Informal Shaman Kingdom for Communism and Anarchy in the North
ISKCAN | 25.06.2012 15:03 | Climate Chaos | Ecology | Globalisation
Why this?
Such as the look at the stars in the sky reveals to these loyal to the Earth the absence of the destruction that recently has been escalated so much on this planet, the look at the elements both threatened and participating in it reminds that this process must be stopped as a matter of existence. As long as there is no fundamental discontinuity of the political and economical powers currently devastating this world in the disguise of that ideal, there is no possibility of lasting freedom. And as long as there is no freedom, any look at either in the best case reveals an unreachable promise, and in the worst case a reminder that only political changes deeper than the oppression that must be ended can create any possibility of freedom.
Why Informal?
In a mass society wrecked by totalitarian rule of unspeakable banality, anything permanent is not only a possible desire but also a gateway of oppression. Every formal structure is threatened by forceful integration into the wrong, and even every informal structure is under the treat of being formalised. In hostile situations the informal structure can change and adapt quicker without having its intentions determined by these situations. In this case the hostility of the situation is caused by its attempts to absorb every human effort of emancipation, no matter how it is protecting itself against assimilation by the evil. Under these conditions, to last longer than the oppression and finally bring about its defeat, the fight for this political change can only take the most stealth and undefined forms - not only to become incomprehensible to the oppressor but also to be open for any honest contribution to the same effort. And in case oppression is masquerading as its own opponent to turn the world into a hell of its own making, only the informal structure can reinvent itself different enough to escape any totalitarian calculations. All these are not the conditions in distant times and places, these are the conditions right here and now.
Why Shaman?
This oppression respects no limits, neither any set by anyone with a conscience nor any set by its own laws. It does rather poison entire cultures with rapist kleptocracy masquerading as what it has been stealing from than respect the sovereignty of the individual it is abusing as legitimation. If civilisation is the possibility to fill an individual space with undisclosed items, then the impossibility of civilised consensus to keep such content private for later use is the total collapse of civilisation. The result is worse than if no promise of individual sovereignty had been made in the first place, because the abuse of the consensus deprecates the promise not only for the individual but for the entire culture. An individual who had to experience this cannot openly and sovereignly take up practice, because the oppression would be with him. The completion of the struggle against the oppression is more important than the definition of the self, and even though the two are mutually dependent this means that the latter must be avoided until the oppression is defeated. When new shamans cannot freshly develop without regime theft, then this is an existential threat not only against these individuals but against the entire culture, and the struggle against the oppression in their way becomes the interest not only of the contemporaries but also of the ancestors and the offspring.
Why Kingdom?
This entity replaces all monarchies with nothingness. Monarchy is a weapon of mass destruction. It comes over people when enemies are trying to corrupt shamans with special treatment. When it is inheritable, it could still be an embarrassment after these enemies are long gone. This statement proclaims monopolistic power only for the purpose to abolish it once and for all like any weapon of mass destruction. There will be no kings any more, they will be all gone. There will be no new ones. Anyone harassed by any regime to take a throne, however indirect, has the right of definition and non-definition. The attempt to make kings is a threat of mass destruction without any regard of the political system and the amount of inheritability or lack thereof intended. The practice of turning humans into weapons of mass destruction is going to end forever - hence this totally empty proclamation full of purpose. This kingdom is a placeholder only to make sure it will have been the last one. It is constructed not to last any longer than its purpose and to fulfil that purpose quickly. Unlike any material kingdom it has no incentive to exist as a purpose in itself. It represents the paradox of a weapon of mass destruction without a payload, a detonation without a sound, which can only be observed from its echoes.
Why for Communism?
Capitalism is failing every day and the vilified old diagnoses why it must do so turn out prophetic statements by founding fathers of the new era. In an uniting world it is only a matter of organisation to handle the common resources in a way that does not only allow equal access to all, but also the possibility to convince themselves that this is not going to be lost to exhaustion. The administration of the Earth is like a black market with man-made risks and requires to be calculated accordingly. In monetary terms, resource exploiting businesses are required to pay into an equal access fund for individual handouts. Then balance can be obtained between avoiding exploitation of limited resources altogether and ending the exploitation of nature by means of removing the risk of poverty and ending all human exploitation and conventional taxation in the job market. In the financial markets the accounting scheme needs to be changed to allow risky behaviour with any intention, but no cumulative discrepancy between possible and actual transactions as parameters go up or down. To make a financial market bubble-proof, cascading effects along ownership lines need to be synchronised with actual transactions instead of with their mere possibility. Once that happens, the overall need for change becomes more urgent because such a clarification alone already makes the fictional economy more real by excluding the possibility of cheating. And yet the capitalist system does not even implement this little change, trying ever more unreliable and damaging workarounds for the predictable consequences.
Why for Anarchy?
The states, the hierarchies, the regimes are threatening to eliminate humanity and nature in the vain attempt to continue their kleptocracy against every common sense. At the same time, the failure of the markets is the failure of the states as well, and they are struggling to survive a change of system of which it is obvious that it will be the end of said apparatuses, be it through early retirement in the case of innocence or through some more offensive deconstruction in the case of guilt. This is already going on long enough to make clear that all attempts to construct the structure for redistribution and equal access from the decaying nation states and international organisations have failed, although it has been tried extensively even after they began interfering with such attempts. As a result, all current nation states need to be entirely deconstructed and any future institutions constructed from scratch so that a repetition of it is permanently excluded. State power burned the branch on which it is sitting, and only anarchy as a political system can ensure that there will be no repeat, not even any desire for it. After all that has happened due to the existence of states and their organised abuse against the individual, without anarchy and communism there is no civilisation in any desirable sense.
Why in the North?
It is the North which has been forcing capitalism upon the Earth, and it is here where it finally must be ended because any effort to achieve something better in the South is always threatened by that as long as that is not stopped at its source. It is the North with its self-referential narrative of historical progress and necessity where the failed system must be changed first, because it is from here that it multiplied across the world eliminating any alternative. It is the North where the cycle of sustainability could be broken without disproportionate consequences immediately wrecking the attempt, because only there were both the preconditions and the circumstances for life-threatening destruction without complete desertification. It is the North which has proliferated this imperialist self-destruction and which therefore is responsible to recall it once and for all. At the time of writing these words the kleptocratic system of the capitalist state still appears to exist, but once this duality of oppression is no more it can only be better.
Such as the look at the stars in the sky reveals to these loyal to the Earth the absence of the destruction that recently has been escalated so much on this planet, the look at the elements both threatened and participating in it reminds that this process must be stopped as a matter of existence. As long as there is no fundamental discontinuity of the political and economical powers currently devastating this world in the disguise of that ideal, there is no possibility of lasting freedom. And as long as there is no freedom, any look at either in the best case reveals an unreachable promise, and in the worst case a reminder that only political changes deeper than the oppression that must be ended can create any possibility of freedom.
Why Informal?
In a mass society wrecked by totalitarian rule of unspeakable banality, anything permanent is not only a possible desire but also a gateway of oppression. Every formal structure is threatened by forceful integration into the wrong, and even every informal structure is under the treat of being formalised. In hostile situations the informal structure can change and adapt quicker without having its intentions determined by these situations. In this case the hostility of the situation is caused by its attempts to absorb every human effort of emancipation, no matter how it is protecting itself against assimilation by the evil. Under these conditions, to last longer than the oppression and finally bring about its defeat, the fight for this political change can only take the most stealth and undefined forms - not only to become incomprehensible to the oppressor but also to be open for any honest contribution to the same effort. And in case oppression is masquerading as its own opponent to turn the world into a hell of its own making, only the informal structure can reinvent itself different enough to escape any totalitarian calculations. All these are not the conditions in distant times and places, these are the conditions right here and now.
Why Shaman?
This oppression respects no limits, neither any set by anyone with a conscience nor any set by its own laws. It does rather poison entire cultures with rapist kleptocracy masquerading as what it has been stealing from than respect the sovereignty of the individual it is abusing as legitimation. If civilisation is the possibility to fill an individual space with undisclosed items, then the impossibility of civilised consensus to keep such content private for later use is the total collapse of civilisation. The result is worse than if no promise of individual sovereignty had been made in the first place, because the abuse of the consensus deprecates the promise not only for the individual but for the entire culture. An individual who had to experience this cannot openly and sovereignly take up practice, because the oppression would be with him. The completion of the struggle against the oppression is more important than the definition of the self, and even though the two are mutually dependent this means that the latter must be avoided until the oppression is defeated. When new shamans cannot freshly develop without regime theft, then this is an existential threat not only against these individuals but against the entire culture, and the struggle against the oppression in their way becomes the interest not only of the contemporaries but also of the ancestors and the offspring.
Why Kingdom?
This entity replaces all monarchies with nothingness. Monarchy is a weapon of mass destruction. It comes over people when enemies are trying to corrupt shamans with special treatment. When it is inheritable, it could still be an embarrassment after these enemies are long gone. This statement proclaims monopolistic power only for the purpose to abolish it once and for all like any weapon of mass destruction. There will be no kings any more, they will be all gone. There will be no new ones. Anyone harassed by any regime to take a throne, however indirect, has the right of definition and non-definition. The attempt to make kings is a threat of mass destruction without any regard of the political system and the amount of inheritability or lack thereof intended. The practice of turning humans into weapons of mass destruction is going to end forever - hence this totally empty proclamation full of purpose. This kingdom is a placeholder only to make sure it will have been the last one. It is constructed not to last any longer than its purpose and to fulfil that purpose quickly. Unlike any material kingdom it has no incentive to exist as a purpose in itself. It represents the paradox of a weapon of mass destruction without a payload, a detonation without a sound, which can only be observed from its echoes.
Why for Communism?
Capitalism is failing every day and the vilified old diagnoses why it must do so turn out prophetic statements by founding fathers of the new era. In an uniting world it is only a matter of organisation to handle the common resources in a way that does not only allow equal access to all, but also the possibility to convince themselves that this is not going to be lost to exhaustion. The administration of the Earth is like a black market with man-made risks and requires to be calculated accordingly. In monetary terms, resource exploiting businesses are required to pay into an equal access fund for individual handouts. Then balance can be obtained between avoiding exploitation of limited resources altogether and ending the exploitation of nature by means of removing the risk of poverty and ending all human exploitation and conventional taxation in the job market. In the financial markets the accounting scheme needs to be changed to allow risky behaviour with any intention, but no cumulative discrepancy between possible and actual transactions as parameters go up or down. To make a financial market bubble-proof, cascading effects along ownership lines need to be synchronised with actual transactions instead of with their mere possibility. Once that happens, the overall need for change becomes more urgent because such a clarification alone already makes the fictional economy more real by excluding the possibility of cheating. And yet the capitalist system does not even implement this little change, trying ever more unreliable and damaging workarounds for the predictable consequences.
Why for Anarchy?
The states, the hierarchies, the regimes are threatening to eliminate humanity and nature in the vain attempt to continue their kleptocracy against every common sense. At the same time, the failure of the markets is the failure of the states as well, and they are struggling to survive a change of system of which it is obvious that it will be the end of said apparatuses, be it through early retirement in the case of innocence or through some more offensive deconstruction in the case of guilt. This is already going on long enough to make clear that all attempts to construct the structure for redistribution and equal access from the decaying nation states and international organisations have failed, although it has been tried extensively even after they began interfering with such attempts. As a result, all current nation states need to be entirely deconstructed and any future institutions constructed from scratch so that a repetition of it is permanently excluded. State power burned the branch on which it is sitting, and only anarchy as a political system can ensure that there will be no repeat, not even any desire for it. After all that has happened due to the existence of states and their organised abuse against the individual, without anarchy and communism there is no civilisation in any desirable sense.
Why in the North?
It is the North which has been forcing capitalism upon the Earth, and it is here where it finally must be ended because any effort to achieve something better in the South is always threatened by that as long as that is not stopped at its source. It is the North with its self-referential narrative of historical progress and necessity where the failed system must be changed first, because it is from here that it multiplied across the world eliminating any alternative. It is the North where the cycle of sustainability could be broken without disproportionate consequences immediately wrecking the attempt, because only there were both the preconditions and the circumstances for life-threatening destruction without complete desertification. It is the North which has proliferated this imperialist self-destruction and which therefore is responsible to recall it once and for all. At the time of writing these words the kleptocratic system of the capitalist state still appears to exist, but once this duality of oppression is no more it can only be better.
ISKCAN
