Opposing Democracy

See Intolerance — Medium http://buff.ly/199165k

There is a rhyme and a reasoning to the ordering of what harms in the graphic which this book seeks to explicate. What harms DESCENDS through thoughtlessness and selfishness to ganging up and excluding. These are things that are elementary and which a child will encounter very early. They can be addressed as conditions that can and should be changed so that a child will become more self-reliant, confident and critical. It is when we get to the obverse of our main active values that we encounter enlarging circles of evil.

Thus a nation where there are good signs of democracy — where democracy as practiced tends to be fair, free, developed — has a leg up over nations that are resolutely anti-democratic. Yes, when we come to the evil of opposing democracy we move away from things we can address merely individually to things that will require major movements of societies even to budge.

In Russia, for example, the likelihood of achieving even a close proximity to democracy is presently about nil. The same may be true in China. Authoritarian governments are little better than these behemoths when it comes to achieving democracy.

The need to affirm democracy is universal and it can be said with confidence that there are persons everywhere, living under the very worst of conditions, who pray daily for a birth of freedom in their midst.

But we are now forced to observe that there are forms of harm that are like great weights placed on various parts of the world. People live under the burden of choicelessness. It may be true, within existing democracies, that this choicelessness is also present, where the harmful sources of poverty exist, where racial prejudice persists and where the animus against open borders is both virulent and mean-spirited.

The world has always had what might be called pan-regional areas where some values are opposed, not because they are bad, but because they would remove from power those who profit by an unjust status quo.

Fortunately, though, we have a counterthrust to this sad condition. It is the common voice of common people everywhere. We need to take seriously the potential power of all who have a voice on the globe-spanning Internet.

Triadic Philosophy promotes three universal habits, the third of which is Messaging. It comes with a list of messages you can adapt if you wish. We need a growing army of messengers. Here is a small sample:

Everyone has the right to realize their full potential.

Everything is reality and everything is now.

Evil is not excusable.

Forgiveness is the most freeing experience a person can have.

Forgiveness of others includes forgiveness of ourselves.

Forgiving all is a difficult but necessary daily discipline.

Give all a chance.

Goodness is heavenly.

Great miracles of the past were merely signs of possibility.

Such messages stated uniquely from person to person, have the merit of evoking universal values, including democracy, and working as a force for good as we gently seek to create a democratic revolution globally in this century.

The first wave of a democracy movement failed because it was largely binary — it lacked the force of a full-blown triadic movement which is resolutely nonviolent and whose stratagems are mass silence, mass messaging and nonviolent demonstrations that have suppleness and tolerance and can fade when opposition appears. The source of thinking for the future is pataphysical, strength derived from weakness, victory derived from tiny movements.

Like what you read? Give Stephen C. Rose a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.