The People have no power!
The 1% will not give us an independent power so we have to take it!
All other activities are secondary.
How can we ever get a Humane World when we have no power? In private companies there is some contradiction between owners and (powerful) directors, common citizens are not involved. Their interests are disregarded and inferior to the interests of the people on top of society.
In the (semi-) public sector politicians have some influence on directors of medical, social, military or other worlds but The People are excluded. Once in a few year they may vote but all elected people have the same background and comparable high incomes as not-elected directors. There is a great distance between elected and electorate. Closed political cliques select the candidates and The People have hardly influence.
The result of the separation of leaders and The People is corruption, favouring the own group, disregarding people in lower echelons of society, striving for still higher incomes and using a lot of money from institutions. When the bill should not be paid by institutions and corporations, five-star hotels should cease to exist.
Nobody controls. The scandals in the cycling sport or in the Olympic scene are examples how society derails when there is no control. The well-paid top (and the lower placed people who want to climb up) are like the mafia. Omerta, nobody talks, nobody criticises what happens, the silence is deafening – out of fear of being thrown out.
In the past it was even worse. Conflicts within the elite were solved by wars between warlords who used Machiavellian methods based on tricks, deceit and a lot of violence. Defeated knights were invited to the banquet in which the end of the war was celebrated while at the same time powerless citizens who were used as foot soldiers were slaughtered. Without soldiers defeated knights were harmless. Towards hostile knights, people of their own kind, the nobility was chivalrous, people from lower classes were hardly seen as human. Western colonists considered people in the colonies also as inferior, the 1% still think they are superior.
The Trias Politica
More than two hundred years ago the elitist count of Montesquieu introduced the Trias Politica to solve conflicts within the elite. He separated the judicature, the executive and the legislature but did not make a fourth People’s Power. Nearly all people in the Trias Politica are nominated by peers. Only some in the executive power are elected. The 1% control all three power instruments.
Lawyers are expensive. The Trias Politica can only be used by people with money. The influence of citizens is minimal, citizens lack the power and the money to use or change laws. The rising level of education made the 99% more conscious of their inferior position. Therefore more regulation was needed to control the masses. The elite restricts the freedom of the 99% by more rules and laws to maintain its privileged position.
People are allowed to vote but the elected decide. Democracy continues to exist even when the elected are corrupt, difficulties are mounting or the freedom of common citizens more and more restricted. Decisions are in the first place inspired by the benefit for the own group and not by the interests of the 99% they hardly know. The dominating reason for any decision is the pivotal role of money, of getting still more money for the already privileged. Nobody from down under controls or punishes them. That has to change, everyone has the right to interfere when decisions are wrong.
Political parties or philosophers hardly question the existence of the Trias Politica. At the most they try to increase influence of The People on the Trias Politica but they do not think about an independent People’s Power. Even after communist or fascist revolutions ousted the 1%, the 99% did not get an independent power. The communist or fascist political parties were dominated by a new 1%. The Trias Politica was maintained and used to settle internal conflicts. The 99% could even use the Trias Politica less than in Western capitalist countries.
Only Small Violence is needed
The struggle will not be very violent (too dangerous for the activists) but you cannot make an omelette without breaking some eggs. Marat claimed the right of the oppressed on violent actions. “Revolution is a natural right of The People”, he said and in March 1789 he proclaimed the violent Revolution. “Violence by The People is legitimate, it remains always far inferior to the sum of all injustices by the despots over the centuries”.
He saw that the use of a certain amount of violence – but far less than the violence of the 1% – was necessary and unavoidable. He propagated that the “Revolution will be a kind of guerrilla in which we can attack the enemy in all places where the army cannot be used. This means that we can deprive the enemy of all his advantages”.
He clearly did not like fights with security forces but wanted to point all arrows directly at the 1%. The only target that will unify all 99% is taking the power and the money away from the 1%. His ideas are in accordance with the old Chinese book “The Art of War” by Sun Tzu. Von Clausewitz in the 19th century and in the 20th century the book “The War of the Flea” by Robert Taber confirmed the ideas of Sun Tzu. But most revolutionaries forget that for real success the 1% must be attacked in their private living situation (where the army cannot protect them). Only then the 99% develop enough power to control any upcoming leading group.
New ideas and a new future can only arise when the 99% distance themselves from the elitist democratic system. The central guiding point is the idea that humans must get more influence on their own life and on the general social development. Only then humans really become freer.
In my book “The Power of the Autonomous Human”, theory and practice of attacks on persons” (free downloadable from my site “Down with any Elite” http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis) I describe some successful actions. Activists had a lot of fun and got more self-esteem because they knew they became less dependent on the caprices of the people up there.
I want a Humane World in which the pivotal point in decisions is not money but the idea that all people have the same status. This paradigm shift, this revolution, gives the 99% more to say about their own life and more personal freedom.
Joost van Steenis