What kind of society is the best for us to live in?

What I have been failing to understand in my recent introspections is how one group of people, a minority, can reflect and represent the views of 65 million people as a whole. When put like this, the whole idea of our governmental system seems absolutely preposterous and slightly archaic. As I discovered on a recent visit to the Houses of Parliament, the idea of it being archaic, is completely true. You only have to look at the designs and the way the building is laid out, to understand that modern politics in Britain is still firmly stuck in the past. The horrid taste of privately educated, out of touch politicians lingers in the air. Remember, these are the people who are supposedly representing everyone in Britain today, including the younger generation. You only have to look at someone like Jacob Rees-Mogg to know that this is definitely not a place which can best represent the way that society is today. It is very clear that politics needs a massive overhaul, and to do away with the ridiculous, petulant traditions and rituals that embody British politics.

For many weeks now I have been studying the concept of Anarcho-syndicalism, at first with much skepticism, but now with more intrigue than anything else. It is a fascinating theory, popularised mostly by Noam Chomsky, who based his ideas off Rudolph Rocker. Anarcho-syndicalism focusses mainly on having separated communities and societies that govern themselves. The basis for this is to ensure that power is not centralised, and that direct democracy is more prevalent than representative democracy.

I am of the belief that a modified anarchistic society could have the potential to be a more beneficial, more peaceful society. I have been told multiple times that I should “join a political party”. This is something that I am extremely hesitant to do, simply due to the fact that I don’t believe political parties that claim to want to represent everybody in a society are the right thing in the governing of a community. The apparent need for these political parties to gain centralised power, and establish a dominance over everyone else, as if to say we are better than you, and although you can’t do anything about this outdated system of governing, it’s tough, because if it ain’t broke don’t fix it right? The problem is that it is very much broke, and politics in Britain is going to be a due a massive change in the coming years.

A truly viable change in the system would be to allow people to split off into separate communities and allow them to govern themselves. This way, there would be no centralised power at the top, controlling the way that every single person within a, and I hesitate to use the word country, because I really do hate the whole concept of countries, and a supposed need for imperialists to continue to enhance their power by creating imaginary borders, which don’t truly exist. However, to change the system, you have to work within the system, so a solution to modern politics would be to have communities separate and govern themselves.

This was more of a revision type thing for my government and politics class at college, but it really is within my interests, and it is always nice to channel my thoughts and feelings of politics in this country.

 

 

 

Advertisements

a few thoughts…

The meaning of life. Have we found it yet? Or are we all just an endless cycle of repeated versions of people gone before? The assumption that one should have to live, and should be expected to enjoy or even contribute to the world us, which is constantly being destroyed by the ones telling us to embrace the natural world. Even with such little experience in the world, I can understand that the endless cycle of cynicism and mindless brutality continues to usurp the world as we know it. Will it ever change? And if it won’t, then what is the point of continuing to exist in such a sanguinary society. It is like Martin Luther King once said: “We’ve learned to fly the air like birds, we’ve learned to swim the seas like fish and yet we haven’t learned to walk the Earth as brothers and sisters”.

Governments are more willing to spend millions and millions of their money on developed weapons of mass destruction in order to “protect us”. I see no protection in spending valuable money, which could be better spent on healthcare, and making sure that there is peace and prosperity among a nation, and that equality overpowers the biased class divide. The endless cycle of countries empowering themselves with weapons, and then others following suit out of fear, is what leads to this so called “protection” and hinders our progress as a civilisation.

While there is war, there will never be peace. And one may argue that there will always be war, so there can never be peace. And what kind of a world is that to live in? Instead of embracing the beauty and awe-striking wonder that it the natural world of Earth, which we are so lucky, and we should be stewards of these resources. Instead, day by day, they are getting destroyed. And because of who? Man. The most maleficent of any creature to ever walk this Earth. What was once a primitive beauty, has now become a use for destruction and malevolent intent. Have we learnt nothing from our ancestors that walked the Earth before us? The sad truth is that man will always demand and crave power, and value it more than the prosperity, and development and potential that we have as a civilisation as a whole.

People will always tell you that you only get one life so make the most of it. If making the most of it is to not even have the chance to contribute to our planet, and watch it get destroyed by egotistical, power driven, money motivated, madmen, then there truly is no incentive to contribute anything to this industrial business that the world has become. There is no incentive to get up in the morning. Even for an inexperienced youth, I can recognise that there will be no hope. There will be no happiness, and there definitely won’t be any peace and prosperity. An alternative solution is very much hard to establish. However, if everyone was to come together, and combine the talent and the adroitness that we all possess, then we would find that an alternative solution would be very much within the realms of possibility.

And so the meaning for what we live for will continue. But life is not for everyone. It should not be enforced on those who wish to exit the immoral and unethical world that we live in. A world so full of natural wonders, yet so devoid of it at the same time. Life isn’t for everyone.