Continued Studies; 03/04/2006

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

03/04/2006

Continuing with "The Analysis Of The Spirit Of Laws" by D'Alembert, I read across a passage early on in which he states and lists that there are only "three forms of government; The Republican, The Monarchical and The Despotic." he then continues - predictably to state that most governments are a mixture of these dynamics. He as well states that the Republican government places sovereignty in "the people," in the monarchical - in one single person, in the despotic - "no other law is known but the will of a tyrant master."

When considering this I find incredible amounts of fascination in knowing that such opinion was before (for the most part) and "just as" (in the lesser) such incredible concepts as is the "Third Degree Of Civilization as we know it, were being developed. Further it is that such rests within the same or similar placement in relation to the idea in the shift of "power base" from "sovereign" to "commerce."

Immediately this contributes several more layers of civilization "post" such concepts, in at least potential. The most obvious to me immediately is in further shifting the "power base" with "the people" as well to that focus on commerce as opposed to social interest and hierarchy.

As anyone can see, that dynamic has produced a considerable amount of inertia within and for the mechanism itself if employed properly. That is to say, that the combination of both perspectives and potentials from the view of any within a "Republic," will act to "supercharge" even the efficiency of society itself as being a substantial area from which to fuel it. When this isn't understood, as in many cases within our modern society - including falsification and topical emulations of this dynamic - it (within those emulations) loses that potency. It essentially seems to degrade into some form of despotism or another. Entirely removing any importance of that former "sovereign" populous (the people) in both manifestations (sovereign/power, commerce/power) - rendering it and placing it entirely within the facet of "consumer," and further entirely dependent on the misused structure of established "government," the "federal" areas for example - further rendering it as dead weight so to speak... as well as continuing to promote the dependence on the dysfunctional motion within it.

Within the dynamic I described of commerce/power over reaching its use - then develops, simply through connection, an overbearing and despotic "Federal" government. "Connection" as per "purse strings" and influence, usually.

This then paints a picture not of a Republic, not of a monarchy, but more of a dysfunction of dead weight being purchased by corporations giving the illusion that the "dead weight" society is doing the "purchasing" and in that, somehow governing itself. This laughably in the face of facts such as those corporations being entities setting the prices they sell their products at.

How is anyone to believe that people are governing themselves through such impedance?

If it were, as a rather rambunctious thought, that these corporate entities could be placed into - convinced to conform to - the design and dynamic of a larger example of Republic, then perhaps even given the higher resistance and impedance as it were, such might be manageable to an extent. But within that marriage of commerce and power, are a few checks and balances - AND to place such constraints on that commerce, is in effect defeating the original shift to begin with pertaining to its value in application within the larger mechanism. That is to say, the "free trade" elements as commonly established, should not be fettered in being required to fill those burdensome tasks and services.

In thinking about it, that tendency seems to be most of what crashes itself to begin with.

Such removes efficiencies from both areas in this example through rendering the populous as dead weight consumers, as well as then placing the burden of social movement and efficiency on private entities which mostly cannot fulfill them accept to great loss of that efficiency to themselves, as well as that mechanism.

I can easily see where within an efficient application of that duality I cited pertaining to the "sovereignty of the people" and the "power of the people" within that modern commerce/power - there is fertile ground so to speak, for actual opportunity and further - healthy stimulation of that larger, functioning mechanism.

In regard to corporate entities roping themselves in the burdens of maintaining society through ways I have described - within this modern dynamic of commerce'power. should they become too large (or monopolistic), they then can easily be described as the modern example of various degrees between the despotic governments described - as well as a fairly new version of tyranny/despotism - placing the former "citizen" now powerful within commerce, as an emulation of the former tyrannical despotic, monarchical ruler - sans of course, any actual sovereignty. Much of which is imposed having no other option within the consumer dynamic and that dependence.

Again, I see a paradox here in these larger corporate influences actually making things worse for themselves through exciting the desperation at "federal" levels to be "needed," and further to pander to the overwhelming and over bearing "consumer mentality."

In essence from some perspectives, through attempt to control that "governing body" too strictly from such directions - it forces the emulation within it to take on the attributes of a "ruled" private corporation, regardless of the "fluid" variables and elemental combinations of "governmental traits" that make themselves present. To put it more simply, the dynamic I see in such directions is akin to placing the back wheels of a car up on blocks and running the engine to remove mileage from the odometer.

Yes, the wheels turn.

Yes, the engine is running.

But, no - the end result of "wag the dog" among other cute names and tactics which are purposeful manifestations of the dynamic and paradox I am addressing, are anything but efficient or satisfactory.

This as well acts to create and support the idea and dynamic of "haves and have nots" in place of efficient, productive societal existence and actual opportunity.

It essentially sets the "corporate" entities in the position of "governing body" so to speak - on individual levels. Meaning that as much or more attention and importance is given by an individual to the wants of the corporate body they affiliate with, as there is to the actual "governing body."

This I see as reminiscent and resonant of bodies of the populous engaged in social structures which are dictated by/from contractual agreements with given corporate interests. A "rock star" for instance, usually exists entirely within a given corporate affiliation as per contract.. then considering other facets around "celebrity" including influence.... it is no surprise really that such tendencies move into society itself.