Looking forward. (Vol. I)

(I want to emphasize that I don't consider myself anything close to an expert or an intellectual, I am merely just speaking my mind as someone who is learning and changing everyday...that's the point of this blog, anyhow)

In my life, I have tried very hard to do not be dogmatic about anything, including my political views and values. I do believe that consistency for the sake of consistency is irrational, one must always keep the eyes and the mind as far open as possible. With that said, my political views are fairly completely within the Libertarian Socialist tradition; more specifically, I have more of a sense of shared values with those under in the Anarcho-Syndicalist tent. However, in theory and practice, I do have some differences of opinion with most thinkers on the the Libertarian Left, and one of those differences is my preference of gradual and effective reform over revolution. In general, I believe that the transformation of the state-corporate-capitalist system into a Libertarian Socialist principled society can possibly be achieved through a series of political reformations sparked by popular movements using the tools of civil disobedience, protest and assembly, free association, community service, and(probably the main point of contention between me and many in the Anarchist tradition) participation in the existing political system including voting, public service, and every other way one can participate.

My line of thinking follows this direction because it is my belief that there is a need for government in the interim between today's political reality and the Anarchist ideal. Yes, this is somewhat of a Marxist thought, I do understand that. However, in this current state we(the people) do need a safeguard against corporate control. I believe, in a sense, the first step in making a more socially and economically just society is in the form of a sort of welfare state; a government that provides a social solidarity program and security against corporate tyranny. But let me be absolutely clear: the sort of welfare state I am proposing is unlike any currently existing examples; I only am using the term for lack of better one, or rather, my lack of creativity in creating catchy labels. In effect, I believe that the sort of welfare state I am proposing will be less like a state and more like a not-for-profit organization in which we all are benefactors and we all are beneficiaries; gradually, as the "state" becomes more and more democratized and take on more and more services focused on social justice, the authoritative function will dissolve and the "state" as we know it will cease to exist with the only remaining function being the administering of services.

This process obviously seems a bit far-fetched from the get-go without further explanation. The basic foundation behind it will have to be a real recognition, through reform, that the government truly is for the people and by the people. This will take reforms in campaign finance and the wider regulation of corporate culture, as well as reforms in how our public officials represent us(with all the innovations in communications via the Internet, I'm quite sure that there is an incredible amount of room for further democratization of our society). I believe that this sort of process would only require reformation, and not revolution, based on the fact that the US constitution, the ultimate law of the land, supports the basic foundation of popular control. Indeed, there is already a framework to build on within the Constitution, and though obviously the Constitution isn't close to a perfect document, in the beginning of this struggle it will be a weapon of great necessity. I have no illusions, however, of the reactionary nature of the two major American parties, and when push comes to shove, the Constitution will have no power. But no one is saying it won't be a struggle. Additionally, one cannot underestimate the power of popular movement. If there is a shift in the basic view of the responsibilities of government and a shift in the view of who really should control it, democratization will be inevitable.

Of course, even with the state essentially becoming a not-for-profit social insurer, it will be of great importance that it does not remain centralized. My view is that as the state becomes further democratized, however, it will automatically become more and more decentralized as more and more power will be allocated from the state to the individual. Indeed, as authority is taken from the state's power over the people it is given to the people's power over the state, and a reversal of roles will ensue. The power relations of our society will become a total opposite than what has traditionally existed. Today, regarding political power, the order of hierarchy goes: federal government, state governments, and then local governments (county, city, township, etc); all of which corporate influence has infiltrated to the utmost extent. At the bottom of the chain is the individual, who has the absolute least power, and above the individual, due to the sheer power of numbers, is his or her directly related community, whether it be geographically based, culturally based, or industry based, amongst other categories. However, this hierarchical chain will be reversed as the process of democratization continues, where the individual and his or her community will have the most political power regarding issues directly affecting their lives. Indeed, eventually the centralized entity known as our federal government today will have almost zero political power, as it becomes just the center of a vast network of federated autonomous communities.

The simultaneous political and economic socialization and decentralization, due the persistent democratization of the state, will create a more libertarian socialist society. I am not a Utopian, and perhaps the perfect end game of pure anarchy will never be achieved. However, every anarchist's goal should be to create the most libertarian socialist society we can possibly create. I am not completely naive, I do acknowledge that there are probably some errors of logic and assumption in this proposal. However, I do believe that the basic outline may be of some value in contemplating how we move forward. As for those who are followers of the reactionary school, the right wing of our country, I firmly believe that as our economy and our government becomes further democratized and socialized, and as everyone's standard of living increases (perhaps besides the wealthy exploitative class), those reactionaries will constantly be quelled. We can already tell by today's debate over Medicare that neither the left's base nor the right's base want it taken away, even though the right's rhetoric of class warfare is as strong as ever.


Well that's all for this volume. Occasionally I will be trying to propose my own theory for political progress in our country. This, I suppose, is the first in that series.