One group assumes power over another by reducing individuals to pawns in a game of thrones. Are we not beyond the divine proclamation of authority?
Warning: This one's heavy. Not for the casual reader.
At the twilight of the 20th century, Professor Rudolph Rummel presented
Rummel's Law: The fewer freedoms people have, the more likely their rulers are to kill them.
Democide is defined as "the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, policide and mass murder"
He argues in his 1994 and 1997 books, Death By Government and Power Kills, that the "more power a government has, the more it tends to kill its own citizens and make war on other countries, and conversely, the less power a government has over its citizens, the less it tends to kill them or to launch wars of aggression". Concluding that democracy is least likely to commit democide.
The sequence of human events so far is generally one of primitive to industrial. From basic ideas rooted entirely in superficial impressions of nature's order to a society based on compound benefits leveraging specific knowledge of how the world really works. I don't mean primitive as in unsophisticated, I mean as in based on "natural order" using our given senses and wishful thinking rather than scientific understanding.
Science is the fertilizer capitalism uses to cultivate higher yields. Great discoveries have unlocked our potential to live better lives. Industrial society is the difference between us and the animals. It's foolish to ignore its benefits. Having less scientific understanding doesn't generate better results. Freedom is profitable; capitalize on that.
Some might even argue capitalism kills, too. It sure can, but you have to balance it out against the explosion in population fed by it. The constantly increasing life expectancies due to medical breakthroughs paid for by it. The endless benefits of all the goods and services. Even the most basic government programs and government itself depends on the taxes generated from capitalism.
However, we sometimes take this freedom to produce wealth for granted and assume it's always been there and always will be. For most of civilized history individuals didn't have the means or opportunity to pursue anything beyond basic survival. Our primitive ancestors had no private property and couldn't build vast machines or sustainable enterprises to hold back invaders. So they relied on the tribe by necessity. They didn't have a legal system recognizing the rights of individuals.
It's individual freedom that's relatively new and rare. We need to protect it where we find it because the price of reestablishing freedom is very high.
Today we use productive knowledge to facilitate more freedom to more people. Contemporary western civilization is built on using scientific industrialization to achieve returns. Yet, even now, after so much progress there are those who would return us to primitivism. There are massive groups of mis-informed ideologues convinced they must replace scientific democracy with a technocracy. Manipulating markets with social media instead of letting capitalism do what it does best. Produce.
Government will grow as individual productivity decreases and will eventually trim the fat. Take power from those who still earn it. Our farms, our labour, our production. It's happened so many times does anyone still doubt it can happen again? Any time one group assumes power over another the primitive past is reasserting itself.
Primitivism - primitive practices or procedures; also : a primitive quality or state
a : belief in the superiority of a simple way of life close to nature
b : belief in the superiority of nonindustrial society to that of the present
Even while ideologues insist they are modern...so modern they are post-modern...they are nothing more than a redundant remnant of yesterday. Over-simplified generalities masquerading as facts. People are reduced to demographics because it's easier and used against each other to serve the elite.
The world's greatest evil is yesterday's best practices. A war between instinct and intelligence.
When primitivist ideologies take root, people are involuntarily divided by characteristics that seem to match some authorities perception of natural order. That's what makes it a form of primitivism. Breed rather than deed. The abandonment of science and broader context in forming the fabric of power that substrates society. Fixation on the superficial "signs" that support the narrative. No wonder statists love socialism so much.
It's the common element of all flavours of malignant socialism which plagued the 20th century: statism, authoritarianism, fascism, nazism, collectivism, marxism, communism, jingoism, corporatism. All children of primitivism because they are driven by primitive ideological perception of a natural order; superior as they see it. Supremacists don't require elections to be authentic. They rule through divine entitlement.
Illegitimate power imposed over another is a key element of authoritarianism. The obsolete imposing upon the relevant. Socializing production to pool power. Making every citizen as dependent on the state as a child to a parent.
When a government presumes parenthood you will be asked to call your leader Fuhrer.
Primitivism encourages ideological superiority which tends to rely on socialist frameworks to enforce the power of an elite few. Taxes and government oversight, when granted legitimacy from authentic election, isn't malignant in this way. Scientific democracy demands informed electorate, at least in principle, so on the whole production is improved and legal review verifies the legitimacy.
It's not a coincidence that all forms of socialism attempt to destroy capitalist institutions which are the pillars of an industrial society. Industrial society is based on merit, discovery...reality. The projection of freedom into the lives of everyday people who benefit from making things and enjoying what others make. The very antithesis of ideology. Results matter to industry so freedom matters.
Socialism is harmful because it's a form of primitivism; which is harmful because it gets lower returns than scientific industrialization. It's too vague; based on imagination rather than reality. The way one might prefer things to be, but real data gets real returns. No way around it.
The oligarchs and the authoritarians. The theocrats, fascists, monarchs and other ultra-nationalists. They all had their reasons. The marxists, plutocrats and technocrats. Bureaucratic relics of the past. Big government is just a symptom of the same sickness infecting them all. Obsolescence. There's no productive justification for it. The bigger it gets the more danger we're in. That's the essence of Rummel's Law.