Red Cliffs Of Dawlish

Red Cliffs Of Dawlish
Red Cliffs Of Dawlish
Showing posts with label The Road To Serfdom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Road To Serfdom. Show all posts

Sunday, 13 March 2016

Why? Living Someone Else's Dream

"Later, as he sat on his balcony eating the dog, Dr. Robert Laing reflected on the unusual events that had taken place within this huge apartment building during the previous three months."

This week sees the launch of The Leave Alliance. It's already a great achievement by an organization with such little regard by the "eurosceptic aristocracy" and indeed by extension SW1 Establishment. Also this week marks the release of the film adaptation of J.G Ballard's novel, written in 1975: High Rise by the British director Ben Wheatley. I really enjoy J.G. Ballard's novels. It resonates so strongly with something of my own personality, as it may also do so with others? What is that? A glimpse of what this might be is found in a minor interview:

An Investigative Spirit: Travis Elborough talks to J.G Ballard
TE: In several of your novels you have used a small community, the residents of a luxury housing development or a high-rise block for example, as a microcosm with which to explore the fragility of civil society. Do you think that your preoccupation with social regression, de-evolution even, stems from your childhood experiences in the internment camp when you saw first hand, how easily the veneer of civilization could slip away?

JGB: Yes, I think it does; although anyone who has experienced a war first hand knows that it completely overturns every conventional idea of what makes up day-to-day reality.


In the previous blog, EU: From Common Market To EU Constitution, it was noted in diagram form the genesis of the EU or Supranationalism in the architect of the EU, Jean Monnet and his experiences of war. A very important blog by Dr. RAE North EU Referendum: the genesis of obsolescence:-
"In fact, the First World War was far more important to the intellectual genesis of the EU than the Second, something that Booker and I observed in The Great Deception (see p.14 et seq).

And if there was one historical event which more than any other inspired what was eventually to become the European Union, it was the battle which had raged around Verdun the First World War. For the British the defining battle of that war was the Somme in the summer of 1916. 

Present for several months fighting for the other side was the father of Germany's future Chancellor, Helmut Kohl. So deep was the wound Verdun inflicted on the psyche of France that the following year her army was brought to mutiny. Its morale would never fully recover.

And from this blow were to emerge two abiding lessons. The first was a conviction that such a suicidal clash of national armies must never be repeated. The second was much more specific and immediate. It came from the realisation that the war had been shaped more than anything else by industrial power.


Thus, Loucheur came to reflect, industrial organisation was the key to waging war. From this he developed the idea that, if key industries from different countries, above all their coal and steel industries on which modern warfare so much depended, were removed from the control of individual nations and vested in a "higher authority", this might be the means of preserving peace. 

But the point that emerges – or should emerge – is that the First World War was in all manner of ways unique. By the time Part II (otherwise known as World War II) had ground its way to its bloody conclusion, the world had changed to an extent unimaginable to the original authors of the ideas which led to the formation of the EU.

Crucially, the post-1945 world was divided into spheres of influence dominated by two super-powers, with the A-bomb and then the H-bomb delivered by unstoppable Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, holding the balance of terror which become known as the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)."
Direct experience is not easily conveyed by secondary descriptions

What is very very strongly demonstrated here is the direct experience of people informs and shapes their world view. In The Great Deception this core and raw and direct experience on the the major influencers of civilization shaped the next step:-

Le Corbusier's design for his ideal city was in his mind the blueprint of social reform (credit: DailyMail)  

You can read a fascinating account of this perspective on "Central Planning" in the documentary discussed here: City of Towers – Christopher Booker – BBC 1979 and on youtube City of Towers with the sound unfortunately missing. We briefly met "Central Planning" or "Centralization" previously in The Road To The European Union:-

However according to  Friedrich von Hayek in The Road To Serfdom, similar such processes have not increased democracy through increases in size and power of the state, but Centralized power and decreased democracy:-

"The most effective way of making people accept the validity of the values they are to serve is to persuade them that they are really the same as those which they, or at least the best among them, have always held, but which were not properly understood or recognized before. The people are made to transfer their allegiance from the old gods to the new under the pretense that the new gods really are what their sound instinct had always told them but what before they had only dimly seen. And the most efficient technique to this end is to use the old words but change their meaning."
"The more the state "plans" the more difficult planning becomes for the individual.

The effect of the people's agreeing that there must be central planning, without agreeing on the ends, will be rather as if a group of people were to commit themselves to take a journey together without agreeing where they want to go; with the result that they may all have to make a journey which most of them do not want at all.

Is there a greater tragedy imaginable than that, in our endeavour consciously to shape our future in accordance with high ideals, we should in fact unwittingly produce the very opposite of what we have been striving for?

Nowhere has democracy ever worked well without a great measure of local self-government, providing a school of political training for the people at large as much as for their future leaders."
 Périphérique: Ring-Road around Paris: Separating the Central and Outer Suburbs such as the Banlieues

It's very interesting reading the above blogger's thoughts on this "Modernist" architecture retold at the above link:-
"City of Towers is a two hour documentary made by Christopher Booker for the BBC, first broadcast in 1979 and a master class in the history of Modernism that covers its birth from ideas first put forward by Antonio Sant’Elia, Auguste Perret and Le Corbusier in the early part of the Twentieth Century...

. . . to its fall from grace in the latter part of the same century when its supposed beneficiaries, the people who had to live in the concrete blocks that followed the Modernist model, rebelled, and it came to be seen for what it truly was, a failed philosophy."

 Bande De Filles ("Girl Gang") or English working title: "Girlhood"

The above film Bande De Filles / Girlhood is a story that takes place in the Paris Banlieues beyond the Périphérique. I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it highly. I also spent some time living in Paris and got to know some of the areas of this city, though to see a portrayal, even fictional of different areas is therefore rewarding: Who lives in different areas and how does their community and people see themselves? Well you can't help feel as if there's an impact on the architecture: Living in Montmartre on the hill is a idyllic area in this respect concerning the small community feeling it engenders and beautifully captured on film in another French film the magical realism fable Amélie. Ultimately the story in "Girlhood" is part coming of age story and part social observation of how the people living in some of these areas particularly perhaps these banlieues:-

Do Parisians buy property outside of Paris' Périphérique?
"In the U.S., the inner cities suffered while the suburbs became havens for the wealthy…just the opposite of what happened in Europe. Here in France, the central parts of the cities have continued to increase in value, while living in the suburbs became a less-expensive answer for families needing more space on a tighter budget. This is not true for all suburbs, but outside Paris in particular, the government built public housing in the banlieues (suburbs), to house hundreds of thousands of individuals from North Africa."
Frames their perception of themselves and their place in society? This is explored in Dirty boulevard: why Paris's ring road is a major block on the city's grand plans by Justinien Tribillon. For a lot of people, the community of the present, the ideas of the past have been codified into structures or even strictures that dictate how they live their lives. The driving force in "Bande De Filles" is the determination to live one's own life, to free oneself, better oneself but also to learn to live and overcome such obstacles, to find an "ecstasy of experience" in friendship, and, in finding a way in life or indeed a way out of oneself, one's own limitations: To live one's own life, not one dictated by others, environment or events. To find one's own identity and freedom in that.

I was a few months ago looking after some friend's children and took them into London to see the Natural History Museum. There was inevitably a Tube strike so we had to take a bus, which on a hot day and for young children merely added to what was going to become a gruellingly long day on their much lower staminas! Fortunately the bus we took instead of being one of those "bendy-buses" was:-


New Routemaster Bus: A more convivial and communal form of transport?

I could not help feel these buses had a "human dimension" to them that the previous flawed models did not apart from the technical specifications no doubt of "micro-pollutants", crunching the effect on traffic with hop-on-off they're primarily designed to handle. They seem more comfortable and friendly in their design of seating and passenger interaction, to me. I don't remember this being the main reason or reasons for their reintroduction but it struck me as quite important if it is multiplied invisibly and unquantified across the entire central London?

In those tower-blocks the vision of the intellectuals in coding and planning for people seems to have been pre-loaded or declared instead of a more iterative way forward, an organic growth of communities; which the older buildings despite their poor specifications at least seemed to engender a human dimension in. I'm for this reason not overly fond of over-regulation of how people decide to live. But if you look at Paris this is a battle that appears more exacerbated for them. 



It was Boris Johnson who relaunched the Routemaster. But unfortunately we have to suffer the Personality Politics dominating the Referendum of our SW1 masters, and their plans for us: Pete North notices this too: Bugger off Boris, and by Dr. RAE North: EU Referendum: not on our side, and Mr. Brexit expanding to the wider Tory Party itself that is dominating Remain and Leave turning the Referendum into the Tory Party Self-Promotion and Leadership Staging Event, Just whose side are the Tory eurosceptics really on? The latest fear-mongering (FUD) from Cameron: Cameron's latest fear mongering on farming, Mark Carney's curiously similar contribution and even some mutterings of Barak Obama down the pipeline, too: Banking is global and so is regulation; the industry will continue to thrive in the UK

A certain kind of political snobbery: Keeping others "out"

The Sceptic Isle writes: The EU is moving towards its final destination, it’s time for us to depart and choose a different track.

What I want to do with this blog is simply to reflect not on this end destination but to reframe the same message but in a different form: The real form, of ideas of people from the past and how their ideas shape the present world of present people.

The question is: Is it still practical and applicable? If not: Why are we living the dreams of people long-gone and possible the coherence of those ideas, their philosophy proving to be "a broken philosophy"? I can't help consider that a certain form of "rent-seeking" "Political Class" rules Europe, and they keep other peoples' ideas out while they cleave to centralization of power and part of their pay-off is to treat with contempt anyone below themselves while supporting that which they themselves are underneath. Thus at the top: The old ideas of a few.




High Rise - teaser trailer 18.03.16

 Coming back to Dr. RAE North's blog on EU Referendum: the genesis of obsolescence:-
"It is significant, therefore, that the Battle of Verdun started on 21 February 1916, almost exactly 100 years ago, and is still cited as the reason why we should surrender our democracy (what's left of it) to a supranational construct based in Brussels."


Related Note: Christopher Booker's recent article: How Britain connived in the end of the Kalahari Bushmen

As the Botswana government persecutes this people and drives them towards extinction, the UK and EU stand by and do nothing
 

Thursday, 1 October 2015

The Road To The European Union



In The Greatest Political Problem of Our Time the observation of the parallels between our current government's EU Referendum and the National Scale problem, opened to the public via the creation of "The Board of Longitude" in 1714 (301 years ago) were made and resorting to the people to help resolve this problem. Namely: "broadening the debate" by opening it up. In modern terms this might be thought of as "Crowdsourcing" the problem.

 1. Celtic Tribes - Roman Britain AD 43–c. 410

Ordinarily the UK's Representative Democracy system of governance appears to be capable of solving most problems of running policy solutions to improve results at the Nation level and as part of the decision-making and debating process, via consulting the people in General Elections. In this way we can think of democracy as a large forum of debate and discussion to test arguments before choosing via voting which arguments we feel are the "fittest" at this large scale of human organization (millions) and also the most "representative" of the needs of the people. Roger Scruton describes this sort of situation in a very brief summary very clearly underpinning these features: A Point of View: Is democracy overrated?:-

  • Freedom of Speech and opinion
  • Property Rights
  • The Rule of Law & Judicial Independence
  • Legitimate Government Opposition
"Long before the advent of democracy, our parliament divided into government and opposition, and except in stressful periods during the 16th and 17th Centuries it was acknowledged that government without opposition is without any corrective when things go wrong. That is what we saw in the Soviet Union and its empire - a system of government without a reverse gear, which continued headlong towards the brick wall of the future."

2. "Saxon" England and Celtic Wales & Scotland pre-Viking 5th to the 11th century


Therefore under the right conditions, necessary institutions or framework; effectively democracy is a National Level Forum for debate and discussion between people who have shared reasons to both agree and disagree over problem-solving with each other via both cooperation and competition. This point is made in Scruton's next piece: A Point of View: Why it can be good to give in to your enemies . Where you start to lose "legitimate opposition", you inevitably start the process of disenfranchisement of the people from the decision-making process. Already voter participation in large population size nations is operating at a scale that is less and less representative and hence resulting in increased disincentive for people to invest in the nation-level decision-making process. For people to invest they must feel part of the family, they must extend their identity what we call national or patriotic identity.

3. Modern Britain/UK (& Ireland)


Again Roger Scruton compares different systems of super-identity in groups of people for human organization leading to different results and "quality of democracy" operating ie quality of debate and discussion in groups of people to resolve their combined problems successfully: A Point of View: Should countries be more like families?

"In the wake of World War II the political elite in the defeated countries became sceptical towards the nation state. The European Union arose from the belief that the European wars had been caused by national sentiment, and that what is needed is a new, trans-national form of government to unite people around their shared interest in peaceful coexistence. Unfortunately people don't identify themselves in that way.

There is no first-person plural of which the European institutions are the political expression. The union is founded in a treaty, and treaties derive their authority from the entities that sign them. Those entities are the nation states of Europe, from which the loyalties of the European people derive. The union, which has set out to transcend such loyalties, therefore suffers from a permanent crisis of legitimacy."

 This is recorded extensively in The Great Deception history of the EU:-

"The real  key  to  understanding  the nature of  the  project  which is  the  theme of this book lies in appreciating just how the central idea behind it came to birth. The  foundation  of  our  researches  lay  in  uncovering  just  how  directly  the European  Union  had  drawn  its  inspiration  from  events  during  and  after  the First  World  War,  in  particular  from  the thinking  of  two  friends  who  had held senior  posts  in  the  League  of  Nations,  the  Frenchman  Jean  Monnet  and  his British colleague Arthur Salter.

One simple test of whether someone has an informed grasp of where and how the ‘project’ first came to be launched on its way is to ask ‘why was the EU organisationally  structured  as  it  was,  round  a  Commission,  a  Parliament,  a Council  of  Ministers  and  a  Court  of  Justice?’.  Not  one  of  many  previous histories  of  the  EU  had offered  an answer  to  this  question.  Yet  in  this,  as  we discovered,  lies  the  single  most  important  clue  to  the  ‘project’s’  essential nature and purpose, crucial to any proper  understanding of  its evolution up  to the present day." 

4. The European Political Union
Jürgen Habermas describes the European Union in his book: "The Lure of Technocracy" in Chapter 2: European Citizens and the People of Europe, p.29:-

I use the term "transnationalization" to refer to the process that aims  to create a "supranational " democracy, that is, one above the organizational level of a state."
Considering this above compared to Roger Scruton's observations and comparisons with both Totalitarian and Theocratic States compared with Secular Democratic States based on the underlying preconditions for Democracy, it does not seem to fit. Secondly it is a quite worth marking with a "Milestone" confirming that the EU Cake really is a Supranational Political Organization: Can we have our cake and eat it too? In any Referendum we must define which "cake" we as a "Demos" choose to vote for.

Looking at our maps evolution of governance at ever greater scales, it seems "natural" that the European Union should be the next stage for Britain and other similar sized Nations to integrate towards?

However according to  Friedrich von Hayek in The Road To Serfdom, similar such processes have not increased democracy through increases in size and power of the state, but Centralized power and decreased democracy:-

"The most effective way of making people accept the validity of the values they are to serve is to persuade them that they are really the same as those which they, or at least the best among them, have always held, but which were not properly understood or recognized before. The people are made to transfer their allegiance from the old gods to the new under the pretense that the new gods really are what their sound instinct had always told them but what before they had only dimly seen. And the most efficient technique to this end is to use the old words but change their meaning."

It becomes quite clear from reading The Great Deception and comparing the observed, actual results with the promised, predicted results of the EU "Projet" that to quote Scruton:-

"...a system of government without a reverse gear, which continued headlong towards the brick wall of the future." 
Some further quotes from Hayek:-

"The more the state "plans" the more difficult planning becomes for the individual.

The effect of the people's agreeing that there must be central planning, without agreeing on the ends, will be rather as if a group of people were to commit themselves to take a journey together without agreeing where they want to go; with the result that they may all have to make a journey which most of them do not want at all.

Is there a greater tragedy imaginable than that, in our endeavour consciously to shape our future in accordance with high ideals, we should in fact unwittingly produce the very opposite of what we have been striving for?

Nowhere has democracy ever worked well without a great measure of local self-government, providing a school of political training for the people at large as much as for their future leaders."

From all this I would argue that The Road To the European Union is "paved with good intentions" despite selling itself as the "next-level of scale for debate and discussion to exist at a European Regional Level. But is there a more positive future, an "alternative cake" which not only strengthens our democracy in a realistic and quantifiable measure but also accepts the above trend of "Globalization" as per the sequence suggested in the maps above? Yes and here's the Twist In the Tale that even argues the central point about the EU to a higher level again without the deleterious results we're witnessing in the quality of our national-level arguments (aka Democracy):-

5. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE or ECE) was established in 1947[2][3] to encourage economic cooperation among its member states. It is one of five regional commissions under the administrative direction of United Nations headquarters. It has 56 member states
Why should UNECE turn out any different from the EU? Because it's a "different cake" created in a very fundamentally different way:-

In Supranational Subordination Versus Intergovernmental Co-operation the blogger "Lost Leonardo" at Independent Britain captures The Essential Difference: How we argue affects the questions and the answers we choose and hence the process of debating and discussion and hence the very formulation of successful democracy.