otherwise be considered
false. All leadership should be based on this
alternative world of spiritual order or else
face a loss of control and authority. All
warfare would be nothing but the result of
disloyalty to that omnipresent culture of
spiritual discipline found in all major
worldreligions teaching it. Whether one is a
Muslim Sufi, a Hindu yogi, asian Buddhist monk
or monastic Christian: all follow these basic
rules. It is the foundation of human
intelligence and true authority of discipline.
It is only the practice of grace and strategy of
control that changes depending on the time and
place. The method is the same since time
memorial.
The
problem with all these disciplines is in the
social ego's they make: it is exactly the
illusion of being holier than thou that goes to
the battlefield calling the other practice of
exercising authority demoniac: the preacher
turns out to be a psychiatrist that is willing
to deny the individual his sovereign rights for
'his own own good'. Waging war we would, missing
our own image in the mirror, exorcise the devil
out of the fallen and disobedient culture and
restore the peace and order in the world. Thus
the proof of God fell down to an ordinary test
of strength: the strongest one has God at his
side. Where did it went wrong? The answer must
be sought in the social confirmations of the
material identity of the group. The world would
be liberated if the Lord could make Himself the
standard of normality: no miracle will do, only
the example that can be followed. Only a system
that creates equality and not a false elite of
priests, professors, Aryans or whatever
conceited enlightenment of race or sex and other
ego will give liberation to its own maker. The
problem was: how to have a system that does not
imprison, crucify or ,contrary to that, worship
its own ruler of Lordship. From the Indian one
might learn the other strategy of power and
indolence: praise the other to heaven and let
him do the job. He can't object the praise and
he must perform the other man's job even better
in order to be worshiped. Lordship would
factually not be the purpose of the religion at
all, God would. It is in fact not the concept of
God that is the problem, but the overlording and
inequality from it that constitutes the problem.
To the discipline it means that in fact
leadership cannot have a personal profitmotive:
they , the leaders of discipline, must keep up a
standard that can be followed by all. To a
possible worldorder thus economically one may
first of all never expect anything more than the
lowest income of social security, everything
above that is a downfall. All one can do for
maintaIning the discipline economically is to
raise the standard of living from the lowest
possible income. More millionaires make a poorer
country if the increase of wealth is not equally
distributed to the lowest incomes that have to
live to all stages in selfrealization and
service to God. At all times it has been the
duty of the state to maintain the respect and
support of and for the interest of the ones
living consciously in poverty. Since the
falldown of all social ego during the ages and
stages of cultural decline, any unemployed
person may be a holy hermit guarding the true
philosophy of the state and the world peace.
Impersonally reasoning from a lawbook giving
equal rights to all, a basic income of social
security must be given to all that are not in
material service but either found criminally
against the laws of the state. They may not be
humiliated or disrespected in repression of
their honor otherwise, since they could be the
teachers and guardians of the discipline that is
needed for peace. Of course 'India' has many
bogus-guru's that only vaguely resemble and
answer to the discipline as described. But still
any step in the right direction also must be
respected. One wouldn't be punished for
accepting poverty and celibacy although
ignorance would like to. Nor may one be punished
for not being perfectly holy from the beginning.
In fact as previously described there are stages
of commitment to money and honor preceding that
of wisdom that might take 10-20 years each
before one has overcome the destructive and
creative propensities of lust and ego. Never
hurry for holiness nor press for it. One will
create demons fighting the system of imposition
if one tries to oblige holiness. As all
intelligent leadership knows: paranoia creates
its own prosecution. The unenlightenend chase
the unelightened. Serbs paranoid about
UCK-terrorism created their own NATO-prosecution
of murder.
Next
to this vow of poverty for leadership, there
must also be celibacy in leadership and in the
marriages of present leadership. The worst
dictators of history all were married people.
The fact that a celibate (married or not) is
himself more aware of the aggression around
married life with its passions must not obscure
the fact that to divert ones energies to
cultural commitment and philosophical capacity
wouldn't be more peaceful. The idea that
(marital) sex would bring worldpeace has often
been proven to be just a theory. Also should
vegetarians be found in leadership as well as in
loyalty to a certain order; confession to the
regulative principles should be explicit in a
basic vow like: 'honest and loyal i am willing
to share and help to the order of filognosy'. Do
not forget that the present leaders of the world
never made a pledge this explicit. Maybe they
swore something to honor God, the truth and the
country on the bible or book of law, but will
they stay honest, be loyal, share and willing to
help for the apollonian cause of peace? If you
ask them something, often the answer is: 'I have
no time, i have obligations otherwise and
elsewhere'. "We are married already" is their
factual answer, one is not espoused to another
type of order. One indeed has not the right mind
of time for it. Still a vegetarian celibate
being loyal and in poverty and sacrifice to the
apollonian order of the state by means of a vow
can be of opposing political interest. Such a
vow does not conflict with a particular material
interest although the fang might be pulled out
of it. But the chance for a disciplined and
filognostically proper approach of selfless
sacrifice, peace and example is greater with it.
Of course will there be as many holy man in each
of the worlds of employment as there will be
offenders of the law and the discipline. What
would wisdom be without the knowledge of the
offenses one made oneself? It is after all not
holiness that counts, but confession to the
actual underlying world-order of filognosy that
does not make so much as a social organization
and ego of 'marriage', but is more to be
recognized in the phenomenon of the
information-culture that is free in service for
all maintained by all. Thus Lord Apollo rules
with order: to the freedom and integrity of the
individual and not to the temporary ego's of
identification with a group of some kind
(compare this with the social definition of The
Order of Time: http://www.theorderoftime.com/info/guests-friends.html#SOCIAL
DEFINITION OF THE
ORDER:
).
6.2)
What makes the difference of enlightenment
that would ward off the illusions of power
and dictature?
This
question cannot be answered without discussing
the reality of ego. Modern psychology pointed
out that ego is a necessity of sanity. To the
psychologist it is better to be an egoist than
to be a beast. In fact one needs a state-order
and government that can take care of its own
business without harassing the people, nor for
paying taxes nor for social security reasons.
Both options should be taken care of with a
system that is equal to all and of servitude in
stead of being a dictature. The Platonist is
right in saying that ignorance and dictature is
the characteristic of the fallen state: there is
no real democracy, there is only an attempt to
set the clock back in time. Still freedom once
tasted cannot be taken back. It is not just the
law of entropy stating this. It the complete of
human intelligence that screams this out loud
throughout the centuries: " do not humiliate us,
respect us, treat us as equals". We are not
children of the paternalistic oligarchic state
or the kids of the queen. The aristocrat, the
ruler and the formal uniform of police and the
military can only be servants in a system that
is of service. They cannot corrupt the system
against all rationality and reason for the sake
of their own petty unenlightened ego's in a
dictature of ignorance. The war in Serbia is
nothing but an extension of the false dictature
of each individual state involved in the
conflict. Based on material motives one cannot
find peace nor sanity. Always the lust for power
and control will make the false justifications
of false elites making second rank citizens at
the one hand and political opposition and enmity
at the other hand. This is the hell of ego and
no psychological glorification can undo it. The
psychologist may say that it is better to be a
damn hypocrite in service of a system of
injustice that makes second rank citizens, than
to be a direct murderer and unashamed dictator
against all opposition. But ultimately the one
demoniac position of false authority will meet
the other at the battlefield: the egoist may
face the perversion of its own truth: the
dictator of fascist unrighteousness that could
not contain the hypocritical any longer but
simply exercised blunt power of racial or
otherwise ego. A famous psychoanalyst once said
that the ego is as peaceful as the ministry of
warfare of fascist Germany. The problem of this
ego business is how to subdue the ego to the
interests of the soul. One has to be able to
tell it woman and children. No heavy philosophy
will do with inscrutable abstractions of
doubtful definition and connotation.
The
two-world reality pertaining to ego and soul
must be unequivocally clear to each citizen, to
each subject of the state. One will have to
endorse that !) The state should be the
servant and 2) It is more important to be
someone than to be somebody. If one
remembers these two fundamentals of peace we can
continue in our filognostic quest for a
righteous and fair state as part of a righteous
and fair worldorder.
6.2.1)
The state should be the servant.
It
is difficult to have politicians that realize
this. They rather defend(ed) military service
and paying taxes to the contrary. It is all too
easy to leave the system imperfect of service to
prove the necessity of ones own personal power
and control. The politician may say: the
ignorant citizen wants it and therefore I have
the right to exercise power and demand obedience
and service in stead of delivering service. But
this is no intelligence at all. This is a
conspiration of dictature and its evil. Never
will the mature adult person accept any
dominance of another person for whatever reasons
beyond the agreements of justice. Nor for taxes
nor for social security, the individual adult
believer wants to be persecuted and controlled
on the ground of the 'roman' paranoia and theft
of honor from an imperfect system. The
politicians must learn to realize that 'selling
the system' to exercise control is useless if at
the other hand one wants to be free from that
control oneself. Duplicity makes no justice but
dictature of inequality. As long as governments
represent the will for the private
uncontrollable possession of what the Platonist
calls "gold and silver", he cannot be the
guardian of wisdom and peace. The guardian of
the state is to him free from acquiring "gold
and silver": that guardian would care and share
to honor honestly and to virtue loyally. That is
the nature of true leadership.
In
modern time it is not longer necessary to
promote the private possession of money. If one
does not sufficiently realize the difference
between electronic creditcards or plastic money
and actual coins and papermoney in private
possession one will always lose control finding
the theories of management refuted. Any economic
traffic of plastic money can be perfectly
controlled, while private possession never truly
can be controlled by definition of the very term
privacy. From the computers each citizen can be
(automatically) checked for his balance of
economy without further paranoid personalistic
false control of the government. That way the
government can settle for an economic police: if
you spend more than you get or have the right to
based on your civil status,
professional orientation
or calling and level
of commitment
or principle of soul (48 economic groups see
fig. 2), one has to account for it. If one stays
within the limits of gain and spending one is
free from control. This way each may challenge
the economic control against spending and
acquiring more than the individual norm allows
(a norm settled by parliamentary discussion of
each individual interest in equal
representation). If I buy e.g. four t.v.-sets a
year a state-official may knock at my door and
ask whether I'm eating them or what. But if I
have money for myself I can be just the fool I
want to be and throw each season a t.v.-set out
of the window. This latter freedom must be given
up and recognized as the dictature of the ego.
It is one freedom against the other. The freedom
of irrational and irresponsible spending must be
sacrificed for the sake of the freedom of the
normal citizen that behaves to his own
individual norm settled by himself in parliament
and shouldn't be harassed by a paranoid
paternalistic generalizing government supposing
crime accusing and prosecuting everybody from
the philosophy that man would be innately bad.
This philosophy of the bad nature of man is a
travesty of the lust for power. One can exercise
power if one gives up the confidence in the
good. The famous soul of human goodness can be
sold to the notorious demon of the irrational
and irresponsible warmongering ego of false
authority. The concept of liberty is essential:
who is to be free, the righteous good citizen
that may go uncontrolled staying within the
limits set by the law or the wild free
entrepreneur that may do anything he wants with
his so called private capital that is in fact
the property of the people, the wise and the
state? To fight the 'capitalist' system with
this 'maybe socialist' option is not enough: one
could not preach detachment from an evil
onesided brutalizing system without offering an
alternative. The system must be fought, nay
counterbalanced with another system so that the
individual worldcitizen can choose how to walk
on those alternative legs. It will be difficult
to have a truly holistic worldculture of free
choice without having parties, believers,
opinions and sciences in unenlightened
egotistical opposition for the power and the
right to control and enjoy. With the government
one has to make choices to what rights what
norms are set for what kind of liberty. There is
no escape from this explicitation. It must be a
fix of state-wise servitude to the soul opposing
a dictature of ego. One may postpone it and reap
the fruit of war from that cowardice and
dishonorable hypocrisy. But reasoning, working
serving and producing for peace and justice
these questions of formal order cannot stay
unanswered.
Fig.
2
---The 48
divisions of Status
Orientation---
|
STATUS:
|
Student
|
Married
|
Withdrawn
--
|
Detached
|
VOCATION
|
COMMITMENT
|
|
|
|
|
Labor
|
gain
honor
wisdom
|
1
2
3
|
13
14
15
|
25
26
27
|
37
38
39
|
Trade
|
gain
honor
wisdom
|
4
5
6
|
16
17
18
|
28
29
30
|
40
41
42
|
Leadership
|
gain
honor
wisdom
|
7
8
9
|
19
20
21
|
31
32
33
|
43
44
45
|
Intellect
|
gain
honor
wisdom
|
10
11
12
|
22
23
24
|
34
35
36
|
46
47
48
|
6.2.2)
To preclude the oppositions of egotistical
warmongering falsehood, even within a renovated
and counterbalanced system, it should be
realized that 2) It is more important to be
someone than to be somebody. This is the
primal concept of soul. Simply one can
explain a child that the cornflakes are more
important than the specific package they come
with. The same pertains to soul and ego. The
system can only work in favor of peace if the
filognostic soul of the content is served and
not the personalism of the package. The person
embodied is a necessity: one has to identify
with the body and take responsibility for its
interests. But never may that interest supersede
the interest of the spirit soul. This very
article might be essential to the truth of a
future mankind of order and a present policy of
making peace in Yugoslavia. But the actual
writer presenting his own physcal body of
enjoyment and control can with its selfinterest
only be a hindrance as none really cares or
wants to be dictated by the very package or
physical body the content comes with. In fact
the cardbox of cornflakes is thrown away when
the content is consumed. Now we may buy Super
Sister rice, but who gives a damn about Super
Sister herself? Nor will the world buy anything
from The Order of Time if one has to kiss the
sweating feet of The Servant. His message may be
fine; buy more computers or something and
believe that the medium or the Tempometer is the
message. But no sane adult will believe that the
medium or the clock is more important than the
message. Our sweet Lord said to that, that it is
not His will that should be done but that of the
heavenly (content of the christian package)
father. Thus from all the religious, political
and scientific paradigmatical packing of the
truth of "the heavenly father' from filognosy it
must be said in respect for all cultures of
selling the message that Father Time and the
continuing soul of respect for Him might be the
ultimate ruler and authority. Only a fool would
fight time. Time is the subduer of all forms and
packages and those who deny it are in illusion.
Although the soul must wrestle to have a sense
of continuity over time forgetting time and
forms, which is the religious/spiritual duty;
the mortal body must inescapably serve that
order of time that scientifically can't be
anything else but a holistic complete of all
possible orderings of time. It must be om
purnam, the complete whole as the vedic
literature states. One may be dualistic of two
legs or holistic of thousand legs, but the
marching of consciousness shall be. The
dictature of standardtime and its imperfect
system of madness and (super)egotistical
political, scientific and religious control may
hop on the one leg of ignorance and
demo(n)cratic imposition, but the individual
soul can never be denied to walk more efficient,
faster and truthful on both the legs of personal
choice, mature selfresponsibility and freedom of
association.
From the
informationculture one can observe this new
reality of egoless service. Rarely does it
matter whether a website offers the personal
name of a webmaster or simply offers the e-mail
address of a 'maintainer' a 'webmaster' or of a
nom-de-net nickname. It is the offering of the
information that counts, not the one who offers.
Internet goes beyond the culture of the ego. The
culture of ego as such is over: it doesn't
really matter and dominate anymore who
says something on the net. It is not to be
somebody, but to be be someone that matters. It
matters whether that someone is true or
not, not whether that somebody makes
money, is married or is a sinner or a criminal.
Things must be judged to their internal
consistency, effectivity, reliability, validity,
truth, righteousness and whatever value of
liberation essential to the progress of
worldorder. That is the real purpose of the net.
The very term gnosis implies knowledge for
itself, but gives no immediate certainty about
the ego's that are in service with it. The
physical body, individual enterprise or
individual product is kept at a distance and if
it can't be properly inspected over the net no
such product will be bought or believed from
that distance. Rather one buys or believes
something in real life where it can be returned
or refused more directly. In fact the Internet
shows the spin-off of each local culture: a
writer , religion, science or whatever personal
home-pager can afford it or not to put his book
or other info of interest in full on the net.
Still people will go to the shop for a print out
of a book as printing it out for themselves
might not be as easy or attractive. Still people
will meet oneother privately or in public to see
what is real of the offering and what not.
Reading from a screen will not be popular (and
the selling of books will) until one has learned
to keep distance from the screen as with
television and set the text to big letters.
Learning people to know through the internet
will not be popular until one knows how to cover
the distance that was reinforced. Only then it
can work as a medium connecting people in the
real world. From serving the purpose and order
of being someone in the first place one
may attain to being somebody
too.(although someone can only be reached by
somebody). But that latter ego will always be as
temporary as the membership to any association
is and must thus be subservient to the someone
that doesn't depend on a material person or a
name and individual preference of form. That
someone can be the Lord of Heaven, The Ancestor,
Big Brother, The King of The World, God or the
Holy Spirit. The somebody meeting with it is
always just an indebted ego of that soul of the
someone one has to attain to. As such a new
medium like the internet made a new religion of
the temporalistic respect of somebody that has
to be reborn to be someone. The effort to become
somebody with someone is the descending process,
the effort to become someone with somebody is
the ascending process. Both may be but the
purpose of becoming one for the sake of
world-order and peace is clearly set before that
of being a body of a particular material
interest. As such we may conclude to the
ascending process in the first place: someone
will keep the peace while somebody might lose
it.
CHAPTER
7
7)
How should this practice of worldorder really
look like ?
Step by step
this manifesto has revealed the actual outlook
of the emerging world culture describing it as a
filognosy of timeconsciousness in the new
informationculture of (being reborn to) becoming
someone before being (already) somebody. It
would have implications for the economic system
using 'plastic' , that is electronic, money that
can be controlled as opposed to coins and paper
that always seems to run out of control in a
state of paranoia about the "bad nature" of man.
Prerequisite was the axiom of human goodness. A
success of worldorder is a success of
peacekeeping in the mode of goodness, not the
success of winning a war taking the form of
badness. Peacekeeping means one loses the war.
Not just the war in Yugoslavia, but all war
around the world. The more wars you win, the
more wars you have. Its an obvious logic, but
difficult to attain to since it puts a great
demand on the sincere will and concept of
collective and personal progress and
emancipation. As we saw discussing the values of
liberation in section one, we are in an
evolution and as such not bound to this or that
culture but by history. From the logic of that
history we attained to a vedic insight of guna,
varna and ashrama that would best be understood
as an eternal division or scientific
classification of men to their natural
propensities of commitment (the platonian
principles of soul), vocation (the more
enlightened version of class and caste) and
civil status (that would best link up to
age-groups and generations). We also realized
that this worldorder should be holistic: at the
most one can make a subculture of
state-management to which individual people are
free to participate. This subculture of
filognostic guardians of the state would be free
from involvement with 'gold and silver' which
could be realized by means of the already
mentioned 'plastic money'. The state could make
a save haven of (filognostically employed) loyal
souls living another concept of liberty from the
first of the non-committed of employment to the
'materialist ego' that simply may continue as it
does now. The paradigm of the Tempometer
that compares nature with culture would inspire
for the holistic reality of a value-free social
science of free choice at the one hand and a
clear cut explicit of state-management and
consciously propagated values of liberation at
the other hand. Thus far this worldorder has
taken the shape of a realistic expansion of the
present multicultural post-modern inconclusive
of the late nineties of the twentiest century.
It is not a science-fiction description of an
utopia, but an accentuation of the present
reality of the internet, the scientific
technological capacity for renovating the
timerespect, credit-card management, new-age
influences, interfaith scriptural truth and
existing political motives. Thus the ideas of
filognostic honesty, loyalty sharing and helping
have taken a more concrete form.
Thus far we
have a vague sketch of this New Time Worldorder.
Next is the question: how does it really look
like; to what extend does it answer to the
problems of postmodern society? To have concrete
answers first these problems must be set apart:
1)first we have the problem of
representation. The state needs a government
and how should this be stable and representative
of what the people want. 2) Second there is the
problem of authority how does one attain
to authority and how is it exercised? 3) Third
there is the problem of economy: how do
we attain to control over the flow of money so
that each will get (and keep getting) what he
needs. 4) Forth there is the problem of
traffic and transport. People and goods must
be transported in such a way that it is
efficient and adequate. 5) Fifth we have the
problem of social control: one may organize
as one likes but does it make a society free
from alienation at the one hand and dictature
and false authority at the other hand. There are
more problems: that of ecology, education and
housing e.g., but in the western welfarestate
there are enough modern solutions for these
problems already. These solutions are in fact
already operating but not universally
implemented. The example of existing
statemanagement as it is now on this must be
enough. The order as achieved already by these
exemplary states (especially in northern Europe)
prove that anyone can get schooling until he is
21 years of age, anyone can get a house and any
city can have a system of processing the rubbish
and waste of culture in an ecologically healthy
way. Overpopulation is not a real problem yet:
the planet can at least house 20 billion people
given the proper culture of food and food supply
(the promotion of vegetarian food is most
efficient in foodproduction and in maintenance
of biological balances in the fauna) and
recycling of materials (nuclear waste cannot be
recycled e.g.). As yet it is not proven that we
couldn't stabilize the population at a certain
level below that 20 billion. If cultural
reinforcement is strong enough people can find
sufficient satisfaction with it and are
existentially less in need of biological
reproduction. The real problem is to settle for
the form of state that could manage a
filognostic order for the whole world. As said
this state can only be an expansion of the
existing culture and not a repression. Still
answering the above questions might provide for
realities of social change that can be called
revolutionary kuhnian shifts in paradigmatic
approach. As such a new world order might
consist of five separate revolutions in the
fields of representation, authority, economy,
traffic and social control. What would the face
of these revolutions be?
First we
have
7.1)
The problem of representation.
As yet we have
dominating governments based on political
parties. One may call the process of attaining
to power revolutionary or democratic, what
counts is the result: one may be glad if the
actual government does cover more than 50% of
the will of the people. Less might be called a
dictature of some kind. Scoring between 50 and
lets say at most 80% is not an ideal system of
representation. This is called the dualistic
principle of the state: one has a government
that does not represent fully what the people
want or how the people are. Such a government
always makes an opposition with which there is
duality: sometimes constructive sometimes
destructive. Sometimes there is repression
nationally, warfare internationally. The duality
runs into egotistical oppositions of material
interest that lose the ability to understand
oneother and from that estrangement there is
either civil disobedience, terrorism and civil
war or international discord, boycott and
international war. Opposed to this dualistic
principle one may propose the principle of equal
representation: the people are divided in
separate groups of interest that cover the
complete population. These groups hearten their
own societal interests and are each represented
in the government by a minister.(1*
)The
oldest person of them is the president. This
principle could be called the holistic
principle: it is more scientific, more
comprehensive and more stable. Free elections
are not necessary any longer: it requires
individual commitment within ones own group of
representation. Naturally some are drawn to
governing duties and some are not. The system
must because of that provide for a proper
balance of representation so that no will to
govern on itself will govern. To govern is a
duty of all status orientations of society even
that of children and senior citizens. In fig. 2
there has been a sketch of such a system
providing for 48 different status identity
groups. One could imagine a registration-system
which would demand from each citizen that he
subscribes to one of these groups. Any
membership is not fixed by birth but by free
choice: one has to chose for a 'color' so to
say, but one is free to change ones orientation.
This way all groups will try to be equally
attractive in its benefits and duties. To
safeguard an equal distribution against the
possible corruption of free commitment, certain
criteria must be fixed: one cannot belong to the
married people if one is not registered as being
married. One cannot be a student if one is over
21 years of age. One cannot be of full
commitment "wisdom' when one is not even
recognized as a representative of the order.
These criteria might change according to
necessity and be settled by parliamentary
discussion. What counts and rules is the
principle of proportionate representation. That
is the goal the government, the parliament and
the state-official should work for. This
revolution redefining the concept of democracy
to a reality without elections and political
parties can be called the holistic
revolution. It would make political parties
not more and less than clubs of friends with an
equal conviction understanding that it only
works if that conviction does not supersede the
interests of an equal democratic representation
of all status orientations.
Next we have
7.2)
The problem of authority.
We know in
parliamentary democracy there are houses of
commons and houses of lords. Chambers of
discussion for the common people, usually local
governments, and chambers of discussion of
elected representatives: the senate. These
'Lords' are usually elder and of standing: they
are renown for their commitment and generally
accepted for their virtue and integrity. The
problem of this is in the confusion of material
interests and the interest of a non-material
integrity of philosophy that should be free from
the motives of 'gold and silver' as the
Platonist says. This confusion can be called the
material principle of state. The philosophical
principle of state commands a more refined
division according to the principle of the soul.
These principles dictate a third chamber of
discussion that would be lower in status from
the other two chambers of commons and lords.
This is the chamber of gain: the interest of
gain should work on the same principle of
representation as the other two chambers and
heartening it should not be confined to separate
interest groups as labor-unions and private
boards of management. In fact this third chamber
of gain is the brooding stove where all
neophytes in government can develop their
commitments and integrity of representation on
the principle of material or a higher form of
gain. All beginners in politics may vent their
grievances and wishes trying to represent the
desires of the people in heartening some aspect
of material social ego enterprising and status.
In this chamber of aspiration one may complain
and plan for a proper income and respect for the
different individual enterprises in society.
From this house of aspirants the house of
commons may derive their higher motives of honor
and conviction of opiniated approach. Later on
one is supposed to understand that gain without
honor makes no progress but a downfall. Just as
honor without wisdom equally loses control,
democratically settled or not. This way the
state would be in respect of the principle of
the soul from the beginning. By separating the
material motive from that of honor and wisdom
these three chambers would effectively make for
a revolution of the soul.
Thirdly
there is
7.3)
The problem of economy.
As yet we have
the principle of the free market. The problem
with this principle is in the way one uses
money: it is dealt with as with private property
while the coin itself is supposed to rule
private property. One cannot rule private
property by means of identifying with it as said
in 6.2.1. That makes a philosophically
impossible paradox like a baron von Munchausen
who tries to pull himself out of the mire of
crime by his own hair. It is easily understood
that from a free market principle never the
crime can be precluded. Opportunity makes the
thief and once we have this advantage of
stealing from the community it is difficult to
reverse it to a righteous distribution of
wealth. Simply stated free market economy can
never attain to a control of the flow of money
to such a degree that economic crime is
impossible. The ideal of free enterprising and
profit is not violated on itself attaining to a
system that is in full control of the flow of
money. It is not said yet how that flow
should be controlled and thus what the meaning
of the concept of freedom in enterprise exactly
would be. That is up to the government of the
state with its chambers of discussion. They may
decide who has the right to control what kind of
money, for what purposes and under what
conditions. But first of all a righteous economy
needs control and not a psychology of paranoia
about black markets, illegal currency, illegal
trade, unrighteous commissions, bribes, illegal
speculation etc. One is mopping with the tap
open as long as the private property of money
exists. Still each has to take responsibility
for his own capital . Money righteously implies
duty and responsibility. Not so much freedom and
power as one corrupt desire might whisper in the
ears of private ambition. In stead of a free
market one should speak of a responsible market
economy. For freedom and the power of God one
may more effectively check out with a monastery
than with a parliament or private enterprise.
Maybe half of all modern legal actions and
settlements somehow try to arrange for the
control over money, although with a doubtful
result. Somehow the terrorist in Yugoslavia
costs us in the nineties and thereafter more
money than twenty years of proper social
security and its commercial revenue for them
would have them keeping at home in Kosovo. Now
we have the total destruction of Serbian economy
for our free market economy of egoist control in
private property. Against this principle of the
free market with its shadow of economic crime
and dictature there is the principle of digital
money: that currency that in fact does not
exist, but is better recognized as a system of
credit-point management in a social science game
of career-mobilty, social security and free
enterprising. Since one is in full control of
knowledge where the money goes, where is stays
and where it is supposed to go and what it is
used for, one can govern for a righteous
distribution and reinforcement of wanted
socioeconomic realities: through this
digital revolution of economy the
people by means of the government can attain to
full control over the flow of money. Simply
stated: plastic money precludes economic crime
and crisis. No opportunity, no crime (who can
steal a creditpoint when the credit is settled
by clarity of income and expense?), no obscurity
or lack of control, no crisis. Nor will there be
any taxes needed since the government is in full
control already (!). As such crime and taxes
make the same objection: capital is not really
capital when it is out of control and more a
symptom and sign of unrighteousness, loveless
selfhood and war. As long as one defies the
concept of economic control by means of this
economic digital revolution (already taking
place step by step replacing money with
creditcards) one is in fact at the side of
thieves and frauds.
Fourth there
is
7.4)
The problem of traffic and
transport.
Here we have
the problem of the centralizing principle.
Economy would make for the so called efficiency
of centralized production and control. But,
although from the point of view of management it
seems to be handy to be in one building, from
the point of view of distribution of the goods
it is certainly not. Nor is the waste of time
and energy on endless commuting adequate either.
Transport even becomes impossible when everybody
has to go elsewhere when there is never enough
highway for it. The idea of decentralization is
nothing new in politics and management.
Rationally we might perfectly know this to be
true, but do we really manage from the solution
called the local principle? The answer is no.
Modern management rules from the centralization
principle with cultures of enterprising.
Multinational companies have their headquarters
in New York , Amsterdam or Hamburg, Singapore or
Tokyo. The local principle is to that only a
vague notion of the fact that the actual product
or actual life of the citizen is always settled
locally. In fact one confuses ones interlocal
business life with the life with the wife, kids,
neighbors friends and local community. To have a
secretary for a mistress is not a solution to
that nor is a divorce from the elderly companion
a solution. Confusing the social activity of
social cooperating for ones work in an office
with having a social life at home is the error.
It should be the same thing, but it is not
because we sold the soul of the local principle
for the money of the multinational interest of
centralized management. Now it cannot be denied
that centralized management is necessary. Of
course there should be a United Nations, US of
A, European Union, Indian democracy, Chinese
state etc. But management should not be confused
with the actual practice of using the product
and enjoying the settled state of affairs in
ones own environment. The revolution of the
local principle is a difficult one. The
central management cannot be missed although the
digital culture provides for the network with
the homeoffice (the wife in control!), the
video-conference and the inter- and intranet
chat and file-exchange. As such each home can
become part of the decentralized association of
a commercial or political board of management.
Local branches for smallscale assembly and more
effective distribution should be profitable
saving on commuting, offices and transport.
Still the psychology of estrangement between the
local and the central interest needs to be
overcome. What counts in first instance in this
revolution is to stress the importance and
efficiency of the local principle and arrive
step by step at the best balance with
centralized control of that efficiency and
adequacy necessary for the most economic traffic
of the people and the transport of their goods.
The very culture of local socializing for work
and leisure itself is to that in need of a
revolution of its own:
The fifth
problem is that of
7.5)
Social control.
In fact is the
modern ego socially controlled by all kinds of
separated unions, companies, parties and clubs
and is the only social control over it settled
by law. The law obliges to respect the officials
who check us out against crime and abuse, deceit
and fraud. One could say that the only formal
social control one agrees about nowadays late
twentiest century is the legal one. Opposed to
this (super-)ego-oriented principle of ingroup
social control is the principle of a
between-group concept of free association. It is
in fact this free association that is the true
sanity and freedom of the community we are
after. Never will the world as said be ruled by
a single party, club, police/military force or
union of whatever kind. Only the public meeting
place where all can encounter all in equality
can be called the freedom of social control. All
the rest of ego-determined ingroup control -
however holy or familiar - constitutes no
freedom at all but on the contrary provides for
more and more between-group violence as can be
seen in e.g. european soccer-supportergroups and
with gangs terrorizing the streets or street
violence in general. Also the violence of
terrorism and warfare can be considered a
perversion of social control. The answer to all
this 'street'-violence is simple: everyone
should go on the street and not make it a domain
for groups in competition of a dominance of
ignorance. The formalization of such free
association must not come from the ego of some
religion, political opinion or another paradigm
of control over people. It can only be if it
liberates and makes the sanity of all people
instead of limiting it and driving it into
conflict working against the mature option of
free choice. The authority of settling for this
social control can only come from a scientific
concept of what religious people call God. To
the common man it must be clear that meeting
oneother must be a good habit and take place for
the proper reasons: to overcome estrangement and
to attain to mutual emotional recognition,
community and support. There can't be a simple
moral or personalist lead in this. One has to
settle for a value-free formal concept of order
that specifies what exactly a good habit of
socializing would be.
In short:
first there is concentration (the
control) and second there is spreading
(the socializing). The concentration specifies
when exactly one does meet as a good habit, the
second must take care of an equal distribution
of attention for all the services and
associations offered in the social field.. The
principles seem contrary, but they are not. As
explained above one needs a system of
non-profitmotives and personal approach to
overcome a system of profit and keeping distance
in material (private enterprising) selfinterest.
Everyone knows that just to work and no leisure
is no happiness and pleasure. Watching
television at home can also be considered a type
of work (attending to the needs of the
worldcommunity to communicate about the troubles
of life at a distance). Thus as we always knew
we need a weekend off for the family and the
religion. But also for study, socializing
outside the private sphere, and to escape from
the contrivances of keeping distance (t.v.,
telephone, video, internet etc.) one needs a day
considering the proper balancing as discussed
above at 5.1. Only then a liberated form of
social control and a free associating society
where one learns to know who lives in ones town
and neighborhood is realized. Isn't it the
estrangement and impersonalism of modernity that
was its problem and fundamental cause of
ultimately war and social destruction with
violence in the streets? Opposite to the
principle of (the conflicting) ego that
factually rules the social control of modern
society the temporalist principle must be
placed. The temporal revolution implies
that for the sake of the restoration of
social control in free association (in whatever
group of preference thus) one individually has
to adopt another calendar and even clock to
settle for an equally potent concept of
time-management that is powerful enough to break
though the hypnosis of the material attractions,
conditionings and regressions of the egoculture
of standardtime. Thus one accomplishes with an
alternative of time management the control over
the seeming conflict between concentration and
spreading of attention for a free association of
social control. It is not the moral directive
thus that will bring social control. From that
we know and remember narrowminded onesided
dictatures of unenlightened social paranoia and
prosecution of deviants. The timeculture at hand
needs an acceptable alternative that can provide
for a concentration on a certain regularity
according another calendardivision that would
spread the attention equally over all days of
the week thus escaping from a conditioning to
social events settled by standardtime.(see
http://www.theorderoftime.com/science/fullcalendaroforder.html#A.D.2001
/ 2754 A.U.C.*
). One can say that such an alternative system
will also come up with settlements that
condition and train the individual to be caught
and be exploited with personalism and the
advantage of doubt. But having two systems next
to oneother one cannot deny that the freedom of
choice is preserved with it and that the
debilitating onesided conditioning is broken.
The government may as said before , from the
behavioral point of view, reinforce the social
behavior wanted by means of a special
reductioncard or even free services. To
strengthen going out as a good habit It may
subsidize the sell of soda's cheaper and alcohol
more expensive, or of vegetarian low-fat snacks
and meals in stead of risky meatproducts. It may
support cultural engagement by offering
reductions to entrance-fees or free entry for
concerts and other theater-productions as the
cinema. Actually this is happening already: the
welfare state does promote the participation of
students, unemployed poor people and old-aged
people with special reductions on cultural
events. It is in this direction that the
restoration of social control from the
adventures of modern engineering should take
place. The temporal option itself might not be
an option for the government in first instance.
They have their own agreements of standard-time
and should settle for a fair time-independent
distribution and reinforcement of risk-free
behavior and consumption for all cultures and
habits of time. Only later on, as an alternative
of timeculture makes a majority in the
government can an accent be placed for
counterbalancing against the unwanted
conditionings of bad habits in a maybe wornout
system.
CHAPTER
8
8)
How should we fight to protect and
defend this worldorder and peace?
Now these
pages have to make an end to the argument of war
and peace. In the previous chapters we saw how
through a recapitulation of history we realized
that we are in an evolution of the practice of
the values of liberation. Next we saw that about
the right to speak we had to conclude that there
is no political solution to begin with, but that
about reference, form and authority we should
hold on to change, time and selfrealization in
stead of fixations, lordships and political
power. In the third chapter we realized the
fallacies of the vedic root, political
dialectics and religious/scientific concepts of
attachment to conclude that a concept of reform
and progress is needed that doesn't make another
world but unifies the two worlds projected by
any system of material identification. In the
fourth chapter we realized that there is a
system of holistic healthcare possible to
account for this abridging of the gaps of
duality. In the next section fifth the question
of authority was answered clarifying that the
show is factually run on properly balancing
divisions of time that factually employ everyone
and that an holistic answer to the dualistic
fallacies must be founded on a realistic system
of statusorientation that is reflecting the
principles of the soul. Sixth answering the
question who these people of liberation are
there was concluded that 1) such a system of
liberation is maintained by a multifaith
spiritual discipline figuring as the standard to
work for offering the relative of all individual
and social ego, and that 2) the state and money
should be the servant with becoming someone
instead of somebody in sacrificing for an
informationculture of filognosy (loving the
knowledge). In the seventh chapter the practical
problem of implementation was discussed
concluding that to the problem of
representation, authority, economy, transport
and social control we need to shake the hand of
five revolutions called the revolution of
respectively holism, soul, the digital,
locality, and time . In one phrase thus far
we
could conclude to the necessity of an holistic
revolution for sake of the soul that uses the
digital capacity of an information culture that
restores the local respect and social control
with a proper renovation of time-management.
Now
this is all very clear we have to close the
argument and formulate what exactly we are
fighting against maintaining such a system and
how we should defend the peace of this holistic
future.
The
theme of this filognostic manifest is work and
unemployment. The factual conclusion is that our
modern/postmodern culture is in need of a
formulation of what the progress of the values
of liberation actually should be. The term
liberation implies the one of employment. One
may be enlightened freed from desires, but one
is only truly liberated if one finds a job with
it. Finally we simply want the problem of
unemployment out of the world. Before we make
any definitive statements about this, first we
must realize what the concept of labor factually
contends. Vedically it is called karma.
According to vedic knowledge we have three forms
of karma: akarma, karma and vikarma. In straight
English this is most simply understood as
respectively: spiritual work or work for God,
material work or work for the consequence of the
physical body and unwanted work or crime. From
this division we realize now again as we did
before at 5.2 that there is factually no concept
of unemployment from the vedic root. In the
platonian republic there is no mention of
unemployment either; the term is not used. There
are the guardians (officials, politicians,
philosophers and soldiers) of the state and the
different classes of labor and trade that have
to divide their duties and cooperate for all
provision of services and goods. No mention of
unemployment. In the Holy Bible there is neither
any word of unemployment: one either serves the
devil, or one serves God or lives an ignorant
life of misery. The mission is to help the poor
and fallen souls and restore their honor in the
love of God. Thus as well as logically from the
realization of the linguistical impossibility of
an absolute definition of labor as from
scriptural truth we must declare together with
the filognosytically formulated interests of the
soul the concept of unemployment as illusory and
political. Calling everyone unemployed whom we
cannot control and subdue to our own dictate of
labor is in fact unchristian, unwise and a proof
of alienation from the culture of the knowledge
of the soul in general (not to say bluntly
egoistic). A soul may have karma: a certain
obligation with the material body that is a
consequence of certain actions, desires
weaknesses or misdeeds in the past. A soul is in
constant evolution emancipating or regressing
from one involvement to another in a way that
may be unique. No government can plan for all
these diverse ways towards oblivion or towards
remembrance of God and soulfulness. The
government is simply not the employer. We
concluded to the necessity of a holistic (not
simply political) fivefold revolution. The
factual employer is Life itself, the Soul
itself, the Lord, the Superego or the Almighty
Reality of Time obliging us to respect all the
natural changes of matter the way they are. And
again as said above at 6.: no human being will
ever rule the world. Not even the Lord Himself
can outdo his own cultures of religion,
chastisement and education laid down and fixed
in another place and time: history is history,
respected or not. Nor will any scientific
paradigm outdo the moral education, peace and
social coherence of the different religious
systems to themselves, however regressive they
might seem to be. In fact we have to work for a
society and social control that can't be
anything but holistic and alternative. The
alternative is just an alternative, a
complement, a counterweight. The five
revolutions of holism,
soul, the digital, locality, and time
are separate programs of action, they are
expansions to already existing duties and
individual cultural options of emancipation that
eventually might together have a political
consequence and general paradigmatic turn of
tables sooner or later. Politics cannot run the
show really though since wisdom has to rule and
not just motives of gain and honor. It is
summarizing not 'gold and silver ' that is the
real philosophy of leadership and guardians of
state. The real struggle is for 1)
housing. and 2) sanity and
health
8.1)
housing.
Unemployment
is the problem of those who talk about it.
Therefore first of all this discussion must end
realizing that simply everyone who is not
without a house and is not sick is employed.
Crime is a special case of moral disease or
sickness to be cured by fines, imprisonment
& reeducation or forced labor. Death
penalties, denying the soul the housing of the
body, are much too easy and a sign of societal
weakness. It is the same as putting people on
the street who can't pay the rent in stead of
giving them an economic reeducation. If I would
be a murderer I would be very grateful to be
killed and have my karma being taken over by the
ambitious community eager after a (my). job.
Likewise many dropouts were happy to see their
debts disappear with their housing. But is one
really willing to pay the price of stealing
another mans life? The countries exercising this
simplistic eye for an eye penalizing are simply
naive in the consideration of what the eye of
life factually is: it is the complete vision of
a complete human life. Also taking the lives
(read housings of the souls ) of animals and
even trees this should be considered. How many
people have to live like pigs and cows just for
food and procreation waiting (in the ad-mire)
and crying (mooing) for their physical end in
hospitals butchered by surgeons explaining them
that they are really no predators but
predominantly vegetarian primates. How many
scientists are just meditating studying the
corpses of trees smeared with ink taking pride
(and money) keeping still as a plant in a pot
for the sake of 'peace', a healthy atmosphere
and biological balance? Let's cut this short:
each may kill and have the consequences of karma
or physical labor coming with it as far as the
law permits us to have death penalties for
enemies, animals, criminals and trees. But let
us be honest also: we are not to judge about
oneothers karma and be of total war and
destruction in political individual and
collective oppositions in the name of
employment. One may be employed by a political
party, an commercial enterprise, the military or
an other institution of the state. What must be
accepted as the cure for this financed conceit
of housing is that we are first of all employees
of the soul with all its holism of divine
omnipresence, principles of respect for as well
the elderly and wise as the honorably recognized
and aspiring motivated beginners hoping for
material gain. We should not in the name of this
"employment" deny oneother ones housing (in the
broadest sense) and call oneother unemployed
because we are all differently of karma. Either
nobody is employed by no one or everybody by the
soul. The ego of whatever power or kind can
never employ everyone; it can only engage others
to a limited material concept. But the rest is
and cannot be called unemployed or unmotivated
and be denied the housing and sustenance one
needs oneself with the same civil rights.
8.2)
Sanity and health.
The
real fight, the real struggle for existence is
that of sanity (all war is there between our
ears). The real struggle is nor only the
struggle to have no homeless refugees, junkies,
bums and tramps fleeing from the wars of
commerce and ego-politics that cannot end
without a conscious strategy of peace and
worldorder providing sustenance, housing and
respect for all walks of life (all karma). The
real struggle of life is about health in its
broadest sense: healthy social control. Healthy
psyches of filognosy instead of neurotics and
schizoids of psychology with its denial,
projection and egotistical destructive passion.
What is the use of fighting unemployment that
from the soul does not exist making people sick
of a society that does not exist either? The
illusion of unemployment must be finished,
otherwise the war will not end. The illusion of
a 'society' of social alienation and violence
must come to an end: that is no society at all
but a disease of lacking social control. Such a
social health cannot be bought: such a social
health is the real employer one has to work for
individually to begin with. The struggle is for
a free associating society that makes a realtime
and true time social reality in a healthy sense
of progress and value-free philosophy of
liberation in reciprocating service. Therefore
the mission is as it always was: love and
respect oneothers employment to the soul and
help the really sick and miserable dropouts to
regain their physical and social health in
offering them from our own health the clear
vision and trust of a righteous society in
progress towards a standard high enough to keep
God from chastising us for at least a thousand
years.
1*:
A
counsel of ministers of
statusorientation-representation making up the
best (most representative) governing capacity
possible can together decide what the former
functional division in ministeries could imply:
they could be institutes that are partly
independent with appointed leading
state-officials who are obliged to respect the
decisions of the government concerning their
policy.
R.M.
Section
1
|
|