It takes a nation to protect the nation
Or the cycle from poor & virtuous to rich & corrupt/decadent. I've often thought that the 7-stages of governmental development & collapse are similar to 4 stage of familial progression.The governmental cycle is called anacyclosis, and was first formulated by Polybius.
The political doctrine of anacyclosis (or anakyklosis from Greek: ἀνακύκλωσις) is a cyclical theory of political evolution. The theory of anacyclosis is based upon the Greek typology of constitutional forms of rule by the one, the few, and the many. Anacyclosis states that three basic forms of "benign" government (monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy) are inherently weak and unstable, tending to degenerate rapidly into the three basic forms of "malignant" government (tyranny, oligarchy, and ochlocracy). According to the doctrine, "benign" governments have the interests of all at heart, whereas "malignant" governments have the interests of a select few at heart. However, all six are considered unworkable because the first three rapidly transform into the latter three due to political corruption. The idea of anacyclosis influenced theorists of republicanism. Some of them, including Aristotle, Cicero, Machiavelli, Vico and Kant suggested that mixed government might help to stabilize republics and prevent permanent anacyclosis. Contents Polybius' sequence Edit Learn more This section does not cite any sources. Polybius' sequence of anacyclosis proceeds in the following order:
According to Polybius' elaboration of the theory, the state begins in a form of primitive monarchy. The state will emerge from monarchy under the leadership of an influential and wise king; this represents the emergence of "kingship". Political power will pass by hereditary succession to the children of the king, who will abuse their authority for their own gain; this represents the degeneration of kingship into "tyranny". Some of the more influential and powerful men of the state will grow weary of the abuses of tyrants, and will overthrow them; this represents the ascendancy of "aristocracy" (as well as the end of the "rule by the one" and the beginning of the "rule by the few"). Just as the descendants of kings, however, political influence will pass to the descendants of the aristocrats, and these descendants will begin to abuse their power and influence, as the tyrants before them; this represents the decline of aristocracy and the beginning of "oligarchy". As Polybius explains, the people will by this stage in the political evolution of the state decide to take political matters into their own hands. This point of the cycle sees the emergence of "democracy", as well as the beginning of "rule by the many". In the same way that the descendants of kings and aristocrats abused their political status, so too will the descendants of democrats. Accordingly, democracy degenerates into "ochlocracy", literally, "mob-rule". In an ochlocracy, according to Polybius, the people of the state will become corrupted, and will develop a sense of entitlement and will be conditioned to accept the pandering of demagogues. Eventually, the state will be engulfed in chaos, and the competing claims of demagogues will culminate in a single (sometimes virtuous) demagogue claiming absolute power, bringing the state full-circle back to monarchy. Origin Edit This theory was developed in stages by the ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle, but is mainly attributable to the ancient Greek historian Polybius. Polybius' explanation of anacyclosis is found in Book VI of The Histories.
But I think it's more like 4 generations, so it should be:
And back to (1), the great great grandson/great great granddaughter lives in poverty
There is actually a website and society for Anacyclosis. This is their revised summary.
ANACYCLOSIS: ONE WORD TO RULE THEM ALL
The history of most states is confined to the events described above this line. Most states in history have not advanced below this line because most states have not developed an independent middle class.
Democracy is historically rare and when it emerges, it comes in waves, as was seen in Classical Antiquity and in the modern West. Once democracy is entrenched in an autonomous state, the cycle will run its full course.
And to think that Rome survived as a State for over 700 years, in many different permutations.
Government by the masses; mob rule.
1. Political control by a mob.
2. The mass of common people as the source of political control.
1. A large and often disorderly crowd.
2. The mass of common people; the populace.
(Rule by referendum with enforced compliance)?
I guess the difference between a king and a monarch is that a king can win his position or be appointed while a monarch usually inherits power.
People like to think that they are apart from nature and determine their own destiny while these cycles of power are natural and unavoidable.
"[Democracy] can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury
Alexander Fraser Tytler.
"Or at best, he will employ himself in advancing the public good, as the means of individual distinction and elevation: he will promote the interest of the state from the selfish but most useful passion of making himself considerable in that establishment which he labors to aggrandize. Such is the true picture of man as a political agent"
(Norwegian politicians are more concerned about their international reputation than in the wellbeing of the ordinary norwegian. Blair and Cameron were examples of this in Britain. Self-interest).
"Patriotism always exists in the greatest degree in rude nations, and in an early period of society. Like all other affections and passions, it operates with the greatest force where it meets with the greatest difficulties ... but in a state of ease and safety, as if wanting its appropriate nourishment, it languishes and decays".
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy".
(I think we are at the stage of "loose fiscal policy". I think the dictatorship following the collapse is our best chance to get back to healthy patriotism).
There will be blood.
Tribalism is the only system that works, without a real common identity no society or nation can function.
I'm having 2nd thoughts about a lot of my original beliefs now.
I now see democracy as an unproven theory - well, you can't get proofs in political science, but nobody has even attempted a proof. And experimentally, it's got a poor record as well.
Prepare to be shocked, but I'm now beginning to think that the only thing that can survive is autocratic Islam or autocratic Communism (in the Chinese model).
Both of these have the idea that they are the best system so are fully justified in wiping out any competitors. It's no good just being autocratic like an African dictator, you need to have some kind of "higher basis" to appeal to for justification.
For Islam, the higher basis is that the 'constitutional model' was dictated by Allah, then Mohammed, then all the companions and rightful descendents.
Communism justifies itself because it (theoretically) takes the Capital assets of the society from the elite, and controls them to distribute the benefits society wide.
I'm exhausted with the spineless and flaccid behaviour of 'pure democracy', i.e. democracy shorn of any cultural or Nationalist or ethnic heritage. The reality is that our democracy was only strong, and only survived, because it was partnered with strong cultural values, a strong National identity, and a common ethnic identity.
People have been totally deluded about how we got here, thinking that its all about our democracy and freedom, and nothing else. Of course, everyone loves a simplistic, idealistic model, so what do we expect?
As we see in Turkey, in a democracy with a muslim majority, conservative Islam will always win out and eventually abolish democracy. Turkey is now an islamic state run by a muslim dictator. No way back from that, he dreams of a new ottoman empire.
Even a one-celled organism has a protective wall to keep it together.
Given the opportunity I moved in 1972 to Norway in order to get away from the mass-immigration and destruction of my Nation.
It was lovely, white faces everywhere and a strong national identity. All of that is gone now and Norway is the same as most of Europe, self-destructing. All we can do is isolate ourselves in a safe place, but we can never give up. Stay true to what we are and given a chance fight back. Right now we have only words and must use them.
Democracy overgrowing itself decided that it did not need a protective wall against deadly virus. If you cannot recognise an enemy or danger then you die.