Like Marx, we argue here that our conclusions are driven by inexorable logic.
The logic of history is not theology; nor is it philosophy.
The logic of history is not economics, or technology.
What is this logic?
What is it that brings out man’s full potential?
What is it that requires the use of man’s supreme judgement?
What is it that brings the state into existence?
What is it that drives the development of the state to its full potential?
Or so we thought.
Until the advent of nuclear weapons and the realisation of their existential potential, war was progressing – new techniques, new technology, new strategies.
However, since 1945, the great powers – namely USG and its vassals – have constrained themselves from waging war in the old style.
The need for a professionally trained, highly specialised, men under arms guided by human intelligence and human judgement has never went away – but it is now returning with a vengeance.
That which is disordered must eventually collapse back into order; that which is ordered must give way to disorder.
The West is collapsing back into order.
France has existed in a state of national emergency for nearly two years now.
The military have been mobilised and have been moved onto the streets.
Here is one of Imperial Energy’s central arguments, it consists of a minor and a major premise.
Firstly, Imperial Energy’s major premise is the following rule: if a state must deploy the military to maintain law and order in the nation that it controls, then that state is a failed state.
(The military is for external enemies, when the state uses the military against its civilian population – even if it’s only its nominal civilian population – it muddies the whole concept of the friend/enemy distinction and military/civilian separation of responsibility – distinctions we will examine in the coming weeks.)
The minor premise has already been furnished, so now it only remains to draw the conclusion which is that France is a failed state.
Imperial Energy has a corollary of that conclusion, however.
For any state that has failed, that state shall have a military government as a consequence of that failure.
Martin Van Creveld claimed that the old “trinity” of war which consists of state, people and the military no longer exists (or is decaying); thus, according to Creveld, the state has lost its reason to exist.
We might also add that this involves a perverse feedback relationship: the state does not “need” its “people” and as a result, the people are losing faith in the “state”.
The military, however, is forever because WAR is FOREVER.
The existence of nuclear weapons, and other destructive technologies, provide hairless apes with the power of gods, and so the struggle for power, the struggle for control of the state – which is premised on the struggle for existence itself – is FINAL, ABSOLUTE and IRREVOCABLE.
We call this the TRAGIC VISION.
A Global Prisoner’s dilemma.
Thus, someone or something, will always have to command.
Grand Master Mencius said that Universalism and the State are analogous to the relationship between Malaria and the Mosquito – they evolved together.
Yet, there is something else that goes with the state, something that is the pure opposite of Universalism: Militarism.
Mao said that political power ultimately comes from the “barrel of the gun” and the Cathedral agrees.
The Cathedral has just “green-lit” a Coup for Venezuela.
The Deciding Vote
The deciding vote in these situations is often cast by the military, which has the power to break a deadlock among elites and, often, the popular legitimacy to lead a transition.
In Venezuela, some are already calling on the military to step in.
Luis Ugalde, a prominent Jesuit leader, said at a forum in February that Mr. Maduro’s government had shown “dictatorial character.” He called for a transitional government modeled after the 1958 military coup that then installed democracy.
Such statements can hardly force change. But by conferring pre-emptive legitimacy, they signal to potential coup leaders that they would enjoy at least some elite support.
Still, the government has been preparing its defenses since 2002. That year, amid major protests, Hugo Chávez, Mr. Maduro’s predecessor, ordered the military to impose order. It instead removed him in a coup that was quickly reversed.
After that, Mr. Chávez packed the military with allies.
The military also gained vast patronage streams, which some local officials say include control over gold mining.
Venezuela is a failed state – led there by leftist economics.
Let’s recall the NYT’s claim again:
“The deciding vote in these situations is often cast by the military, which has the power to break a deadlock among elites and, often, the popular legitimacy to lead a transition.“
What I can’t understand is why they’re putting him in a military tribunal when he’s a civilian,” Reyes said, his voice hoarse with exasperation.
Human rights activists say more than 250 detained protesters have been put before military justice over the last week – a sudden upsurge in use of a practice they say violates Venezuela’s constitution, which limits military courts to “offenses of a military nature.” Some lawyers and opposition leaders put the number far higher.
“The growing use of military tribunals to judge civilians demonstrates the absolute determination of Venezuelan authorities to asphyxiate the growing protests and terrorize any person who contemplates the possibility of expressing opinions,” said Erika Guevara Rosas Americas director for Amnesty International.
Whatever happens, poor Venezuela will not have good government, however. The generals would be best to adopt the Master’s advice; sadly, the Cathedral is the one that will call the shots.
Here, we explain how it all goes down.
The Cathedral – through its chief organ – the New York Times and Harvard has “signalled” that it is now acceptable for a small section of Venezuela’s political elite, the military, along with activist groups and NGO’s to support a military take-over.
The Cathedral open’s up with the following rhetorical question:
Even as Venezuela sinks into chaos, with clashes between protesters and the police escalating, why have its powerful political and military elites stuck by President Nicolás Maduro?
(You hear that men? You hear? This is the Cathedral. This is your Commander speaking. Hear my words and obey my orders for my word is the word of the one, true
Then, in the second paragraph, the Cathedral deploys its fundamental assumption: that the world should be ruled by professors, or civil servants, or civil servants trained by professors:
The country would seem to be a prime candidate for something scholars call an “elite fracture,” in which enough powerful officials break away to force a change in leadership.
“Elite fracture” nice formula for a coup.
The Cathedral then does a triple whammy-1-2-3 knockout. Strike one comes from Steven Levitsky – a political scientist “professor of government“; strike two is that Steven Levitsky works at Harvard – the unofficial HQ of Universalism; strike three is that Levitsky is justifying the Coup after the fact.
The fact that it hasn’t happened in the last two years is the biggest puzzle of all,” said Steven Levitsky, a Harvard University political scientist. “If it happens next week, all of us will say, ‘Yeah, it was bound to happen.’
Now, when the Coup does happen, everyone in the Cathedral will have no problem with it – no problem because the Cathedral caused it to happen.
So here is Power: Real Power – subversion, bribery, persuasion and force.
(And make no mistake Harvard is the Cathedral. See this video of a talk by Edward Luttwak where he mentions Harvard as a “player”, but that “Donald Trump (will) take care of it in January.” Start the video at 19.25. The entire talk is about why the military cannot fight effectively against insurgents – something we will examine in the coming weeks. )
What institution – what kernel with a repeater – can oppose the professors and bureaucrats of Harvard?
West Point? Wall Street? West Point or Wall Street? West Point and Wall Street?
Comte’s vision of a world run by professional bureaucrats has been a disaster and change is coming – though it may tarry.
The Mask of Power is slipping from the faces of the Brahmin sages in the West as their political formula is contradicted by reality and is being repeatedly challenged and exposed thanks to the internet; the soldiers, meanwhile, are getting restless over years of mismanaged wars abroad and terrorism at home; the people are increasingly frustrated and fearful, disorientated and disillusioned.
We live in the age of disorder, an age of crisis; the old is giving birth to the new, but what will that new be?
STEEL-cameralism is a new political formula and system of statecraft developed in response to the crisis of the 21st century.
Next post will be delivered on Saturday the 13th, where we look at how the three greatest reactionaries of the 19th century assessed Napoleon.