“If you can keep it”

Franklin’s famous phrase is somewhat opposed to the current meme “rule of law.” In some sense, any organized society lives under a kind of rule of law – laws determined by whoever is in charge, even if the “law” is “I can do whatever I want and you must obey me” .

The founders considered a republic to be based on rights grounded in ideas of liberty. Laws which infringed on that liberty were wrong and should be unenforceable.

Those founders did not see much difference between liberty and “rights” owed to any adult white males living in the country. Those folks were supposed to preserve the idea of liberty (even if they treated women, slaves, etc differently.) Fundamental rights included being able to defend oneself, protect property and contracts, and think and say what you wanted. In a libertarian manner – they did not initially see any need to explicitly enumerate a bill of rights – freedom to do anything that doesn’t harm someone else .

All would of course be forever preserved by the innate virtue of the ruling elite. After the founders finished laughing, they constructed a complicated federal system of checks and balances. Alas, over the years, we have deconstructed most of that in the name of “pure democracy” – what the founders called mob rule.

We may be in the final stages of a semblance of a republic. It was, for a while, a nice nearly working dream .

Chairman Trump

Americans are used to hearing about the “rule of law” which sets the ideals of our Republic above other forms of government. But it seems to have been forgotten that “rule of law” does not mean simply obeying whatever momentary capricious rules are enforced by a government in power. In that sense anyone in an organized state – China North Korea Nazi Germany – lived under a “rule of law.”

The idealized American conception, however, implied more than that. It thought that laws were formulated following certain procedures, that most law was stable, that all classes of people were treated the same and – importantly – that historic “rights” were protected .

When any leader – a king, a military dictator, or a popularly elected official – can arbitrarily not enforce certain laws, artificially enhance others, pardon offenders at will, “go after” enemies legally and economically – that is not what we have considered a “rule of law”. Increasingly, that situation seems to be what we have now .

Elite philosophers through the ages have known that the concept of “rule of law” is fragile. It is hard to establish, easy to destroy. As we are now witnessing .

Lean, Mean, Government

It’s been all the rage for a while for organizations to claim they want to be “lean and mean”. Such a desire will apparently yield greater efficiency, keep costs down, lower prices. What could possibly be wrong with that ?

Not long ago, however, people actually prized other things. They ridiculed those who “knew the price of everything and the value of nothing”. Even today the wealthy expect services far beyond a “wham bam thank you ma’am” approach. We have begun to regret the loss to society as civility has been submerged by nastiness .

More than that, whatever the benefits to a private economic organization, such an approach has never worked socially. “Lean and mean” families generally fall apart or produce monsters. Lean and mean social organizations fail miserably .

So it is with government. As rich technocrats take over and seek to “streamline” everything, they fail to realize that the primary goal of government, as in families and social organizations, is not to produce a product at lowest cost, but to provide a service that keeps a culture healthy, whatever the expense.

Like many slogans, “lean and mean” is a shallow fad of limited utility once the shock wears off and the actual results are evaluated. Even most successful organizations learn they must find ways to happily engage as a collaborative tribal unit. But too often, a lot of things are wrecked before that happens. In a government, that is a massive, and perhaps fatal, tragedy .

Plato

Now that rich white men have seized power, studying dead white men is all the rage. Mostly it’s a social signal to show who has “merit.” Among the things one must know to be admitted to the club is a gloss of Plato .

I’ve read Plato. I found him a boring ignorant old fool. As are the philosophical musings of anything written before the 19th century – particularly before Darwin and Einstein who finally placed humans properly in the universe .

I enthusiastically enjoy history. I freely admit that any human over the last 50,000 years could think as well as I do, experience life just as deeply. People are complex, amazing, and deal with existence in miraculous ways .

But logic – Plato is very logical, for example – is a tricky tool. Useful but easily dangerous. Politicians, preachers, and various madmen are always able to construct wonderful logical castles on completely wrong and stupid foundations. Plato sees visions of “real ideal” and imagines fairy tale perfect men who wisely use logic to rule everything. He includes souls and reincarnation. In fact, he has no idea of everything we actually know about – well – everything .

Oh, there are major things still unknown and maybe unknowable. The nature of time, the meaning of consciousness, the purpose (if any) of life. None of that related to the cold dead weight of writings such as the Republic.

Venal

“Venal” is a useful old word for describing someone in government who is susceptible to bribes. In the most egregious cases, that someone also actively solicits them. Usually this is accompanied with threats if the bribes are not forthcoming .

Much of the world works this way. It always did. Local officials can rarely avoid it, even if they are basically honest. It’s human nature to expect gratitude and to return favor for favor .

The sometime naive idealism of Americans believed they could avoid it. Laws. Checks and balances. A free press. Strong opposition parties. We happily followed accusations, investigations, trials, convictions .

Now? Well, venal often refers to monetary bribes, but there are others. Flattery for example. Stroking the ego, right or wrong. “No backbone”. We see the signs.

Not that money is out of the picture. Billions are being made by high and low officials on crypto deals, inside trading, and pure slush spending .

Nor are the massive threats missing .

I guess, given that everyone thinks it’s okay, a venal government is what we have come to deserve. A payout for our native cynicism. No longer exceptional. Just like everyone else .

Taxes

The Roman Empire ran government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. Wealthy individuals were required to pay a lot for government positions, in the expectation that they would be more than reimbursed (by bribes, extortion, etc, within reason). It worked remarkably well .

The Roman Empire mostly ignored individual taxes. Entities like cities and provinces were expected to pay decreed amounts, and were free to raise money any way they wanted. If they failed to do so, the legions went in and looted it. That also worked well for hundreds of years .

Modern government is more “enlightened”. It is run “for the people” meaning, by definition, the poor. It is paid for by multiple … well, the problem is that it really is not paid for. The wealthy, as always, have ways to protect their wealth. Their bribes go to preventing taxation, sometimes by illegal evasion, more often by legal maneuvers like “exemptions” or “investment”. The result is increasingly government by debt

In an age when everything will be made by machine and billions of humans helplessly consume, all bets are off. The very idea of paying for scarce items may be obsolete.

But, of course, that land of cockaigne remains ever over the hill, far away, and in the future .

Crowd Pleasing

We all love a crowd-pleasing act. It is fun to be amazed and entertained by improbable performances that lift us out of our ordinary thoughts. We willingly spend time and money to enjoy the show .

Every crowd pleaser starts as a clown. Bright clothes, exaggerated gestures, loud sounds, and crazy antics. No magician wants anyone to be looking at the sky while they pull a rabbit out of a hat. They must keep us focused all the time on what they want us to see. A wonderful moment, when all goes well .

But is it any way to run a country? Democracy relies on it. Other systems may use brute force, or rigid tradition, or even intellectual logic. But votes (real free votes, anyway) require a massive crowd-pleasing act, first to grab attention, then to follow through on what must be done .

All systems have flaws. The exact type of the democratic tradition matters. Technology and situations radically change things. In a rainstorm a magic show doesn’t work. There’s no reason to believe crowd pleasers are worse than any other kind of ruler .

The only problem – in all methods – is when the audience is too small, too isolated, too ignorant and begins to believe it represents everyone else, or a god, or the universe. Then the performer becomes purely a cult leader rallying fanatics – and often only trying to maintain a tiny audience’s attention and duration .

Conventional

I consider myself fortunate to have led a fairly conventional life. By that, meaning to have fit in, done well enough, a little ecstasy, not too much heartbreak. Accepting of most of the rules and tradition of society .

Conventional connotates the core of a civilization, even in its various groups. What the conventional peasants do, what the conventional rulers might direct. The basic conservative principle that keeps tribes from falling apart, and which helps individuals support each other to face the world .

Lately, conventional has also come to mean fashionably correct within a given cult. Conventional leftists, apparently, are all snowflakes who think the world should be cotton candy sweet. Conventional right, on the other hand, believe bitter harshness is the only survival skill in a hostile universe .

The center that I thought I inhabited has apparently melted away. It’s too boring for the young and restless, too naive for the old and cynical. Nobody wants to just try to improve things little by little – time to tear it all up and start over .

Perhaps the fringe fanatics are right. I think not, but none of them (nor anybody else) cares what I think. So I sit in my conventional backyard and, as Voltaire would say, concentrate on growing my equivalent of vegetables .

Future Jobs

Imagine for a moment that civilization survives its many current existential crises. Automation and artificial intelligence would surely fulfill their promise and do all the unpleasant and necessary jobs. In fact, the very idea of having a “job” would vanish .

Of course, that also requires that we imagine a world of plenty, where machines equitably provide endless bounty for everyone. But suppose that happens. What remains? Traditional moralists, naturally, claim that with no “jobs” people lose purpose and degenerate. Those very moralists often emerge from an elite strata of wealth that abhors the idea of “job”. Aristocrats find purpose in many things – social games, hobbies, whatever .

I imagine such a future would be filled with nothing but aristocrats, good and bad, who resemble the aristocrats of old without requiring servants or peasants to support their needs .

Others might claim there are two equally likely outcomes. One is a new society that resembles European explorers’ vision of South Sea Island Paradise, where everyone is happy and lazy and all needs are supplied by nature. The other is the garden of Eden, where all is peaceful and wonderful as long as you don’t anger the AI running the show .

Ah, but that’s all just imagination of the destination. Getting there – or wherever – is going to be a lot more interesting, and maybe unpleasant as well .

Deregulation

Laws and regulations are both necessary and infuriating. It all depends. We imagine they have been around in one form or another forever – sometimes as traditions or taboos, sometimes merely as the whims of the strongest ruler or group. It is impossible to imagine a society without them .

And that is really the key to the problem. Because with social tribes, we imagine things to be more fluid. “Let me do what I want or I’ll go somewhere else!” We believe that as civilization takes hold, every individual becomes encrusted with responsibilities and prohibitions until he or she cannot breathe. “What is not mandated is forbidden .”

We further imagine the frontier as freedom. Cities are confining. Run away to open space, where each can do as each desires. There may be some truth in that, but people are complex. For some reason, throughout history, folks often ran away from rural pastures and small farms to the great cities .

The advantage, of course, has been anonymity. In a city you feel free because the mobs (usually) don’t know you. In spite of those pesky regulations on everyone .

Regulations do tend to hinder innovation and progress. Keeping them “under control” or focused on “common sense” is difficult. Yet cities usually manage to work it out .

It’s when the rural yokels with little experience take charge and get rid of regulations that things really fall apart .