14th May 1998
Revised 16th May 10
The Governance of the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom along with many other western countries is governed by a system called 'democracy'. We are told ad nauseam that we are lucky to live in a democracy and that democracy is the only way.
But are we lucky to live in a democracy?
Over the years, this country has been in and out of crisis and the physical and moral strength of the nation has declined to danger level. And if we look at other western countries we see the pattern repeated, with their governments equally unable to govern and to provide stable conditions. In fact, democracy appears to be a system that consistently produces bad government - government by nonentities and often crooks.
Jean Marie Le Pen has examined the problem and stated that, "If western democracy is to survive - if indeed the west itself is to survive - then the electorate must make harsh decisions and be given the information and education to enable it to make those decisions"
However, under democracy, as it currently exists, there is absolutely no likelihood of this occurring.
The basis of this paper, therefore, is the recognition that for the survival of the west we must not look forward to a day when, miraculously under the democratic system, we find ourselves with honest and intelligent people forming a government promoting the health and welfare of the nation, but devise and then build a new system of government that will attract such people.
People who seek the continuance and well being of their nation are known as nationalists. Nationalists, in our view, must henceforth work on two levels, or more likely for most to work on one level, but to be aware of the other level. There is a need for straightforward political work under the existing democratic system with the object of slowing the decay of the nation and to educate a proportion of the nation to the need for reform of the system of government.
The second need is to begin the task of devising and building the alternative. This paper is concerned with the background to that alternative.
Quote: “A state is merely a population which can engage in a common political life and feels enough of an ultimate common interest for the minority to accept the decision of the majority.”
Devising a solution.
How do we tackle the enormous task of devising and building this alternative form of government that will work to ensure the continuance and prosperity of the nation?
We can make a start by divorcing discussion of the solution from day to day politics and in doing so we are using a standard method. In any large and complicated affair or enterprise, and in particular, an affair that may take or last many years, a standard way of controlling, or solving its problems is to segregate the day to day direction of the enterprise from that required to maintain long term stability. An example of this is a large corporation where the chairman and the specialist directors define the long-term strategy and engage the operating staff. The operating staff, led by the chief executive, or managing director, are responsible for the day to day running of the concern.
The running of the nation is a large and complicated affair.
We shall use analogies and methods from business, science and philosophy and collect data and ideas not usually associated with politics and thereby build up a working hypothesis from which we can start examining possible models of suitable forms of government.
Currently, society accepts the artefacts and conveniences that are the result of advanced science and technology in some matters, but rejects the most basic science in others.
People accept, for example, 'miracle' medicines, smart phones and jet liners, but reject, for example, the science of genetics and inheritance.
Extreme efforts are made in some directions to 'save the environment' and there is total inactivity in others. There are tight regulations for refrigeration gases, yet still oil and coal are being burnt by the millions of tons.
A scientific concept that is useful to this discussion is that of entropy. Entropy is the tendency for systems to degenerate into increasing disorder. A corollary is that to maintain order energy needs to be put into the system.
The system we are discussing is the nation, and using the concept of entropy, the run down of the nation is a natural event, unless prevented wilfully by, perhaps, good government. There is no need to postulate the deliberate running down by an evil sect or sects.
Another useful concept is that a nation, which is apparently made up of autonomous individuals is, in fact, an organic whole with each individual bound loosely to the overall 'body', just as the cells of a plant or animal make up the whole organism.
Such a concept explains the sacrifices of individuals in bringing up children, and in the extreme, the sacrifice of an individual’s life for the benefit of the nation.
(Looking at the nation in biological terms as a large amorphous 'animal'. This animal is continuously alive, but the individuals that it is composed of, are born, live and die.
Some of the actions of individuals can only be regarded as totally autonomous, whereas others can only be explained by referring to the requirements of the whole 'animal'.
1. Choice of style of clothing is individual and has little effect on others.
2. On the contrary having a baby, or fighting in the defence of the country, can only be understood if - at least sub-consciously - the individual is behaving for the good of the whole animal.
In a healthy 'animal nation’ the individuals are differentiated, but co-ordinated. When co-ordination is lost the 'animal' dies.
Looking at our nation in this way, it can be seen that co-ordination of purpose between the individuals is far from perfect and, subjectively, probably deteriorating.
Further if the nation is to continue living, it is axiomatic that the individuals making up that nation should be of continuous quality, or improving quality.
Tragically, today this is not the case. All the pointers are to a rapidly falling average standard of individual for which there are many reasons:
1. There is a strong tendency for good to marry good and bad to marry bad.
2. For the bad to have a higher birthrate.
3. For lack of prevention of the very bad breeding.
4. Cross breeding with individuals of another nation.
Why are we on this earth? What is our purpose?
At this time there are no absolute answers to these questions, although various religions make assertions from which answers are deduced. But there is no proof that these answers are correct.
The politicians of the Western world also have no answers to these questions. Indeed their attitude is that these are questions of religion or philosophy unconnected with politics. However, if these questions are not answered then there is no basis for constructing a mode of living. Nothing could be said to be right or wrong. There would be no morality.
Nationalists state that, “The purpose of our life is to promote the existence, well-being and development of our nation.” Again this is an assertion without proof but without this belief there would be no nationalists and no nations.
A nationalist government would govern according to the above principle. All decisions then become subordinate to this grand statement.
The supreme task or challenge that the nation faces is not technological, not reaching for the stars, or curing diseases, but it is the solving of the problem of organising the nation so that these tasks can be tackled.
(Indeed the nation that can do this best will be the nation that in Darwinian terms will be the winner. Returning to the analogy of the nation being a large animal and the individuals being part of that animal, the possibility arises that the nation becomes so technically advanced that it is capable of changing the physical form of its members so that the members are no longer homo sapiens but a radically improved man, or 'super' man, and in biological terms a member of a new phylum.)
Return to Links