The Next Stage of Development
~ Prologue page 2~
~ The Study of Threes ~
http://threesology.org
Visitors as of 1st Feb 2020
| Preface page 1 | Preface page 2 | Preface page 3 |
| Preface page 1b | Preface page 2b | Preface page 3b |
| ANC Prologue Page 1 |
ANC Prologue Page 2 |
ANC Prologue Page 3 |
| ANC Prologue Page 1b |
| Communism and Societal Collapse |
| ANC Epilogue Page 1 |
ANC Epilogue Page 2 |
ANC Epilogue Page 3 |
There is a very real concern that the adoption of a Communism will lead to the implementation of standards which will emphasize a practice of celebrating mediocrity, since the definition of Communism is being used as its ultimate goal, and does not include the dynamic of ensuring and insisting on an automatic practice to search for an existence exceeding the proposed and Communistically assumed state of Utopia. While the practice of a Communism is suggested by some as addressing all questions of inequality, it does so by providing the assumed answer of establishing the practice of a commonism so as to dispense with what is presumed to be the reason(s) for conflicts by way of judgmental comparisons which define people, places and things into hierarchical stratifications. And yet the stratification formulas are not permitted to be seen as part of a larger stratification.
For example: Communists view Communism as the ultimate form and formula by which humanity can achieve an equal distribution of goods, though we must insist that this includes services as well, such as medical services, child care services, educational services, legislative service, legal services, etc., which often are— in present government practices— particularly poor commodities such as state-provided lawyers who may be someone who took eight or more time to pass a law exam. If the so-called attempted equalization under present democracies is any indication of what an established equality will be like under the auspices of a Communism, there is little reason to support any effort to pursue such a course. Substituting a Communism for a Democracy serves little purpose for humanity if the end result process of equalization expects a mediocrity to play out though it egotistically defines itself as a superior way of life.
If humanity strives to adopt a Communism and that Communism views itself at the highest rung of achievement that humanity can ever obtain, then why should anyone want to strive to instill a system in which those who will assume its power elite, have no vision other than that which fulfills some here and now, though the here and now is incrementally deteriorating, causing all life forms to make adaptive adjustments in order to maintain some semblance of equilibrium in the three noted spheres of body, mind and spirit? It is absolute ignorance to adopt a formula of Communism which rejects the idealization of a spirituality which plays an active and significantly important role in the lives of billions of people as part of an overall cognitive hierarchy. It is appreciably dumb-founding for any ideology to expect itself to be representative of a greater measure of equality when it does not take into account all the variables of human existence, and instead insists upon everyone accepting, and rejecting anything but that which is proclaimed as the largest valuation.
While the Marx-Engles formula of democracy provided (a rather truncated) version of an historically laid-out hierarchical stratification of economic development involving supposed economically driven interests of humanity from primitive through and to later more complex social practices which came to define Capitalism as an evil monster and market forces as a sadistic personality instead of naming a culture of individuals who shared a similar psychosis of Narcissism whose behavior was aided and abetted by both religious and political practices because they too were environments in which similarly framed individuals came to flourish by being enabled to gravitate towards such centralizations the people largely left to their own devices; the Marx-Engles view of stratification failed to provide a larger appreciation of human cognitive dimensionality. Marx and Engles spoke in terms of a singularity (economics) by way of a framed dichotomy called a dialectical, and overlooked what we of today clearly indicates the existence of a trichotomy, like the standard dimensions of reality in which we are fully aware of ideas involving more than three dimensions.
Let me provide another rendition of the Communist idea:
- Hunter-Gatherer co-operatives moving from place to place on a seasonal basis . (Semi-domestication of dogs?) Rebelliousness amongst individuals not common.
- Hunter-Gatherer co-operatives moving from place to place on a periodic but not seasonal basis. (Intensified domestication of dogs and other animals such as goats and sheep and cattle for direct food sources but not horses or cows for hunting, warring, or ploughing?) -Gatherer co-operatives staying in one place... beginnings of agriculture and farm-based animal husbandry?
- Co-operative communal settings sharing similar religious orientation?
- Hunter-Gatherer co-operatives staying in one place... beginnings of agriculture, irrigation, and farm-based animal husbandry?
- Co-operative communal settings sharing similar religious orientation?
- Semi-cooperative communal settings. Beginning of intensified diversified and specialized tasks with an increasing emphacis of indiviudalized and/or familial interests and development of diversived religious-oriented beliefs? Rebelliousness amongst individuals or multiples; altogether not uncommon, but ostacisim may have meant a death penalty without the safety and security of the clan in an otherwise hostile terrain. (Jesus caused Lazurus, the brother of Martha and Mary to "rise from his entombment" interpreted to mean he was actually and not symbolically dead. However, it can be viewed as a forced hermitage being used as a type of punishment by a community for undesirable behavior for which he was disenfranchised and forced to live on his own. Any number or activities during the time period might well have caused someone to be ostracized. (Reference the ideas of being "born again," Resurrection, rebirth.)
- Increased centralization of social power in a select few using religion as a means of controlling the masses to effect an intesfied effort to pursue the desires of the select few who chose to forcibly enlist the public in massive public works projects such as the building of pyramids and ships?
- Increasing population sizes decreases the use of Communism except in the practice of those sharing a small community setting such as a religious monastery, nunnery or isolated tribe on an island or jungle setting; but this does not preclude the development of alternative groups who may share a distant singular ancestry, but who have come to develop antagonisms to one another... whereby females and other may be taken for personal and/or group usage such as for rearing children, as slaves or as food (cannibalism).
Fast forward to the future:
- Increasing populations, decreasing resources, and incrementally increasing global occurrence of natural deteriorations as a process of a dying planet will require an increased intensification of wide-spread globally-communal cooperation to conform to a singularly collective goal of removing humanity from the planet, from the solar system and eventually the galaxy in search of new foraging grounds to hunt, plant and raise families; though the history of humanity's transitions of socialization on Earth might well be re-created in space within the contexts which arise.
Of interest to some readers with respect to an attempt towards identifying early forms of "civilzation" (as opposed to "civilized") behaviour: Social behaviour of Early Hominins by J. Michael Plavcan. By identifying early models of civilization, one might also apply notions of basic communism to them, so long as one is not steeped in a top-heavy inclination of defining Communism by commonaly of 19th and 20th century interpretations of the Marxist-Engles and alternative appropriations thereof such as found in Maoism, Lenism, Stalinism, Castroism, Trotskyism, etc... While this Wikipedia article on: Pre-Marxist Communism is an attempted effort to recognize formulas suggestive of Communism, it appears to be written from the pen of someone who is fearful of stretching their imagination in relation to the notion of relating Communism in terms of a basic cognitive theme stripped of the nonsense so many theorists examining ideological patterns appear to be concerned with because their views can be readily justified by reference to some noted author cited as some supposed authority on Communism. What silly scholarship. Imagine letting a basic definition of Communism as that described by a Britannica article (though there are multiple other sources with the same inclination), to keep one from venturing into a larger domain of exploration in an effort to acquire a larger comphrehnsion of human intellectualibility by broadening the case for an enhanced intellibiility:
Communism is a political and economic system that seeks to create a classless society in which the major means of production, such as mines and factories, are owned and controlled by the public.
The existence of a knowledge consisting of examples of cognition from multiple subjects which provide an abundance of evidence that there is both a conservation of cognitive assignment (enumerated ideas show only a very few number patterns are being used) and a repetition (thereby suggesting an environmentally influenced genetic disposition like the recurrence of a triplet code in DNA which does not itself exhibit signs of evolving and therefore further suggests it is for one reason or another exempt from having to evolve); are criteria that Marx, Engles, their peers and those who established a similarity of Communist-oriented opinion thereafter, did not exist... but since they now do, it is inexcusable for Communist, Socialist Democratic and all other socio-political thinkers not to take such information into account and make adjustments to their ideological orientations accordingly.
Because we are forced to look beyond the Earth for an extension of human existence due to the ongoing incremental deterioration of the planet, the solar system and galaxy, if not the entire Universe, it behooves us to view Communism or for that matter, any philosophy produced on Earth, as a product of rationalization in an effort to establish some semblance of mentally-associated equilibrium to changing environmental conditions. Hence, the notion that Communism is some sort of ultimate achievement to be reached, is a falsehood and needs to be interpreted as a mere stepping stone, just like the human-on-earth created idea of a Heaven and its corollaries differentially defined and labeled by way of environmentally altered intellectual dispositions.
With the ongoing deteriorations taking place and yet socio-political ideologies are not embracing this knowledge with a shift towards an incorporation by which their designs are altered accordingly, it represents a situation in which humanity stands in the middle at a crossways and is blinded by an oncoming vehicle with its lights on. Indeed, the primitive slowness of mentality of current humanity thinks it logical to be dismissive of the circumstances by denying any relevant relationship to itself and a need to alter socio-political ideologies because present day humans think to make an analogy between their life span as that being comparable to some geological time-scale or nuclear particle half-life instead of one similar to that of an insect such as a fruit/vinegar fly whose existence is but the unechoed whisper of a half-moment. Indeed, because of humanity's recorded short span of existence, it would be more appropriate to measure it in terms of a half-death in order to bring a clearer picture of attenuation to the details of a miniscule representation of existence and how quickly, in human-related terms, events have taken place and are mostly forgotten except for the prejudiced interests of historians in different fields of interest.
Communism, by any standard of definition can only be viewed as a stepping stone for humanity. Communism, Democracy and Socialism can well be viewed metaphorically as three different vantage points by which humanity can look out beyond the Earth-born philosophical vistas which are very often defined by an Id dominant personality, an Ego dominant personality, or a Superego dominant personality that are contoured to fit into the regulatory process of an incrementally deteriorating environment.
If establishing Communism set into the framework as a threshold from which humanity might better achieve progressive goals beyond the fence-lines of the Earth, the Solar system and the Galaxy; then it is Communism that should be adopted. Unless a Socialism is the better platform. Or if democracy can be molded into such a port of call by being reconditioned to admit the entry of progressive visionaries to take a leading role in the development and implementation of policies, procedures, and other legalities by which humanity might all the better reached beyond its present self-defeating grasps of a here and now that frequently take on the appearance and stench of an over-used outhouse because it is defined as a commode of such commonality that it is best viewed as existing beyond the parameters of normalized maintenance routines established by those who knowingly or unconsciously practice a personal elitism of aligning entitlements where equality is provisionally lop-sided because of a realized real reduction in resource availability that is increasing due to an increased population and an increased rate of environmental deterioration because of.
Present Communist doctrines can be analogically characterized in terms of the old idea called the Peter Principle as outlined by Laurence J. Peter in his 1969 book entitled "The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong". Essentially it is another "here and now" preoccupation that can be stated in a positive way as 'a person will rise in an organization to the level of their competence,' or in a negative way as 'a person will rise in an organization to the level of their incompetence,' the latter being the pessimism which Mr. Peter indulged in. In terms of a Communist doctrine advocated by its cultic members, it states that Communism (being viewed as an individual) will eventually rise to exhibiting its greater (than democracy and socialism) competence. However, the Earthly environment is not viewed as a bureaucratic (producing) environment which contours all its members to effect a particularized conservation of body, mind and spirit orientations. Nor do Communists oriented towards the old (typically Marxist-Engles) philosophy appreciate that the assumed goal of proposed social structure greatness is an effected limitation of its own potentiality because of the "bureaucracy" of the Earth's environmental constraints on its genetics and physiology, tied to its cognitive 'apparatus' which is set into the functionality of a conveyor belt mode of activity.
Present standards of different Communism are provisionalized with the idea of an equalization of goods and services which can be adjusted to accommodate situations and circumstances that occur outside of an idealized "commonness", such as occurs when a person exhibits a quality considered to be extra-ordinary, with words such as talent, skill, genius, beauty, wisdom, intelligence, giftedness, etc., frequently used to describe them. However, this implies that Communism's standardization of Commonism means there will be a common means of making such an interpretation, and that interpretation is itself not a process of selection related to a commonality unless everyone is permitted... and expected to have such a value, or be cast into a classless model of classification which either identifies such a person or obscures the presence thereof from everyone.
If Communism is to practice a commonism in its communalism, what is to be the measure of that commonism if the commonality of interpretation is unable to recognize and appreciate that type of commonness which is superior to most others? If no entitlements or expectation to extra-ordinary behavior is to be permitted, why not engage in an active genetics program to ensure that only a certain type of commonness is born, such as is found in some insect colonies like bees, which differentiate between workers (the majority), drones (fewer), and queens (most rare by a percentage comparison). The Workers thus constituting the lower class, the drones the middle class, and the Queens as the upper class. While each of them may well be described as being of equal importance to the overall functionality of the hive, there exists three types of classes and represents yet another example of human cognitive behavior using this particular pattern-number, though the labels of worker, drone, and queen may not be referenced in terms of human class distinctions though the words "worker" and "queen" have human correlates. The word 'drone' might well be cast as a noble or Bourgeoisie intermediate social functioning element, though Marx viewed this group as the owners of businesses and not as middle men between the Aristocracy and the lower class Proletariat, though the Aristocracy had to be supported as a means by which businesses could operate they way they wanted by being reflexively supported in return by way of legislation.
To deny the existence of a recurrent cognitive paradigm which frequently asserts the presence of three hierarchically aligned divisions, and that this is the standard measure of a supposed equalization that nature itself supports and authors, suggests those who engage in such a perceptual activity are either highly stupid, or are engaging in an unrealized attempt to surmount the commonality by introducing their own pattern of commonality; thereby constituting a recognizable effort by humans to reach beyond the common boundaries, but that current Communisms want to suppress in order to signify themselves as the greatest reach humanity will ever be able to achieve and must be forced to accept this idea as a fact that is not to be tested nor rebelled against, even though many Communists uphold the need for a Revolution... in as much as they define it and limit its boundaries, like so many democracies around the world do.
Current Communists do not believe in the practice of a true Communism defined as a global practice of commonism. A commonism to be practiced by the majority as a means thought to end all conflicts, but not a commonism to be practiced by a select few who are enabled to enforce the commonism by having their own type of commonism which differs from the others. To practice the same type of commonness as all others either means everyone is engaged in making sure everyone remains in a state of commonness, or that there is no one to ensure that such a commonness is breached because the people are genetically transformed into creatures who will practice conformity... though there might ensue those who come to believe they are more common than others and thus exhibit a believed in elitist model of commonism which develops into an insiders cult, sect, division, club, department, school, gang, institution, agency, etc...
In many instances Communism presents us with the attitude that there is no next... nothing to be achieved other than a more finely tuned Communism. Like a religion boasting of a Heaven as one's final destination or a Buddhism-defined Enlightenment. However, these are other-worldly or off-worldly (off the Earth) abodes of supposed residence on may take up at or in. On-Earth similarities are variously named such as Eden, Shangri-la, Paradise, Utopia of which most, but not all, are said to be achieved if one conducts themselves in accordance with one or more rules. The lack of obtaining entrance is defined as a person having not followed one or more given set of rules or requirements. Hence, those speaking of a special place afford themselves a means by which they can escape having to answer for such a place not being achieved by simply claiming one or more people did not follow a path, a way, a given policy, program, procedure or other requirement. In other words, the house rules are fixed for the benefit of the house to win, with the "house" being a person, institution or belief presented by one or more people who are very often organized in such a way so as to reap some benefit from those who seek out the reward and will provide some service or good to be instructed on how to achieve what they want, though those doing the teaching will also claim that they do not claim the reward either because they want to stay behind and serve their fellow humans or that they failed to carry out a given requirement that they want others not to fall prey to and must make penance for their failing. Though that or those making the judgment call is generalized into the perspective that because a person has not achieved what they think they can, then this alone is the statement to be interpreted as having failed to deliver on one's responsibility.
The problem with this ongoing human cognitive setup taking place in different forms throughout the world is that few of those who are analyzing the different variations are casting them into a profile which describes a recurring cognitive activity brought on by an incrementally deteriorating environment in which humanity is forced to adapt to and create commensurate ideas in order to accommodate the changes in behavioral requirements to physiological adaptations. It is uncommon for a socio-political idea to be drawn up to include a look deep into the future in its proactive compilation of design. It is the currency of the typical idea to be placed into a here and now theme, accompanied by a feature of speculating about a future that can be approximated into a single person's life span such as a hundred years. While Marx and Engles and those who opportunistically assumed a management of their views and arranged them according to what another thought was best for their situation, their view was limited in its attempts to catalog an approximated historical lineage of economic practices from some poorly defined "primitive" past which was not aligned with a specific time period, as well as attempting to portray some supposed futuristic scene in which their brand of Communism would come to overshadow all other socio-political practices. Again, no specific moment in the future was provided.
In as much as one might want to argue the need for a drawing board approach describing generalities which can be understood in part because Marx and Engles lived during an era when lots of detailed information was lacking, let us make note of the attempt by Lenin to offset the lack of economic data with those of his immediate purview, but this still did not provide any historical data to go along with the lineage used by Marx and Engles to formulate a presumed scientific approach to the study of sociological concerns. And even when they are in the present day context, we of the present are apt to label them as statistics with variations and therefore once again dismiss any specifically enumerated identification. Though it is a given that we frequently speak in generalities, this given should be noted as being acknowledged so as for it not to be later considered as an oversight by today's analytical socio-political philosophers. It can't be helped, or so we allow ourselves to believe because we are presented with too many generalities which remain generalities because we lack a model by which the generalities can be adequately itemized and thus categorized, since categorization often leads to a hierarchical arrangement.
If we take an example of comparative physiology and categorize it in terms of a hierarchy, we might also be able to adopt it to a socio-political focus as a means of identifying a nature-born recurrent function and that overall, it also represents a development as a byproduct of environmental pressures acting similarly on different life forms to produce a similar evolutionary effect. The model to which I speak of is the Pentadactyl limb, as shown in the following illustration with accompanying comments:
The model is a 3-in-1 structure that must be prominently noted as an artefact having been designed on a planet that is incrementally deteriorating. And just because they are prominent and recurring should not lead one to view them as being emergent properties which existed in some early genetic past awaiting a "proper" time and place to sprout forth. One, two or all three... including all the life forms may be accidents of nature that can never again be repeated nor repeat elsewhere in the universe. Indeed, like the solar system in which we inhabit and has been noted as being uncommon: (In all the universe, just 15 percent of solar systems are like ours); the Pentadactyl structure may actually be an uncommon biological event outside of Earth and its solar system though we humans claim it to be a commonality by way of our means of identifying patterns— if even all of biology as we know it or otherwise (that which we don't know) is not also an accident and not a commonality despite the commonality of DNA's triplet code being present in millions of life forms. Hence, the striving for a Communism with an emphasis towards establishing a communalism of commonness is antithetical to a natural design in some respects as viewed in a planetary sense of configuration; unless we view its attempt to strive for and achieve a commonness as an uncommon activity. In other words, a consistent lack of commonality is philosophically to be viewed as a common occurrence.
Unless we were to adopt a definition of Communism that is absent both the attributes of commonism and communalism, we are stuck with the foregoing dilemma. No less, if we are to strive for a propositioned "classless" society, this idea portrays an active knowledge of being able to distinguish between class and classlessness and this active knowledge and assertion to make everyone comply thus admits to the use of a classification system and hence, the usage of a class-based distinction. Are Communists and their Communism trying to conceal such an hypocrisy? Is the usage of a non-class system for humans to be applied universally amongst all activities? For example: Are we to discontinue making distinctions between dog breeds, horse breed, plants, minerals, money, climate, etc.? Are not distinctions a system of classification and thus the usage of class distinctions and hierarchical arrangements such as between the different types of diseases and their virulency? In addition, are all forms of competition to be stopped because they exhibit classifications and a hierarchical arrangement on team rosters and competition ranking scales? Would not the continued usage of such events be cause for alarm since they might influence people to think in terms of classification and the pecking order to which they belong, even if law forbids one to even think about class, much less practice it?
Clearly, the old formulas of Communism and Socialism and Democracy present us with philosophical conundrums which must be addressed in order to move society forward in its desire for progress, or is the idea of progress just another illusion manufactured by those who use this idea as a fantasy by which to get people to purchase products that make them wealthy and it is the accumulation of such wealth which is the only progress that all current forms of socio-political philosophy are concerned with? Indeed, current models of Communism are obsessed with property ownership, equality of goods and the measure by which all must be sustained to produce a level of equality whose costs have not actually been tabulated and have only been idealized into some golden fleece and chalice that must be gained through the trials and tribulations of a combatant form of Revolution like the tests and tasks of Hercules, Jason and The Argonauts, as well as Crusading Knights? Is this not but the projected imagery of some past mythology, folklore and fairy tale set into the context of a socio-politico-economic stage with all the twists and turns of a television soap opera... and represents the types of government in usage today?
Those who are desirous of creating the foundation of a New Government can not afford to be so idealistically naive as previous Communists and Socialists have been (as well as those advocating the many forms of phony Democracy). It is both naive and idiotic to create an idea which does not incorporate a professed acceptance for the practice of spirituality. Right or wrong, good or bad, progressive of obstructive, it nonetheless exists. Similarly, it can not be so stubborn and self-centered to think it too is not a stepping stone in the process of both a progressive development and the development of a progressive means of pursuing progress and progress' development, unless it is not an integral part of humanity but a fluke brought on by sporadic... never-to-happen-again events. Are Communists so blinded by an obsession with Marx and Engles values they are unable to see that their exists a world of functionality beyond their drug-like habituations which produces a level of egotism that erects itself as a bronze statue that is used as a chip on the shoulder?
Whereas Marx and Engles drew up a blueprint that they imagined was a mechanical drawing from which a stone edifice would be constructed, the Communist Manifesto and their other writings have been translated like so many do-it-yourself instruction manuals and pamphlets which do not adequately nor accurately assist anyone in putting the item together as well as having not itemized the contents so that the screws which are missing might be more easily identified. (Marx, Engles, and their many followers are said to mentally exhibit the same "loose screws" of judgment because their brand[s] of Communism are philosophically deficient and portray what we of today note as an autism, though some might want to claim Marx as being an idiot savant because their own narcissism embraces Marxian dogma as if it were akin to a scripture by being enraptured by certain words, phrases and ideas upon which they project a personalized image of identification with.
Date of Origination: Thursday, January 23rd, 2020... 3:51 AMInitial Posting: Saturday, Februray 1st, 2020... 12:27 PM
Herb O. Buckland
herbobuckland@hotmail.com