Continued Studies; 02/22/2006

CONTINUED STUDIES

Of

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

Observations

And

General Philosophy

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

02/16/2006 ~ 07/19/2006

02/22/2006

In my reading today, I happened upon a quote which I find to be very informative as to much of the dysfunction within modern "democracies" as they are acknowledged.

While it is that I am none too familiar with any of his works, the quote itself speaks volumes and is as follows;

Henry Miller from 1941 speaking on democracy and equality.

"It is the American vice, the democratic disease which expresses its tyranny by reducing everything unique to the level of the herd."

Firstly, besides this being the prevailing understanding of "equality" within our modern democracies - it is factually, very much not the result of the version of democracy which is the "third degree of civilization," being representative democracy.

It is quite factually, as is proved throughout history, to be as result of the version of "democracy" which entails the "first degree of civilization," being "primitive democracy."

Further, in regard to this result being from failed application of representative democracy, that result has been compounded and amplified in the blur which was and is the "advent" and "progress" of modern technology. Such haste in social development acted to encourage the promotion of that first degree version - as well, as much from result of a "path of least resistance" within the sudden speed of society.

When I think of the concept of "equality" itself, my experience and observation gives me a vastly different definition than that which is more widely upheld within that failed emulation of the "third degree of civilization" being really only a modern example of that "first degree."

Within the modern dynamic and those other influences, is as stated in that quote and readily observed, an idea that "equality" is the taking away of things as opposed to the presentation of opportunity. As if the understanding of its meaning within the actual mechanism of representative democracy is just that - to be focused on taking from one area or individual that which has been earned, to give it to another that may very well know nothing pertaining to the area(s) such an exchange may effect.

As if all people should be born without appendages, because there are those within society who are without them or their use.

Again, within what seems to be popular opinion - such is meant to be the focus, meaning and function of "equality."

Obviously and quite literally, such is a gross misinterpretation and a rave point on which to focus effort or the meaning of "equality."

There is nothing within even the concept of the "third degree of civilization" (being representative democracy) that I can see, which even suggests much less substantiates such a grotesque misinterpretation... that is, to my knowledge and understanding.

10/26/2006 In the interest of fairness, I do admit that the mechanism we exist within is not exclusively of any one idea or design. In fact, from what I can tell such is very much purposeful.

I personally cannot see the worth in sacrificing all of which genuine opportunity provides at even the individual level, for the misapplied dysfunction of such destructive and negative measures as the seemingly popular definition of "equality" does hold and dispense.

Again, from my understanding and personal experience, the word equality applied onto and into society means opportunity to progress within ones own capacity.

I have never even dreamed of thinking it was in any way the version which seems most widely upheld, much less insisting on any fictitious guarantees of successes there-in.

Such misuse is in no way "equality."

It likens more to its antithesis and extremely to prejudice in its worst form. How can we allow ourselves to falsely promote "equality" while producing an extreme lack of it, even within the facade and illusion of immediate benefits it brings to some - while damaging more, and more specifically their chance at enjoying actual equality?

Especially when the more proper application of such a concept as is equality, is so much more fruitful for all in their own right.

Even the life lived and failed as an individual within such a concept, is worth far more than a life (or part) taken from one and given to another to display as their own.

Such a thought again brings me to the subject of "value" and all such entails.

In our modern day there are those, particularly those specifically associated with the "virtual" realm - who- similarly to the misconceived understanding of equality, seem to think that "value" is gained simply through getting many to say something holds value. Such opinion, even en masse, bespeaks origins within and from consumer perspectives. Very much a consumer mentality.

To address "value" pertaining to the virtual realm more specifically, it is that such is directly attached to things of "value" which do not originate in the "virtual" sense. That is to say, within modern communications technology, as the concept of scrip dates even farther than Justinian and those ground breaking concepts of REM and Phsyical sale.

To be more precise, the Internet depends entirely on other value systems applied to itself.

This is not unique in any form, other than that of the direction and potentials of Internet communications. Such dependency coupled with the "desire" of those other directions has served to create a tension which is not necessary, between the two different "worlds." It is only "necessary" as far as that dependency.

This tension has also resulted in a competition of supplanted or perceived "need"..... a contest for some sort of dominance, which I see as entirely un-necessary - further even becoming a detriment to the potentials of both "worlds."

If it were that the "virtual realm," meaning Internet and Internet commerce established its own true version of sustained value independently of a direct attachment to others, that "contested" area would be freed up for actual development - progress and pleasure of living. Relieving as well, the other detrimental aspects of the non-essential clash between "worlds." Such seems as though it would quite factually permit the establishment of healthy trade between the two areas of existence.... this further acting to maintain an already established "value system" with the newer, "virtual" economy.

I do hold it to be true that such a development will still have to have some connection with the "physical" world, but I see devising and establishing a separate and unique point of connection as part of that economy building.

firstly it seems that there must be established a consistent, constant which is not relative to already established value systems or scrip - something which is not in effect at this point in time.

I readily see this opportunity to lay in using areas which need development and resolve, that have found dead ends due to the rigidity and lack of "space" in areas too far in motion to be of use. This of course would entail choosing such areas that are the least used in regard to the "negative" effect in sustaining the social aspects of something else. Some area where it is that such a shift could not only be beneficial, but efficient in such a use as well.

For instance, here in the United States of America, it has long been a point of contention in regard to restitution for the descendants of former slaves. I see this as a potential area to establish such a "micro' effect in "value" base as per the "virtual realm."

The biggest problematic areas with this plight, seem to be as I have stated pertaining to little efficient opportunity within the motion which already exists. It is a potential point of contention.. which indicates a deeper use perhaps.

In other words, it would be a larger detriment to all should such a large quantity (prospectively) of monetary remittance be issued at once in the direction of a "direct" restitution, than it would be to employ that "need" and motion into other uses peripherally, even as an emulation of said traditional "succor" to a new (though virtual) economy.

The damage to the existing economy with such a large scale and polarized disbursement could prove to be overly problematic, where to use such an opportunity in establishing a consistent and constant flow in "launching" a separate economy system, could be greatly beneficial to all.

This combined with similar efforts within other nations, simultaneously - as well. Thus rendering the potential for an independent, virtual, international economy containing new, raw elements for which to establish and maintain real value. Independent, though still in touch with the other, existing economies of the various interests.

Essentially incorporating the various different nationality participants as the beginnings, and "value" base.

Applying the efficiency of a "democratic" economy (in that "floating" sense), on a large scale.

In essence again, this would be similar to creating an entirely different country consisting of a "virtual" populous from several different countries - still residing within those countries of their origin. A dual citizenship of sorts.

Think of it, a big, diverse country (or even several as it develops) which exist on no land what so ever, or sea for that matter.

Of course, this would mean that those participating (especially at that "base" area) would again need to be regarded as people holding dual citizenship's - that of their country of residence/origin, and that of the virtual realm.