Showing posts with label conflict. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conflict. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

The Protracted Conflict and Systemic Revolution

City Statesby Ron Russell

The purpose of this article is to give an overview on "History of Western Civilization". We will begin with the city-states of ancient Greece and proceed to the modern period.

The city-states of Greece such as Athens, Sparta, Corinth and others gave us many contributions to our present day society--democracy, philosophy and literature, just to name a few. They were the dominate force in the ancient world, but due to internal and external forces that period passed. The forces which caused this to happen we will refer to in this piece as the protracted conflict--this is an ongoing struggle between the old order and the new. With the old order always being the stronger in the beginning, but gradually giving way to the new order in the end. This, again, is a continuing struggle in history.

The city states eventually gave way to the Roman Empire, a system which,also, lasted for hundreds of years contributing a great deal to modern society-laws, architecture and literature. But again, this system would soon pass away into history because of internal struggles and the pressures from outside forces--the effects of the protracted conflict. The fall of the Roman Empire was indeed, a defining moment in world history, leading to one of histories darkest periods--appropriately called the Dark Ages or middle ages.

The Dark Ages lasted for hundreds of years. It was similar in some respects to the Greek city-state period in that there were many small seats of power--there the similarities stop. To recap for a moment--we had the disunity of the city-states followed by the unity of the Roman Empire to the disunity of power in the dark (middle ages). Not much good came from that period-- it was, indeed "dark". Probably not a good time to live in. That period begin to come to an end during what we call the Renaissance--a time of enlightenment. But again, the "city state' form of government continued to exist fora time-Florence, Genova. It was appropriate that this period started here in the heart of the old Roman Empire. Gradually, the old city-state form of government in Europe would give way to the larger kingdoms of France, Spain, Portugal, England and others. Here we have the beginnings of--The age of exploration, the Colonial Period. So far we have seem the Greek city-states (decentralized government evolve to the Roman Empire (centralized government) and that in turn giving way to the Dark Ages (decentralized government) to the beginning of the Colonial Period (centralized government)--all part of what we have called the systemic revolution.

Before we move into the colonial period, I need to point out again that this is a continuing revolution brought about by a protracted conflict--the struggle between the old and new orders. History does repeat itself over and over again--it is systemic in nature.

The Colonial Period lasted as those before it for hundreds of years. Its primary players were Spain, Portugal and England--there were others--these, however were probably the most predominate. This was a time when power was centralized in a few of the capitals of Europe, although there were conflicts between the various powers. These struggles would continue up to and including WW1 and WW2. These two world wars will bring an end to this period and carry us to the modern period which will we refer to as the age of Rampant Nationalism. This is the time we live in. Rampant Nationalism, our current period, could possibly be one of our most dangerous times--due to the influence of modern technology on weapons of war. New nations are popping up right and left. Who can keep up with the pace--I can't! The old colonial systems have totally collapsed and the vacuums created by that collapse have helped this process along. I don't know where this will lead, but it doesn't seem to be a pleasant place. Dangers are always out there, but this is, indeed, a troubling period. I hope by this time you have seen the continuing process that has occurred--decentralization to centralization and back, again and again. A continuing process--Systemic Revolution, and within that the Protracted Conflict.


Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Utopia and the Socialist

Last night while channel surfing I can across an old movie made back in the 1930's. Never caught the name, but did watch enough to grasp the theme. It was the old Utopian idea wrapped in the 1930's Hollywood love affair with communism and fascism, something that many today have either forgotten or never knew about. The movie got me to thinking about our present day situation and how it related to socialism, the state and Utopian thinking.

Most men dream of Utopia, their own personal utopia. The socialist also dreams of utopia, his vision of what every man should want. One dreams of a better life for himself and his family, the other plans on how to make HIS dream for others a reality. These two visions , at first glance, sound similar but the difference is staggering. The first sounds self-centered, but actually its the latter that falls into that category. One man, simply wants to live his life and go his own way, the other has what I call the herd mentality and must seek to control the lives of others in the group. And he will continually attempt to get those around him to adopt what his perceives to be "the right way". This puts the first man at a distinct disadvantage in this ongoing struggle. A good analogy would be a tug-a-war between two with one just trying to hold his position while the other attempts to pull him to his side. The outcome would, at first glance, appear to be obvious; however the first man does have one advantage---individual initiative. While those on the other side, for the most part are only the followers of some almost mystic leader.

Socialism, almost seems a victim of these leaders. They invariably pop up during times of economic turmoil and hardship. They present themselves as the ones with the solutions to the complicated problems of the day. And the masses hungry for answers, give these leaders the power to project their ideas, into some form of action. Usually the changes are sweeping and draconian, and enacted with little or no debate and the results at first are pleasing to the common man. But the leaders of these movements, being the Utopians they are, never seem to be satisfied with the changes they have brought about. For they are seeking a world that doesn't exist, except in their own minds. Not being able to bring about the changes they have dreamed of, they will turn to more and more desperate measures and in the end theirs will become a repressive and totalitarian state.

The quest for utopia can be a noble goal. One should, however always keep one thing in mind, "one man's Utopia is another man's hell."
Ron Russell

Bookmark and Share