Cenocracy: A Declaration for Greater Independence
Cenocratic Anti-trust Commentary
(We can't trust them)


The adopted practice of a (Cenocratic) Peoples Legislative Branch is a means by which the people can address the anti-trust monopolization of legislating laws currently in use the world over in many different forms of Communism, Democracy and Socialism. Necessarily so, at one time or another, it will come to grips with a given country's economics, whatever theoretical approach is pursued. What follows is a viewpoint example that may or may not be included in a later discussion.

As a Sociological theory put into practice it is inevitable that we will be addressing the fundamental design of the Democratic capitalistic structure and its auxiliary designs found in Communism and Socialism. Present economic theories exhibit an inclination towards a magical-mystic reality derived in part from antiquated reliances on superstitions conjectured by the embodied "forces" tribute such as "market forces" and "economic forces"; even when more colloquial bartering terms are employed. In other words, when governments apply one or another economic theory to social policies, particularly in an effort to forestall a possible problem lurking on the horizon or when attempting to re-ignite a sluggish economy, they characteristically use a "wishful thinking" wait and see approach.

It is an approach which many of us used in childhood and frequently identified by the phrase "just wait, you'll see". Unfortunately, we can not rely on such contrivances based on sentimentalized childhood logic... not to mention the fact that most people are not cognizant of the fact that we adults do so. We can not rely on such perspectives to ensure economic stability which are supported into the illusory and myth created status of a phenomenal factuality, by making us dependent on a philosophical premise... which is another noumenon... characterized by a sublimated acquiescence to an anthropomorphicized ethereal notion that competition in the market place will ensure unpartisan equity by way-laying disproportionalities wherever they may arise.

And while some readers will react to the foregoing as being philosophical gobbledegook, perhaps an exercise in Danteism (the usage of a colloquial vernacular, or everyday/commonplace language) will be more to their liking with an as-yet truncated illustration of how Governing structures are economically aligned with the three generalized social classes:

  • Upper Class = Capitalistic Democracy (Plutocratic Democracy)

  • Middle Class = Capitalistic Socialism (Democratic Socialism)

  • Lower Class = Capitalistic Communism (Democratic Communism)

The Lower Class Communism reference is easily identified by utilizing the traditional reference of "Communism" as it was linked with small groups, 'communes' or communal settings. Such small groups are seen in family units, though the unit may not necessarily consist of a father, mother and one or more children. Its typical experiences of wages is low pay and raises can be symbolically characterized by a cent (¢) sign. Its usage is encouraged and subsidized by governments through a social benefits program sometimes referred to as welfare, national health-care, unemployment insurance, etc... The Lower Class Communism can be associated with the economic philosophy of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

The Upper Class Capitalism reference might well be best identified with Adam Smiths' Economic perspective of free trade and competition known also as "laissez-faire", in which the rich are in a position to take best advantage of and uses a socially engulfing (but largely unseen) monopolization which renders a lop-sided one-way door system that is "lousy and unfair" to most people. The Upper Class Capitalism structure can be symbolically represented by three dollar signs ($$$).

The Middle Class Socialism, even though Socialism is sometimes characterized as a less developed social form than Communism, variably experiences both Upper and Lower class realities and can be symbolically represented by a dollar and cent sign ($¢). This social class might well be viewed as embodying a trial and error usage of multiple economic theories.

If you have something another needs, you can ask for whatever you want in exchange, be it money, sex, servitude, loyalty, patriotism, knowledge, criminality, war mongering, conflict instigation, bomb making skills, journalistic skills for propaganda, etc. However, if one or many others have the same or similar item, they might ask less and therefore supply the person, at an affordable cost, with what they demand (in this instance "need", and not just want). The suppliers are referred to as the "Market", (which is a term derived from antiquity), though they are also types of government in that they govern social behavior by their activities.

Let it be spelled out: Economic Theories are also Social Governing theories... in other words, they are governing bodies, or forms of government... Just like religions and businesses express their own forms of government. Likewise, households, classrooms and one's personalized morality are all forms of social governance. In a classroom, for example, it is not a Democratic form of government by which an instructor teaches a class. A teaching institution dictates what is to be taught, and an instructor dictates to students what is to be known in order to receive a passing grade. The U.S. college system of instruction typically is by way of the lecture method. At present, in many subject areas, this formula has provided the most economically sound means of transferring knowledge from a select few (instructors), to the larger populace ("many" students).

But the reverse also is true: Social Governing Theories are Economic Theories... The recurring economic problems are a reflection of the inherent problems with the formula of social governance being used. Solving economic problems so that a recurrence of recessions, depressions, up/down-turns, fluctuation, or however so named, can be addressed by altering the type of government we have... particularly if it involves a larger, self-reflective social mindset— and the old mindsets are not permitted to express their perspectives for maintaining "things as they are" to suit ulterior motives that have become traditionalized into a fixed rationale of political philosophy that serve as blinders for a draught animal being led about by various illusive vegetables called justice, liberty, and equality; as if they are some obtainable fruits whose presence can only be sustained with continued great effort. And yet, they are never to be fully appreciated by being totally consumed... only the illusion of consumption is permitted by way of various capitalistic strategies of inequality. Be such strategies called Communism, Democracy, or Socialism... though one might include the many personalized philosophies of business and religion— since all of them are focused on some potential reward to be achieved.

Indeed, present business, government and religious systems of governance breeds ignorance amongst the people. Yet such a comment is an echo of past struggles spoken of by those oppressed, suppressed and otherwise subjugated to that which acts as a foreign occupation operating under various guises and slogans aimed at seducing a given population to rules, regulations, processes and procedures which unequally dispossess the many for a select few whose avarice is not limited to a traditionalized hoarding of money... since the definition of personal wealth has many vagaries. Centuries of protesting, pleading and prayers, to take a "3 P's" comment from the words of Tiklak during the rise of Nationalism in India; has often required the usage of force, either overtly, introvertly or covertly applied. While the passive resistance of Ghandi was effective enough to assist in the purging of India from British rule so that the Indian peoples could acquire a greater semblance of Self- Representation to combat many inequalities... such a manner of single-minded rule once again relied on the usage of unwarranted taxation. For example, on Salt, as it had done on America in terms of a Stamp and Tea Act which preceded a Declaration For Independence... different forms of imposition are used by those in Authority today in their attempts to avoid being analogously caricatured with historical precedents which are metaphorically described as adding fuel to the fires of protest which would benefit the people in their assertions.

Yet, it is difficult for some to see that the present forms of Democracy are mere modernized formulas of old British, French, Spanish and other Monarchial rule-by-occupation programs that the peoples throughout the world must Declare a Greater Independence from in terms of a Cenocracy (New Government). While the peoples of differing nations will come to define their own improved Constitutions and Bills of Rights, their individualized struggles are no less an International struggle for a Cenocracy. While a Direct Rule type of Democracy has been practiced on a small scale such as in Switzerland, it has not been attempted on the scale of a large Nation or a concerted International level.

The adoption of a Cenocracy will dramatically alter the economic landscape because it will be designed by the public whose voice will force compliance to the implementation of a greater equality based on anti-trust (anti-hoarding) laws with a more definitive and wide-spread application. The present laws are extremely insufficient and superficial. Newer laws to be adopted will surely foment the occasions of conflict against those who feel it is their right to keep the greater portion of what they make as a reward for their effort. While this is not denied, neither shall such a reward be denied to the public who deserves to have their largesse reinvested into their well-being. The meaning of Equality must take on a greater standard. In order for those of a given civilization to prosper equally, the limitation of funds to be derived from a limitation of resources demands that resources and rewards be recycled... that is, reinvested. The present valuation of one's personal property, when the gain is detrimental to the whole, can not be permitted. By a single person, by a few, or by the many, anti-trust/hoarding laws must become more expansive.

If a single person has a monopoly, or if a few, or if the many... anti-trust/hoarding laws must enforce equality for the whole populace. However, those accumulations which do not effect the whole of the populace, are to be excluded. For example, a rare stamp collection can remain the ownership of an individual who may or may not wish to share the collection in terms of display. Yet, to claim that money or land is to be interpreted as a rarity and therefore is to be excluded from an anti-trust/hoarding law against accumulation, are items that can be clearly seen as commodities which can sorely affect the well-being of a public. Hoarding of a commodity which denies the public an accountable equality can only be permitted if its accumulation is of need to increase the occasion of greater equality. For example, a certain accumulation of cash-on/in-hand is needed for establishing an enterprise on behalf of the public to secure more employment, a cleaner water supply, alternative energy, etc... Such accumulations can be permitted so long as the intent is made public, and specific, observable goals are set that can be monitored by the public. Attempts by one or more others to undermine the goal can be viewed as subversiveness to the public's equality.

Because the presence of a growing population will require the adoption of a Cenocracy, those with the traditional mindset that is colloquially referred to as "greed" may well attempt to enforce a reduction of the population through war, disease, or some "accident", so that present forms of socio-economic governance remain in tact. Monarchial and dictatorial mindsets are quite evident and expressed in microcosmic ways... sometimes called "control freaks", who use various modes of social expression to manipulate others to do their bidding.

If a population remains small, an abundance of resources does not require the usage of a bartering and exchange form of economy. As a population grows and resources become more scarce, and particular items become more valued, whether the value is real or imagined; an accepted form of bartering and exchange economy is needed... unless someone like a King, Queen, Dictator, President, Congress, Business Executive, Business Industry or Religious leader attempts to hoard one or more resources... which include ideas... so that the desirous public is forced to render some type and level of payment in order to receive a portion thereof. One's "personal wealth" is viewed in proportion to one's accumulation of goods or services desired or needed by one or more others willing to provide another good or service in exchange. One's "personal wealth" is an expression of one's ego, or the definition applied to the worth of one's "self". Accumulations, whatever they may actually or imaginatively be, and how one or more others may view them, positively, or negatively, may be used as a means of measuring one's worth.

Anti-trust (or anti-hoarding) laws are meant to increase the worth of the public "self" by increasing equality and decreasing accumulation by any one person or entity. But some measures of accumulation are needed when a specific item is being sought after having a particular cost. However, the accumulation is directed towards a goal, or as a potential pretentative measure against some unexpected and undesired event and denoted as a "rainy day fund". Larger accumulations are possible by a larger population if the accumulations are made imaginative, yet the unreal can become real. For example, one can accumulate a large "portion" of money that is rendered into numerical symbols on a bank ledger. Whereas the money is not real, but can be changed into a real entity. This way, a bank not need to keep large reserves of cash on-hand. If all the banks kept the total revenue of all depositors in their bank vault, there might not be any money in circulation. Hence, the present economic strategy is one which uses a type of circulation that is as antiquated as the old idea that the Earth was the center around which the other planets revolved.

The usage of the word "portion" is made possible only because it is compared to a limited source. It is difficult to have a "portion" of an unlimited source. For example, to say that the Milky Way Galaxy or for that matter, the Earth, occupies a portion of the Universe... is to say that the Universe is finite. How is it that a limitation is a portion, a segment or a sliver of that which is unlimited? To attempt the distinction of a particular in that which is unparticularlized may be little more than that which we describe as human ego. An effect of biology which often creates misinterpretation... like the human inhabited Earth once referred to as the center around which other planets revolved, or that which created those conditions which forced map makers of old to place a certain kingdom in the center, and the rest of the known world external and inferior to it. Another example is to identify the usage of an artificial system of coordinates in order to establish one's "self" in relation there to. In this instance, the "vast" ocean, though limited, seemed unlimited and unending to early explorers who had poor or no means of recognizing their position. If the ocean had truly been unlimited, a means of referencing one's "self" might have been made by time and distance measured in conjunction with a usage of provisions, such as food and water... if not liquor and patience.

The circulation of money as well as goods and services is needed in a fixed economy. In other words, there must be rotation in a fixed planetary system if it is going to continue to live. The Earth as we know it will expire if its rotation stops. Likewise, a society will expire if its finite economy stops "circle-ating". If the Earth gets too much or too little sunlight or oxygen, life as we know it may well perish. There must be a mechanism which moderates an over-accumulation. Hence, this moderation is called the establishment of "Equality". Trouble in the cyclic nature of an economy occurs when an over-accumulation takes place and that accumulation is not used to increase the strength of a measured Equality. And again, it should be stated that an increasing population is an accumulation that must be addressed by greater circumstance of equality. It is major force for establishing a gyroscopic moderation towards preventing a destabalized circulation. A greater equality can be gained by the usage of adopting a social governing formula for increasing the value of the public's "self", through a self-representative Cenocratic model of governance... that some might refer to as the Cenocratic Economic Theory.

Whereas some may see a government run by the people not as an expression of an increased (moderating) equality but as a factor of over-accumulation, this is because they are seeking to particularize in that which should not be particularlized... but often is when compared to other nations. Their identity of "self" is to particularize a distinction from the whole and not with the whole; such as a person as belonging to a particular nation, race or religion and not as a species. An increasing population necessitates the adoption of a social governance formula which increases everyone's value but does not marginalize commonality into a label of mediocrity to be valued less and should therefore have less value, or less equality. A greater level of practiced equality does not minimize the value of expressed individuality, it increases its uniqueness by producing higher levels of competition that one must exceed to overcome observed standards of commonness. For example, whereas the assumed uniqueness of value ascribed to Congressional Representatives will be viewed as a commonness by the increased value of Representative equality given to the public... and will therefore necessitate the development of a greater level of vicarious Representation or obviate the disusage of such a distinctiveness developed by way of the current Democratic governing formula. In more general terms, the usage of a Representative form of government now being practiced will either no longer be needed, or the alteration with a Cenocracy will cause the value of such a Representative model to greatly exceed present standards because of the competition it receives from the adopted Cenocratic form of public self-representation.

A Cenocratic formula of social self-governance raises the threshold of competence required by those seeking to occupy the old Democratic government positions. Like competition in the market place, where innovation can be sparked into developing a Revolutionary standard, Cenocracy's model of equality is the realization of a new unforeseen talent... like a new kid on the block whose skills and talents exceed those who thought they had no one to compete with... and thereby set the level by which equality and exception were to be measured, now have a challenge to improve the quality of equality or submit themselves to a new level of established mediocrity. The present governing systems of the world do not like being subjected to competition with a new governing system whose winnings are shared equally amongst everyone. They prefer to persist in varying models which help to establish perpetuate distinction measured by an old system of separate levels of equality. Those who receive an equal share can easily distinguish where that share actually comes from. They need not distinguish some presumed equality based on falsely measured valuations of worthiness.

Cenocracy is a very real form of competition to Communism, to Democracy, to Socialism, and other forms of social governance found in business and religious philosophy. Cenocracy professes a path of truer economic equality than do present Business, Government and Religion. All businesses, governments and religions are varying forms of economic systems. All of these economic systems do not like competition. With respect to the United States' model of Democracy, it does practice a form of equality that is internally competitive... though models external to it may claim some level of superiority or equanimity to it. Specifically, while the role of elected Representatives is to profess an observance of equality, they do not practice it, or the people would have a legitimate form of self-Representation... as a type of check-and-balance provision against a one-sided model of governance giving itself the sole means of determining the course by which a public must steer its rudder. It is a rather interchangeably specious, quixotic and at times, pixilated wind.

America's system of governance is a false democracy, just as others' around the world are, and use this commonality of practice as a justification for continued propriety because its adherents think there is none better... at least none that serves them in their immediate interests as well as that which they have come to master... to some survival advantage. It is rather hypocritical to claim to support equality and then to practice a scant similitude thereof... otherwise the people would have a more equitable economic's system which enforces the peoples' right to have equal pay (both minimal and maximal wages), equal say (Cenocratic Referendum process),and equal right -of- way to legislate laws (Peoples Legislative Branch).

But if all the suppliers collaborate by offering the same item at the same price, (in other words they monopolize the situation), the idealistic "competition in the marketplace" is therefore a (philosophical) presumption that is untenable. In other words, it's a lie or it doesn't work. Because the person (or an entire society) can not trust the suppliers to harbor an unselfish concern for the welfare of others (called altruism), whereby they, out of the goodness of their hearts will keep prices low and the quality of the product(s) high; a government may develop what is called an anti-trust law so as to prevent a monopolization of goods and/or services which cause prices to rise and the quality of goods to be reduced. In effect, the government acts as a parental figure intervening on behalf of the most vulnerable child being picked on by other siblings. And while many readers easily understand this metaphor, it overlooks different governments as different theories of Economics.

But, even this well-intended effort on part of the government overlooks the fact that it, traditionally, has exercised its own form of monopoly. Its act of monopolization comes by way of legislating laws through a selected few instead of everyone being able to participate through a process of referendum. And to justify its own theoretical "Representative Model: of governance, it too engages in myth and illusion making, such as for example: by claiming itself to be a government Of, By and For (all) the people (and it deliberately leaves out the word "All" or it would create the incentive for a Peoples Revolution).

As such, companies that want to raise prices need only to get more and more of the "market" involved in the same scheme to raise prices... because there are no anti-trust laws which prevent the entire market place from collaborating in a monopoly. And because the government itself practices a monopoly, its membership can easily be swayed (by campaign contributions, jobs for siblings or friends, etc.), by way of a simple activity called lobbyism. Lobbyists are very effective or there wouldn't be any. Lobbyists are just another type of business product that Legislators "buy into" because the products represent a source for something Legislators think they need, or at least want.

In attempts to address the monopolization of Medical and Dental services in the U.S, the U.S. government under President Obama instituted a National Health Care provision; that has been called "Obamacare" as a personal disparagement against him and thus rejected... and might well be rescinded by later legislation. By adopting a National Health Care law, the monopolization of Medical and Dental services can be addressed in order to make health care affordable to everyone. In essence, it attacks the monopolization, which also includes the Insurance Industry and Legislators whose election campaigns are funded by such organizations; by way of a zig-zag assault approach, sometimes used in military tactics. While the usage of a National Health Care law to put a check-mate move on the greed of Medical, Dental and Insurance Industries is admirable, its approach at doing so is lamentable.

  • It is very foolish to think that the public during a period of economic troubles is in a state of vulnerability and will readily respond to being forcibly spoon-fed something... even if it is thought to be for their own good. Viewing the public as a sick child laying in bed is a false assumption when it is actually in pain and wants something it can focus its anger on for the discomfort.

  • A people more conscious of the need for their role in determining laws by which they must live, must be made aware of the provisional legislation and have the ability to negate any measure when it is found to have an exploitable loophole.

  • The social troubles of a population do not necessarily create a numbing effect from which follows a contrite subservience of body and mind. Such experiences can frequently spark a heightened vigilance that may be accompanied by a heightened awareness requiring an equally heightened approach when interacting with the public.

Hence, if a proposed plan for a law is to be introduced which produces a social battlefield where the public is caught in the middle between the government and those industries, groups or corporations wielding large sums of money, resources and influence, the people may well choose what they perceive to be the lesser of two evils.

In such a case, because the public expects their government to exhibit a higher ideal that they themselves want to believe is a reflection of the core of their very own being; and yet this vision of themselves is not being realized.. and in fact they see their government exhibiting the disheartening vagaries of human behavior witnessed in others, if not themselves, they will choose the side which is against the government because they at least portray some semblance of honesty about being unscrupulous and they know where they stand in relation thereto. And though they will be disappointed in themselves for doing so, it is less than the disrespect they feel for having believed in a falsehood.

It is because such a falsehood exists that the public must be asked to decide their own fate by way of a Cenocracy, a New Government that has an established National (if not International) Cenocratic Political Party, a Constitutionally-binding National (if not International) Referendum, and a Federal (Parliamentary, etc.) as well as local Peoples Legislative Branches; which decides the full breadth, width and length of the law.

Updated Revision: Friday, November 28, 2014 8:37 AM
Updated posting: Monday, December 22, 2014