BE POLITICS 10 RE ABOUT VIOLENCE AND DEMOCRACY
From: powerelite@no-spam (Joost van Steenis)
Subject: Re: About Violence and Democracy
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:04:04 GMT


On 25 Jun 2003 10:43:17 -0400, gcf@no-spam (G*rd*n) wrote:

>powerelite@no-spam (Joost van Steenis):
>> About Violence and Democracy >> >> I have published my latest book "About Violence and Democracy" on >> http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy.htm >> >> It proposes a way to reach a society beyond democracy by analysing the >> present elitist democracy, the role of violence in our society and the >> necessity that people can become freer by using special human >> characteristics as autonomy, individuality and creativity. >> ............
>> >> In the hierarchical organised democratic society the elite has a near >> monopoly on the use of violence to safeguard its privileged position. >> Rulers and ruled live in two separated worlds, the elite world and the >> mass world.
>
>This seems like a fundamental error to me.
>
>First of all, for one group to control another requires a >lot of interaction of some kind between the groups. The >controlling group must employ at least armies, police,
>informants, slavemasters and administrators to maintain their >position. The is the comparatively simple form -- the slave >state.
>
>The situation is much more complex in contemporary industrialized >liberal bourgeois democracies. Instead of a clearly discernable >pyramid of power-holders, there is a complex if somewhat >pyramidical network with many, many intermediate positions,
>groups, classes, roles, jobs and relationships. While there >is generally very little direct connection between the top and >the bottom, there are innumerable pathways of connection >between individuals at either end. The levels are far from >separated; it many cases, they are so interwoven that the >bounaries are indistinct. An analysis of the contemporary >situation which posits two completely distinct classes does >not accord with observation.
>
>
I agree that there are connections, our society is well organised but the many pathways between top and bottom are so diifficult to use that the influence from the masses is virtually nihil. It is indeed difficult to precisely describe who belongs to the elite and who to the masses but it is certain that president Bush and his group have much more to say than the blacks that live in the poor quarters of the big American cities. They can even force other countries not to bring American warcriminals to the Internationnal Court of Justice. Blacks have no possibilities to demand that policieswill chang, they can only beg if the people high-up want to listen to their voice.
The power instruments of the top are also much bigger than from those at the bottom. Indeed there is some freedom of expression (but even that is curtailed (in name of the fight against terrorism and some other vague ideas) but there is hardly any freedom to bring your opinion foreward on a nation-wide scale. The means to propagate your ideas are for the bottom very weak but for the top they are great. And the top has police (people who belong to the masses) which they use to control other people at the bottom. The criminals at the top - and in financial circles we have seen many of them the last years are never treated with zero tolerance.
But I have said it better in my book. For the media see the chapter about Media Power. Knowledge is only power when you have the power to make knowledge work for you.

Greetings, Joost van Steenis http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis New ways to break the power of the elite