Image result for abolish money

The cry for Real Democracy demands a reappraisal of the voting systems that undemocratically favour two major parties, nearly always the centre right and centre left. liberal-democratic parties, who themselves ensure a continuation of the dominant capitalist-economy of the global world civilisation. Most Western-style democracies have cheating mechanisms which are designed, according to their supporters, to provide “strong” governments.

From a point of view of political comfort, the cheating mechanisms seem to be necessary for maintaining a desirable stability. We have seen in the last few years how the arrival of more radical parties into the governmental scenario (e.g.: in Greece, Spain and Italy) has done little to make any fundamental changes to the system. Anti-capitalist parties have been castrated by the global capitalist-economy. Because of this, the System falls into an impossible paradox in which winning power becomes political suicide for radical parties.

But what if the objectives of winning the elections were radically opposed to power itself: that instead of gaining power, the objective of the radicals is to create non-power? Can we imagine a political party with an anti-power ideology? Of course this sounds like anarchism, but let’s ask why anarchism is so scarcely seen in democracies? Why do we think we need power so much when, over and over again, we see how greedy and selfish it is?

The reason is that Power in our economics-driven society is inextricably tied to the flow of money. Power makes and distributes the wealth. It is an underlying belief in our society that without money we would die, and this means Power is related to survival, and only when Power threatens our survival, as it did in 18th century France or 20th century Russia and China, will major revolutions take place. That Power is inextricably aligned with Wealth is no secret, but when that alliance is seen as a threat by societies to our welfare and as an endangering force in our lives, it starts to be questioned, and the seeds of revolution begin to sprout.

However, a real revolution can only truly hope to succeed if it attacks the real source of the problem, which is the relationship between Power and Wealth, and which stems from the inextricable bond between Power and money. In other words, only by questioning monetarisation and envisaging societies in which money as we know it no longer has to play a part, will successful revolution or purposeful political change ever come about.

But for this to happen, political activists have to enter the political scene not with a thirst for power, but with a desire for non-power.


Syrian war victims

Everything is politics, said Brecht. True, it has now become such a ubiquitous concept that it has evolved into nothing – or nothing that is meaningfully representative of what we think it is or would like it to be. We confuse it with the class struggle and so we have to see it in a cyclical way with constant “new” beginnings. But these are really just echoes of an age-old dialectic between the workers and the owners, between the lower class and the upper, between the rich and the poor, or the right and the left, etc. In actual fact this dialectic no longer exists because it has been absorbed by the State, which renders the dialectic impotent. State politics serves the State, not the people, and therefore it is not politics. Politics, by definition, must serve the polis. The State’s anti-politics however, moulds the polis and makes it subservient to the State.

Politics has certainly become a concept that is anti-reason. Its purpose, either in the actuality of the State or the nostalgia of class struggle, is to support or attack the ways things are in a myopic way, from the point of view of the present. It hates to wrestle with “big-picture” concepts like what we should be doing or where we are going. The philosophy of the State is an anti-philosophy that has managed to enslave a world to the dictates of a mad, capitalist economy in which vision, creativity, science and education are shackled and enslaved to the ephemeral dictates of the market. An ephemerality which is falsely rendered positive by interpreting it as a “dynamic” force, even though it is a Jacuzzi dynamism, swirling around in an enclosed space. It looks impressive and feels good, but in the larger scheme of things it serves no great purpose.

If the State, especially State-capitalism, has become a hindrance to progress and a force of separation for humanity, then this State must be seriously questioned. There have to be better paths, one’s which will take everyone forward and instil our condition with meaningfulness again. For if hope and satisfaction are ever to become common human traits, then they must be preceded by meaning.