by Kevin Carson
Today?s column, oddly enough, was inspired by a quote from Konrad Lorenz used as an epigraph for Stephen King?s ?Cell?:? ?Humans have not evolved any ritualized aggression-inhibiting mechanisms to ensure the survival of the species.?
In fact, this is not true.? Such aggression-inhibiting mechanisms are quite prevalent among hunter-gather societies like those in the Amazon, and simple fishing and farming societies like the Indians of the Pacific Northwest.? Almost all such societies have had ritualized forms of warfare, relying on such practices as coup-counting to minimize the damage from conflict between villages or tribes.? The peasant village communes predominant from the agricultural revolution to the emergence of the first states were mostly peaceful and cooperative.? Even among highly organized and aggressive non-state societies, like the tribal confederations of nomadic Indians on the Great Plains, where genuine warfare took place it was still highly ritualized by all sorts of customary taboos that limited the damage done.
Relations between individuals and small groups tend to stabilize themselves on the sort of peaceful pattern game theory would predict, when they have ongoing rather than one-off dealings with one another and can expect that ?what goes around will come around.?
All this happens because human beings are rational utility-maximizers.
But all these damage-limiting mechanisms disappear in total war between states because states are functionally insane.? Institutions governed by authority relations behave in a manner analogous to that of a human being whose perception of the world is distorted by some cognitive dysfunction, and cannot logically evaluate the consequences of her behavior.? This is because authority relations pervert and distort the institutional mechanisms analogous to an individual?s perceptions and evaluations of the world around her.
As Robert Anton Wilson pointed out, dealing with reality in a sane manner requires accurate environmental feedback about the consequences of one?s actions, which in turn requires two-way communications between equals.? This is impossible under authority relations, because authority results in one-way lines of communication.? Those in authority give orders without any accurate feedback on the results of those orders, because the upward flow of communication is distorted by power.? Information is filtered by power relations as people tell those in authority what they want to hear.? No one tells the real, unfiltered truth to someone with a gun, or even to someone with the power to fire her.? When the genius MBAs in the C-suite decide to lay off half the production workforce in order to goose their own stock options, there?s not much danger of a factory manager, or even the head of a production division, saying ?You know, that?s a really stupid idea.?
Those in authority are also insulated from experiencing the real consequences of their actions, because power is a machine for appropriating the positive externalities of others? actions and imposing the negative externalities of one?s own behavior on those with less power.? The net consequences of a decision for everyone in the organiztion may be negative, but what counts is that they?re a positive for the leadership.? ?It?s good to be king.?
And the state is the ultimate in power relations.? Its leaders are functionally insane, with their own power distorting their perception of reality and the consequences of their actions.? Total war, in which a major portion of a country?s population and wealth is sacrificed for the leadership?s purposes, seems worthwhile because they?re not the ones who see their families slaughtered and their homes and crops burned.? The leader of a state will send an army to devastate Georgia or to firebomb Dresden because he knows any retaliatory consequences will be experienced by others.? ?Let?s you and him fight.?
There?s been no strategic nuclear war since 1945 because the leadership of the nuclear powers had enough residual perception of reality to understand that ? for the first time in history ? a nuke could be dropped at will right on the Kremlin or the White House, with virtual certainty of death for themselves.? The bomb for the first time raised the possibility that, if war went total, the king would be the equal of his subjects before the Grim Reaper.? That?s why, despite all the cries of alarm about ?foreign threats? in the buildups to war, the U.S. government since WWII has only attacked those it thought couldn?t fight back.
Rational behavior is possible only when people voluntarily associate with one another, communicate as equals, and experience the full consequences of their own actions.
C4SS Research Associate Kevin Carson is a contemporary mutualist author and individualist anarchist whose written work includes Studies in Mutualist Political Economy, Organization Theory: An Individualist Anarchist Perspective, and The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto, all of which are freely available online. Carson has also written for such print publications as The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty and a variety of internet-based journals and blogs, including Just Things, The Art of the Possible, the P2P Foundation and his own Mutualist Blog.
- War on Terror Is Bad for Economy
- 9/11 and the Orwellian Redefinition of "Conspiracy Theory"
- The War on Immigrants, Farmers, and Consumers
- When the State Breaks a Man
- New York Times Columnist Nicholas Kristof: The Military as Socialist Model for America
- From Farm to Zoning Official
- The Persecution of Juan Cole
- Imperial Inanity
There is only one real, lasting solution to this entire problem:
Someone more powerful that Satan (who runs the "State") needs to intervene & remove him from power. Only then does mankind stand any sort of chance. And there is only One Person more powerful than a fallen angel.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill