The lexicon, democracy, has an etymology, which can be traced back to the Ancient Greek word for the mob, which is translated into our own language with its Roman alphabet into the term, demos. The term, demos, with the suffix typically attached to it, forms the referring expression, democracy; which we assert to be the rule of the citizens. It is the position of the Midwest Alliance that democracy is realized when the will of the Demos becomes the policy of the state. The intermediary devices that we currently have installed in American Empire’s political system are a device to mitigate the power of the Demos; the will of the people.

Furthermore, the distillation of the people’s expression of opinions concerning matters of state, which constitutes a quasi-republic, not a democracy, have been corrupted by elitist cronyism and the influence of special interests, which invest money into the campaign coffers of career politicians. We suffer from the rule of the provincial, which imposes its selfish head at the expense of the cosmopolitan interests of the Demos, the populace.

The Demos is not represented through this system of polity. Rather, it is provided with the illusory impression that it somehow affects the posture of the state through ceremonial occasions where each member of the demos is provided the opportunity to express himself or herself through the casting of a single vote for an individual, who indirectly, in theory, represents the individual in the affairs of state.

Let us recognize this pathetic ritual, which reinforces the collective representation of a democratic nation, as a device to propagate a false ideology. We do not live in a democracy, we live in Empire, which is controlled by a plutocracy that carefully manages the representation, the veneer, of an electoral system, which provides the Demos with preselected choices, which are the products of a complex system consisting of networking and cronyist quid pro quo.

This process, conducted among the elites, preselects those who will be our choices for representation in polity. The individuals presented to us are typically those with the most elitist alliances, as well as, those with the access to the necessary capital required to enter into the ceremonial pageantries of primaries. Following the series of ritualistic dramatic performances, one of the members of the power elite eventually assumes the role of Emperor; more commonly designated as President.

Our choices are made in advance, prior to our even becoming cognizant of candidates presented as electoral options. We live under the rule of single political party, because the ideological divergences between and among the assortment of individuals belonging to the elitist class are blown into consequential oblivion by the intersection of interests among the plutocracy of Empire, which consist of preserving their elevated status.

Therefore, the Power Elite is interested and defined by the following teleology, which gives shape to their primary project: The maintenance of the status quo.

Tags: american empire, centralization, democracy, direct democracy, foreign policy, localism, midwest populist party, politics, populist movement, power
Categories: Commentary, Global, Populist Party, Democracy, liberty, government, Russell Cole's Blog, Power, Politics, Third Parties, Empire, Direct Democracy
1 Comment »

by Russell Cole

There is a perception in society that the most efficient and rational method by which to structure an institution is through a hierarchical architecture that possess levels of strata endowing individuals assuming statuses in those strata with certain powers and responsibilities.  This sentiment seems almost self evident; without hierarchy and the delegation of responsibility distributed by an executive source, standing atop a hierarchical structure, there would be no accountability as well as planning, and, for that matter, organization, at all.

This description is applicable to the ordinary corporatist institutional configuration, where there are levels of employees and gradations of management, and power is acquired through ones acquisition of a status that has a specific position in the hierarchical structure that is not in the lowest strata of the vertical grid constituting the organization.  Many political parties subscribe to this conventional wisdom regarding organizational theory, and what results is a hierarchical structure manifested from this archaic philosophy’s implementation into practice.

Currently, third-parties, such as the Green Party, are in the process of arranging vertical positions within the framework of its party’s organization.  The basic Membership is losing a lot of the influence it once had upon the Party’s platform and the specific imperatives, or plans of action, developed in order to actualize the state-of-affairs described by the propositions included in the platform.  I will not even go into a description of the two business parties because their hierarchical structures are so evident that it is ostensible and extraneous to even provide a description of their unegalitarian structures.

I want to introduce a radically new conceptualization of organizations that is becoming quite a popular school of thought in both democratic theory and organizational theory.  I will refer to this paradigm as Extreme Democracy.  This understanding of organizations recognizes that vertical differentiation that is prepared in advance of the organization’s enactment is counter-productive to the organization’s ability to place the best people in the most influential places; by, the best people, I am merely referring to those who are willing to work harder, produce more, and manufacture commodities - intellectual and material - that are qualitatively superior.  These people, due to the dynamics of the organization I am about to describe will naturally ascend to positions of disproportionate influence.

(Article Continues Below)
The type of organization that fosters this meritocratic scheme for determining who will amass the greatest impact upon the organization is a loose network of associations that is entirely egalitarian with respect to the fact that there are no preconceived stratification within the social body.  Here is the dynamic that operates within this network that propels the most productive and effective to positions of influence within the network, or the loose organization:  Those who can produce better results will attract others in the network to form relationships with these individuals, who possess the ability to achieve prodigious tasks.  In other words, naturally, people in the organization are going to want to exchange commodities - in the form of intellectual information or more tangible constructs - with those who provide a more beneficial product.

Therefore, the number of relationships possessed by an outstanding member of the network will proliferate, and through these links within the network the products produced by the talented and hard-working individual will become dispersed more widely throughout the system, and his or her influence will be exacerbated.  He or she will then, through a completely egalitarian process, ascend to a position of power when it comes to shaping the contents and dispositions of the organization.

The theory of Extreme Democracy is somewhat of a by-product of the social phenomenon of social-software projects.  People noticed the trend referred to above taking place within the loose organizations of associates who were involved in the production of the coding necessary to enhance computer products.  Mozilla/Firefox is probably the best example of this type of social activity.  Jon Lebkowsky has been responsible for much of the expansion of the school of thought referenced as Extreme Democracy.  Though I agree with him on many aspects of his theoretical contemplations, there are still numerous problems to be worked out.  Nevertheless, this still appears to be a fruitful avenue to pursue for those who are interested in improving society by institutionalizing improved forms of democratic polity.

Tags: democracy, direct democracy, extreme democracy, federalism, government, localism, National, politics, populist, populist party, russell cole, society, third parties
Categories: Commentary, National, Society, Populist Party, Democracy, government, Politics, Third Parties, Direct Democracy
1 Comment »