- Our Society is based on Rationality, It's Time We Insisted that Our Politics is as Well

Revolution implies a very rapid, radical change in polarity of a state's political structure. Since it is a radical change in polarity, the group must, by necessity, be extremist. To support its rapidity and success, force is employed, and perhaps required. Sometimes it is violent and others the mere display of violence through social disobedience and protesting seems to do the trick. 10 - 15% of the population so dedicated to the cause is sufficient, and perhaps necessary, support to sustain such revolution.

On the other hand, even in a democracy, if you double the % of people dedicated to 1/3 rd of the people, 30 - 35%, say, such change may be effected without out-and-out revolution but through patience. The end result is the same, of course, that is, the radical change in polarity of the state's political, and social, structure.

Of course, if a comparable number are equally dedicated to maintaining the old political structure then you have a civil war, in the former case; and, serious political instability as society undergoes the radical social and political upheaval, in the latter case. Who wins out is really a question of survival of the strongest.

This has, of course, been going on since humankind started organizing into groups. Our instincts have developed to equate politically strong with what is right and good. How often have we heard people say "my gut instinct is to vote for this person", or, more usually, "against that person". This begs the question, exactly what instinct they are relying upon to formulate this judgement. Of course, mud slinging and in its extreme form, attack ads, are designed precisely to play upon this. Some may say that this approach - equate politically strong with what is right and good - has served us well, and is the way it ought to be. But, one must keep in mind that this whole approach was developed and is effective in the situation where the law of the jungle dominates, where power flows from the barrel of a gun, so to speak. Where power flows from commerce, information and understanding our surrounding, all derived from knowledge based on rational thought through scientific methods, this 'physical might is right' approach not only has no place but is, obviously, counter-productive, and in fact downright destructive.

However, we, modern, scientifically advanced and dependent, developed, complex, multi-faceted, tolerant, economy based and democratic societies are in a circumstance that has never in the history of mankind been seen, or even close. Our whole way of life depends on rational thought. Our science is based on rational thought. Our economics is based on rational thought. Our educational system is based on rational thought. However, politics is still based on approaching the voter on an emotional level and irrational level - employing the socially dead-end evolutionarily principles of: our camp against your camp; we're right - you're wrong; we're good - you're bad; we're big - you're small, all relying on the basic premise: we're strong - you're week.

It is suggested that the doctrine of laïcité, or secularism (separation of church, or religion, and state) went hand in hand with the modern development of the application of scientific thought with the accompanying of mathematics to our circumstances. It freed politics from basing its decisions and policies on religious considerations and so allowed them to be based on the developing rationalism. Somewhere, somehow, this process has been thwarted and has has not yet taken effect.

Because our life style, standard of living and society as a whole, are based on rationality and diametrically opposite to the emotional, irrationality of the way we select our political leaders and those that govern us, we can only be destined for a radical change in polarity of our social and political structure. The only question is will it be rapid thus leading to revolution or civil war, or, through political instability and reversal of social attitudes. Of course, if we, the people, required that our politics be based on rationality, then our social structure will not only fall in sync but re-enforce each other, rather than, vibrate at odds and shake each other apart.


Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html