Political Systems Psychology - Members Continuation
The Psychology of Political Systems and their Advocates
Welcome Freedom Fighters! Are you ready to Get Active?
Hit Subscribe to get more access to content. Visit the Members Library. Take Survey.
///// Main Channel ///// Media Channel ///// Movie Channel ///// Law Channel /////
The Psychology of Political Systems and their Advocates
Structure and Stability in Organized Groups
If political systems are manifestations of a Nation’s interior anthropology, then abstraction must now give way to mechanics. Psychology influences rhetoric, but more importantly, shapes constitutional design, elite reproduction, civic durability, and ultimately the lifespan of any state.
A people’s threat hierarchy becomes institutional geometry.
Nations rank dangers differently. Some fear chaos above all. Some fear oppression. Some fear incompetence. That ranking determines how authority is distributed, constrained, and legitimized. Architecture follows anthropology. The construction of a government flows directly from the will of the people who manifest it.
If government itself as an institution is evil, than there is no solution for man.
Self-government = anarchy
anarchy(n.)
1530s, “absence of government,” from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia “lack of a leader, the state of people without a government” (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), abstract noun from anarkhos “rulerless,” from an- “without” (see an- (1)) + arkhos “leader” (see archon).
From 1660s as “confusion or absence of authority in general;” by 1849 in reference to the social theory advocating “order without power,” with associations and co-operatives taking the place of direct government, as formulated in the 1830s by French political philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865).1
State = government of a Nation
STATE, government. This word is used in various senses. In its most enlarged sense, it signifies a selfsufficient body of persons united together in one community for the defence of their rights, and to do right and justice to foreigners. In this sense, the state means the whole people united into one body politic; (q. v.) and the state, and the people of the state, are equivalent expressions. 1 Pet. Cond. Rep. 37 to 39; 3 Dall. 93; 2 Dall. 425; 2 Wilson’s Lect. 120; Dane’s Appx. §50, p. 63 1 Story, Const. §361. In a more limited sense, the word `state’ expresses merely the positive or actual organization of the legislative, or judicial powers; thus the actual government of the state is designated by the name of the state; hence the expression, the state has passed such a law, or prohibited such an act. State also means the section of territory occupied by a state, as the state of Pennsylvania.
9. The several states composing the United States are sovereign and independent, in all things not surrendered to the national government by the constitution, and are considered, on general principles, by each other as foreign states, yet their mutual relations are rather those of domestic independence, than of foreign alienation. 7 Cranch, 481; 3 Wheat. 324; 1 Greenl. Ev. §489, 504. Vide, generally, Mr. Madison’s report in the legislature of Virginia, January, 1800; 1 Story’s Com. on Const. §208; 1 Kent, Com. 189, note b; Grotius, B. 1, c. 1, s. 14; Id. B. 3, c. 3, s. 2; Burlamaqui, vol. 2, pt. 1, c. 4, s. 9; Vattel, B. 1, c. 1; 1 Toull. n. 202, note 1 Nation; Cicer. de Repub. 1. 1, s. 25. 2
Nation = the homogenous peoples of a defined area, identifying themselves as a particular Nationality, and being of such, and being of the same State.
NATIONS. Nations or states are independent bodies politic; societies of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage by the joint efforts of their combined strength. 2. But every combination of men who govern themselves, independently of all others, will not be considered a nation; a body of pirates, for example, who govern themselves, are not a nation. To constitute a nation another ingredient is required. The body thus formed must respect other nations in general, and each of their members in particular. Such a society has her affairs and her interests; she deliberates and takes resolutions in common; thus becoming a moral person who possesses an understanding and will peculiar to herself, and is susceptible of obligations and rights. Vattel, Prelim. §1, 2; 5 Pet. S. C. R. 52.3
If a nation exists, and has a collective interest in authorizing a states existence (which it always does), for the sake of administrative affairs of the collective, than it produces a state as closely reflective of that people's identity as possible, usually without much effort, except by the small number of leaders of that Nation.
When there is competing interests amongst the people, great enough that the state would be serving 2 masters (or however many factions exist within the people) the people are split and are not one nation, but several. As such the state cannot exist but in tyrannical form over all but the one faction it serves, or perhaps even none.
Individual conscience must create the state, which is the case...
When political nationality is a choice, not a requirement.
When mobility is not restricted, beyond necessity of common security.
When secession is recognized regarding sovereign states in confederacies.
When contracts are upheld, without interference by the state, but for the resence of a crime.
When mechanisms exist and are recognized for the people to change the state.
If any government does not restrict these things, it is not impeding the people's ability to choose their participation. In essence, this makes te indiviuals voluntaryists automatically, while the collective is yet served by the chartered mandates upon those who choose to be part of the Nation. The political status of the individual determines their ability to be removed from the nation, such that criminals cannot run, nor those who have made agreements with the Nation left unfulfilled. This is where voluntaryism meets government.
Contracts exist to bind men to their agreements. The handshake, the verbal agreement, the signed document. All ironclad and superior to all other law when conducted properly. The contract is enforced by the will of the collective through particular courts, wherein only the material of the contract is considered, and whether fulfillment happened or not. A contract between 2 free men of sound mind and who voluntarily applied themselves to the binding to contract, are held accountable by such consideration. It is the same with a Constitution, or a Declaration of Secession, or Excutive Decisions that restructure a State. They exist by the will of those who create them, and they are executed upon all who agree, abide, and consent to them.
No order would exist in a world where the worst amongst us were allowed to lie, cheat and steal simply by giving their word, and not following through with it. It is by contracts that society becomes ordered, no matter how individualistic or collectivised it is.
In a 100% voluntaryist/Anarchist nation, which is an nigh impossible condition (without collective authority, the social order is upheld only by an extremely high moral and physical state within each individual, which is an improbable state for all people to be in), the individuals must still bind themselves in a common law, no matter how horizontal the distribution of authority is.
In Fact, the horizontal distribution demands that every individual is of the highest caliber, for it implies each may conduct himself as the Sovereign proper, and be accountable only to himself. Most people do not have that ability. They demand authority from others to guide them. They willfully enter the contracts that bind them into different levels of slavery. Just look at how many people sell their future into debt for loans, instead of labor and save for a future moment when they may purchase homes and cars without debt.
Thus contracts still exist, they still amount to agreements between people, choosing to bind themselves to various arrangements, and organically the people will bind themselves in such a fashion as to create a state for their group (PMA) or if the body is large enough a state recognized by Law of Nations for it is ordered in a certain way.
People can be voluntaryists individually, but not collectively in the conditions of the world today.
