|
The Passion of Liberty: Part Four - Original Sin by Richard
Rieben Many
people are willing to respect the sovereignty of other individuals – and
do so regularly – but they do not believe that reciprocity is sufficient
motivation to get others to return the respect, nor that it will provide
sufficient security, in itself. Patently,
something more is needed, such as understanding how reciprocal respect
works to our mutual self-interest, and some sort of agreement to sovereign
boundaries. But this is still not considered sufficient. Our
indoctrination and our experience with group solutions suggests that power
and force are necessary, in some measure. Basically respectful people will
expend enormous energy attempting to configure group power and force in
the nicest and least intrusive manner possible. But power is power, and
force is force. At the end of the day, there isn’t a way to employ these
tools that respects the integrity of individual sovereignty. At
that point, they assert that individual sovereignty will just have to be
compromised, since, according to their group programming, there is no
viable alternative. “Be realistic,” they say, reasonably. “Some
level of power and force are necessary.” The
institutional tools of power and force – employed by the group for
subordination and extortion – are burned into the membership’s
indoctrination as a real-world understanding: To them, these are the only
tools that can work. My
focus here is the indoctrination itself, not group psychology. Briefly,
however, groups are human constructions which, once given the ring of
power (force), become corrupted and plot to enslave all unto that power.
Individuals may or may not become corrupted by the possession of power,
but any group will be instantly corrupted by the slightest brush with
empowerment over individuals, regardless of checks, designs or intentions.
Vigilance counts for nothing. People
who are indoctrinated to subordinate their lives to the good of the group,
are not encouraged to practice respect for one another in a manner that
threatens the existence of the group (i.e., making it redundant). They are
usually taught to respect members of their own group, and only such
as to facilitate group cohesiveness. Other
solutions, such as reciprocal respect of individual sovereignty, are not real
to them. And, if they grasp the liberating potential of such concepts,
they may, as indoctrinated members of a group, be threatened (on behalf of
their group) and defensive (of the authority of their group). It
is important to understand that those jeering throngs, littering the
roadsides of history long before and ever since They
are no longer human. It
does not matter if they are brandishing the whip, or cheering from the
sidelines. It does not matter if they are pulling a trigger at Borrowing
from the description and imagery of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the
Rings, they are essentially orcs, though the degree of their
programmed mindlessness varies from orc to orc. Group
programming is the source of the concept “Original Sin,” which is not
inherent to the human being, but to anyone raised within a collectivized
society. We are all of us corrupted by such indoctrination. “We have
seen the enemy; and he is us.” What do we do about it? Most critically,
we need a respectful environment in which to heal from it. Under
a condition of political liberty, where boundaries of individual
sovereignty are respected (and effected by contract), and where groups
have no enforceable power over anyone, the nature of social indoctrination
– religious, social, moral – would be informative rather than
crippling, at least for the most part. Moreover, there would be the
broader political arena (of respect) in which to heal from discordant
childhood indoctrination, rather than being forced to perpetuate it (as a
cycle of abuse). The
sovereign human being is, naturally, respectful of the sovereignty of
other individuals, on the understanding that this is the most effective
means of securing respect for his own sovereignty from others. It
underlies the whole thing: our basic humanity. But
this is not true for people who have subordinated themselves to a group
power. Group-programmed orcs, who seek to subordinate independent
individuals to the priorities and values of the group, are violating the
boundaries of their own security in the process. They believe that they
will be protected by the group, even as they, personally and on behalf of
the group, go around violating the boundaries of everyone else. Killing
or attacking the most abusive agents of the group merely musters the
defense of the group, intensifies its indoctrination, and strengthens the
morale of the orcs in their “patriotism,” their “religious
conviction,” or their sense of “racio-cultural superiority.” It
intensifies the production of propaganda on behalf of the group,
regardless of the degree of debauchery practiced by the “overly
zealous” agents. Moderate
members of the group acknowledge that the abuses should be curtailed, but
maintain that challenges to the viability of the group cannot be
tolerated, regardless of the nature of the abuses (and, hence regardless
of provocation). They defend the group “right or wrong,” because the
group is their refuge, their identification, and, mostly, because they
have been programmed from birth to defend it, to support it, and to
sacrifice themselves for it. The
thesis of respect, in regard to healing oneself and healing one’s
neighbors (such as to generate a secure and respectful environment), is,
in our present context, that of turning the other cheek. “Respect thy
neighbor as thyself” is the first (and only) commandment of liberty.
Generally, this means even if they are orcs, or wrong-headed, according to
you, in any other fashion. The
orcs are, at their core, human beings. They have a sovereign right, as
such, to their own choices, even if these choices debilitate and enslave
them. They have a sovereign right to choose this condition for
themselves (and for themselves alone). It would be
disrespectful to rescue them or to force your views on them. Deflecting
their disrespect – turning the other cheek – is not a matter of
“nobly” suffering insults to one’s sovereignty, but of recognizing
that most people (orcs) are humanly crippled: “They know not what
they do.” The
alternative – responding to force with force – will only worsen
one’s environment. In the case of physical assault (defined according to
individual circumstances), killing an orc may be the only defense possible
to preserve one’s own life. And, thus, defensive force is justified (at
all times). A
defensive action is not chosen by you, but forced upon you through
the actions of another in violation of your sovereignty. It is a “first
blood” situation. Regardless of where they are coming from in their
desperate group programming, they are running “amok” upon the
boundaries of your sovereignty: you are the offended party, and you
are being forced to respond with force, qua sovereign human being. However,
run-ins with armed orc agents are likely to be less frequent than run-ins
with the orcs who have accepted submission and slavery, who provide
support for the armed agents, and who resent anyone claiming individual
sovereignty. (“Just who does she think she is!”) These are the
orcs that you need to reach. For the most part, you need to reach them as
a fellow orc striving to become more sovereign, more respectful and more
human. We are, none of us, without the “sin” of indoctrination, but to
heal from this sin, we must give and seek the respect of our fellows,
regardless of their individual level of humanity – in the quest to heal
others and heal ourselves. Turning
the other cheek is not entirely passive. You return disrespect of your
sovereignty with respect for the inherent sovereign humanity of the other
person, and with the glad tidings message of “respect in exchange for
respect.” You turn the incident into an opportunity to spread the gospel
(“good story”), without disrespectfully expecting immediate
conversion, and without disrespectfully forcing it upon anyone. discuss this column in the forum Richard Rieben is a world traveler, house remodeler, and sometime author and philosopher. The thesis of his manifesto, Reciprocia, is, briefly: “Sovereignty is the base; reciprocity defines how to make it work.” Aside from harping incessantly on the theme of liberty, he leads a fairly normal life in middle America, where he scouts for silver-linings. His internet articles are featured at TakeLiberty.com. Comments may be e-mailed to: richard [at] reciprocia.com. |