printable version PDF version

Once Lucky
by cleaves Saturday, Apr 9 2005, 8:05am
international / social equality/unity / opinion/analysis

“A slave is he who cannot think for himself.” (Euripides)

“As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy.”
(Abraham Lincoln)

“The worst form of delusion is self-delusion and the most amenable slave is one who thinks he is free.” (Anonymous)

In today’s world the above quotes could not be more relevant, the whole social world drama in which we all find ourselves cast has become a master-slave dichotomy. Subservience is now the modern way of life for the majority. Few are ‘free’, if any. It would be preferable if we all took stock of our real-life circumstances before resorting to indignation born/e of denial.

One example of a ‘liberationist’ prescription is Marxism. Marxist ideology is a ‘photo-negative’ of its parent ideology, Capitalism; as such it derives its identity from another and relegates itself to the reactive – a perfect binary opposition! Marxism is a derivative ideology formulated by a reactionary but binding relationship to that which it opposes. The status of slave is earned by those who sub-scribe to another’s view or ‘reality’. In the case of Marxists, a double bind is incurred. ‘Liberation’ here is easily appreciated as profound slavery.

Cowards and others, who are incapable of formulating their own worldview, subscribe – they then share (as a group) a self-imposed uniform identity. This is not confined to the cringe mentality of Marxists. All institutional religious systems offer similar modes of shared identity. Those who subscribe to any religious or political worldview are by definition (Euripides) slaves!

Subscribing to any belief system or ideology would earn the status of slave for the subscriber. Unfortunately, this mode of behaviour is the accepted ‘norm’ today. Recognition of slave inducing behaviours is rare; shared worldviews numb participants into accepting “without question” another’s fabrication as a personal reality. This situation has always amused philosophers and others, who are acutely aware that everyone possesses the inherent capability to determine their own course and live their own unique lives. There are numerous reasons why this does not occur, cowardice and fear would seem the principal causes. All things being consequential in this universe, what is the price of cowardice? Perhaps the example of Australia, as average nation in today’s developed world, would highlight the price of slavery.

Australia has been referred to as the “lucky country”, a once well deserved description. In the not too distant past it rated the fifth highest living standard in the developed world but today it verges on banana republic status. As a result of grossly inept government, Australia’s national debt is the highest ever recorded and (not surprisingly) so too is household debt. The average Australian is precariously living on an economic tightrope. This situation in a land of ‘plenty’ is inexcusable but it is the well-deserved reward for a population that allowed foreign interests (Transnational Corporations) to take ownership of the nation’s abundant wealth. [Is this a familiar scenario?]

In the period when Australians enjoyed a high standard of living, Australian companies held majority ownership of the nation’s wealth. This wealth was necessarily shared with the population who were participants in its production – today however, the greater percentage of wealth is owned by foreign interests who are loath to share their wealth with anyone. ‘Australian’ wealth now fills overseas coffers, little is returned to the local population. The current record deficit is largely the result of losing, to foreign interests, the ownership of the means to sustain the local standard of living. There is no need to complicate the causes of the Australian tragedy – surrendering your assets to another will always result in slavery to that ‘other’. The present pathetic situation for Australians is that they are now in debt (directly or indirectly) to the same interests who have taken ownership of their assets/wealth. The slaves who voted for successive Labor/Liberal conservative governments are now ‘enjoying’ their reward.

The Australian example is not unique; the world abounds in slave populations. It is not the task of this writer to offer an alternative ideology (or strategy) and encourage persistent slavery. It is hoped by way of discursive deconstruction and analysis, the reader will be able to in-scribe rather than sub-scribe – the active is always preferable to the reactive.

The days of leaders and followers are numbered – the present world situation bears testimony to the failure of the master-slave dichotomy as social model. Reluctance to act now would result in the continued Zionist/Bush pursuit of the “New World Order” – is anyone willing to live that prospective nightmare?