We Cenocrats challenge all you would-be Anarchist, Communist, Economicist, Environmentalist, Feminist, Libertarianist, "Sexualist", Socialist, Theologicalist, and other so-called pretender-ists of Social reform such as Capitalist-protectionism. We slap all of you in the face with a glove from a jouster's raiment of depricating insult as was the habit of former age professionalists from which the mêlée arose followed by present day soccer and football... though the former was a typical no holds barred bloody affair. We slap you in the face because you deserve it, and we shall prove it. However, unlike the many methods of intellectual hit and run brigandary so many of you are known for, we call for an International tournament during which you will be called upon to defend the honor of your beliefs. However, in knowing the type of barnyard fowl which you expose yourselves to be, for all your crowing and cock-sureness of prancing about in self-defined territorial boundaries of intellectual excursion, the presence of any real sojournist perceived as a threat, will undoubted show yourself to be just an every-day clucker of the ordinary chopping block kind upon which you will publicly bleed most profusely for all the world to see that the conveyed innocence of your ideas has but the value of ignorance.
Henceforth, let us begin by adding the first rules of the forthcoming tournament as a forewarning they may well be subjected to their own experiences of a literary gantlet, though the word "gauntlet" (or some other-wise spelled derivation) best describes the more widely known form attributed to the history of Native Americans:
But let us now continue with our retinue of declination by stating that all of you are a bunch of liars, a bunch of hypocrites... most of whom engage in little more than segregationist models of intellectual intercourse! All of you are disgusting sychophants of a heritage of true social reformers whose books and pamphlets are hoarded and provided places of distinction because they are cherished like so many adolescent posters, memorabilia, toys and stuffed animals. By being able to discuss a given historical representation of an actual social struggle you imagine yourselves to be cast in the role of some exultant Revolutionist waiting for your cue to come upon the stage of history to play some imagined part of specialized significance... yet, you indulge in so many distractions of social issue minutiae, you miss your calling every single time. All because you're afraid of having your views thrust into the lime-light of a larger public viewing. You cowards! We denounce your claims of expending efforts to blaze a trail into a cornucopious valley of future social well-being.
You are a disgrace to a lineage of social reformers who gave their time, energy and applicably available resources to right social wrongs that, in hindsight, all of humanity should be embarrassed by the practice of such governing injustices. But what has happened to the mindset of Social Reformers? It has fallen victim to the same insensibility that it has fought against for generations, in different times and places. It is you, oh would-be social reformers that now reek of an embarrassment no intellectual garments, trinkets, and perfumes can protect the world from the stench you are spewing from every orifice of your social reformist being.
No one in their right mind would want to join in the individualized consortium of Causes that you represent, because you are afraid to put your theories to the test. All of you live in some self-styled fantasy world with its own variations of antagonists, protagonists, champions, innocents, and various character actors arranged in the settings of different historical references used to create the image of some glorious awakening that exists just over the horizon. All of you have developed into variations of story tellers that have created their own literate akin to Aesop's Fables, Grimm's Fairy Tales, or some Biblical tradition that inter-mixes bits and pieces of misinterpreted history with biased distortions of self-interest. Go on then, tell us your Anarchist, Communist, Economic, Environmental, Feminist, Sexualist, Socialist and Theological tale. Yes! Speak of it by way of a social indulgence using alcohol, caffeine, tobacco, music, or other group-ritual inebriation. Yes, go on... tell us how the future will one day reveal some glorious awakening in human consciousness that will naturally and necessarily incline the nations of the Earth to see the world through your prescient, precocious and precognitive vision.
Let us facetiously make note of how grand a group of visionaries you all make! You've got to be kidding you court jesters of a bygone era. You have become no better than the nonsense so many generations have had to suffer because of the formulas of propaganda different governments have engage in to convince their populations their way is the right way, is the right idea, is the truth of all truth, and that because of human fallibility, there can be no hope for anything better. Yes, this is their lie, and it has become yours as well. But instead of preaching there is nothing better than current governing processes, all of you indulge in letting them have their way... because your tactic is to lick the wounds of the past in which your ideas have had an opportunity to express themselves in some practice, the fashion of the time and those who dictated the usage of such apparel, made a mockery of the greater ideals.
The strategy of protest you engage in is to think that by providing bits and pieces of your views via pamphlets, door to door sales tactics, etc., the presumed ignorant masses will somehow embrace your ideology through some sort of Alchemical process of transmutation akin to osmosis. Oh yes! The truth expressed in your words is all that is necessary for someone to be touched by the magical spirit of transformation to be as enlightened as you are. What a fantastic imagination you all have! Nobody but nobody should be without such a fountain of truth... from whose waters will spring forth a new youthfulness of purpose and direction! Oh what glorious treasure maps are revealed in your books, speeches and other efforts to convince the public that a new day, a new way, a new future awaits... if only we sit back and wait as all of you are doing. We need only emulate your self-satisfied indulgence to do nothing and everything, someday, somehow, will miraculously change for the betterment of humanity.
And while we're waiting, let all of us provide you with donations in order to keep this great, grand struggle alive. We must be supportive so that you are enabled to continue your quest to supply us with different variations of the same old story. The only trouble is, we are no longer entertained by your various marionette displays of individualized intellectual intercourse that makes you and your like-minded brethren engage in social foreplays in anticipation of some eventual orgiastic liberation of body, mind and spirit. You hypocrites! We want you to practice what you preach. Whereas you claim that there is a process of social evolution underway which will eventually bring us all to the doorstep of your belief; that will provide us with an opportunity to make the only real choice for a proper salvation— unlike the falsifications being provided by so many other carpet bagging snake-oil selling social reforming ideologies... yet, how is that We The People might collectively select to accept your prognastications when the public is not practiced in making collective choices for itself? Every time the public wants to make a collective decision, We The People are confronted by a government backed by various businesses and religions, that engage in various types of distractions, delays, and detour methodologies so that they can each, in their own way— exploit the publics of the world by using such ideas like a carrot suspended just out of reach... all the while leading the public along self-serving false trails. How is it possible for the public to choose to adopt your belief when it not only does not have the right to establish their own established laws of their lands by way of a collective discussion and collective vote; but so many national and international institutions have developed supporting social-interactive philosophies which persuade them into accepting the deference to let a few others make their choices for them?
With respect to the ideological notion of social transformation proceeding along an evolutionary path of social development, we can use the 3-step illustration portrayed by the Communists, with respect to their Democracy → leading to a → Socialism → leading to a → Communism, once Democracy reaches a plateau of its own developmental expression; because the idea is an illustrative generality that is appropriated by other ideological considerations as a means of expressing an imagined series of events that will, and therefore must take place... even if the labeling is differentially applied by various sociological development perspectives. In other words, the labels and ideas employed by Communists may not necessarily describe what some flavors of Anarchism, Feminism, Libertarianism, Theology, etc., might want to use in individualized doctrines, but the underlying basic idea of developmental progression is nonetheless adhered to in some relative fashion. Yes, in your espoused way, in your espoused make-shift time scale, according to your beliefs... many of which are half-baked ideas.
As such, using the Communist paradigm as an example: let us all pay homage to the regal presence of your pretentiously grand wizardry in claiming that all will be right... all will eventually be well with the world, once it emerges from the present cacoon of straight-jacketing Democracy that will permit the transformation of the whole of humanity into a Socialism that is but another cocoon layering from which is to dawn the birth of your presumed ideological (Communist) eminence... whose adherents never once considers that it too may be but the end result of a series that proceeds into yet another series of three and from it yet another series of three— as a functional set of a emulated cognitive functionality... but because the human mind remains enraptured (and entrapped) by the thought of flight performed in various childhood dream excursions (many children have dreams of flying that are expressed in the adult-created science fiction fantasies); we think the third in a series is THE ultimate expression of realistic achievement of liberty, freedom, truth... all encapsulated in the notion of some wildlife motility involving flight, swimming, running, or simply walking away from a former existence. And yet, all of it may be related to the environmental impressions of solar activity involving the sequential series of events known as Dawn → preceding → Noon → preceding → Dusk... with its marvelous exposition of twilight, shooting stars, and effulgent Moon and meandering shadows of curiosity inviting intrigue.
Yet, those not versed in deducing the origin of symbolism conveyed in the various concealments of language whose pristine meanings may be lost in time; makes it difficult for them to transgress the parameters of their ideological conventions in order to make comparisons between different subjects in order to appreciated the similarity of basic mental patterns. If some noted figure such as Mark and Engles did not make any such excursion, they might not do so... even if their mind is more astute. Fortunately, Marx and Engle's adopted the intellectual behavior of combining the characteristics of Hegelian dialects (Thesis-Antithesis = Synthesis... derived from Hegel's relationship with the Christian notion of Father- Son- Holy Spirit), and the notion of world-related materials, or "materialism". Hence, there was a rudimentary awakening in their consciousness for inter-relating diverse concepts. For the present context of orienting the reader towards acknowledging a developmental sequence leading to some supposed grander realization, we will restrict the discussion to the Triplicity of the expression as a step-wise tool of measurement, and not digress into a discussion of a duality (or dichotomy) existing in the structure provided by Hegel's three-patterned formula. In fact, the idea that Democracy and Socialism are somehow "bound by blood", though some would think them to be antagonistic to one another (but from which will nonetheless emerge a synthesis in some future [rational] Communistic age), take a look at the following passage:
The view that Democracy and Socialism are inwardly related spread in the decades which preceded the Bolshevist revolution. Many came to believe the Democracy and Socialism meant the same thing, and that Democracy without Socialism or Socialism without Democracy would not be possible.
This notion sprang principally from a combination of two chains of thought, both of which sprang originally from the Hegelian philosophy of history. For Hegel, history is "progress in the consciousness of freedom". Progress takes place in this way: "... the Orientals only new that one is free, the Greek and Roman world that some are free, but we know that all men are free as such, that man is free as man." There is no doubt that the freedom of which Hegel spoke was different from that for which the radical politicians of his day were fighting. Hegel took ideas which were common to the political doctrines of the epoch of enlightenment and intellectualized them. But the radical young Hegelians read into his words what appealed to them. For them it was certain that the evolution to Democracy was a necessity in the Hegelian sense of this term. The historians follow suit. Gervinus sees "by and large in the history of humanity," as "in the internal evolution of the states," "a regular progress... from the spiritual and civil freedom of the single individual to that of the Several and the Many."
Source: Ludwig Von Mises' "Socialism", from the section entitled "Democracy and Social-democracy" (ISBN 0-913966-62-2/ 0-913966-63-0 pbk)
(Note: Quantitatively, the "individual" can be rendered into the numerical value of "1". The "Several"... "Many"... "Some" references, might well be rendered into the value "3" in the perspectives of a few. The aforementioned recital denotes a linguistic variation of the basic development structure in which some ancient cultures progressed; in that in their own linguistic equivalent way, they developed a 3-part counting scheme involving a word for the quantity "1", a word for the quantity "2", and any quantity beyond this was referenced in a term referring to "Many". Hence, the progression of their thought processing involved a 3-step configuration of "One- Two... Many". Hegel's unacknowledged recital of this basic cognitive pattern was expressed in his "Thesis- Antithesis... Synthesis". However, not all variations adopt an "internalized dichotomy/complement" from which emerges a third term representing unification, synthesis, fusion, etc...)
Simply put, as a reference to a history of thought involving the notion of progress, however seen from whatever pedestal of subject matter eventually seduces one's fancy to become a life-long companion or antagonistic pain in the neck/thorn in the side; there is an inclination to adopt a "wait and see" view like some childhood comment when their own incessant "why?" invocation is returned to the them in the form of "when, who, what, where?". Though we may be inclined to agree with your disposition concerning the presence of an assumed natural change described as development, evolution, and progress; we must also point out that your ideas represent stagnation... and the lack of progress noted by a recurrence of the same social problems gives us the suspicion all would-be reformists are contributing to the delay in development because they are stuck in an ideological rut... like so many religions and businesses that practice a philosophy of self-centeredness akin to the old notion of the Sun revolving around the Earth. They become so entrenched in their ideas about some future event... always in the making, and thus keeps them from having their ideas ever put to the test as a presumed valid pinnacle of social development. By keeping Democracy in a primitive state, they think to create a world in their own image by engaging in a particularlized ceremony and ritual of thought as a cultural identity from which will spring the presumed natural emergence of an inner-most essence that is never actually articulated in a testable reality.
As such, can you not tell we have out-grown all your would-be social reformist ideologies? For they are the expressions of a primivity that only a new pragmatic metaphysic can provide succor from. In short, all of you have let us down. You don't want to put your ideas to the test regarding some presumed sociological evolution that must proceed along a given course without deviation, like so many other natural events of developmental cyclicity. You want to help perpetuate the present nonsense so that your ideas don't have to be tested, whereby you remain safe behind the moat and ramparts of your own design. You don't want the drawbridge lowered by demanding that the people have an Actual Democracy, because you don't want to be faced with the possibility that it may evolve in a direction away from your interests. Let's take for example a variation of Communist thought using a child-like fascination with the growth process of a butterfly:
The above illustration is not meant as a disparagement, but as ideological attempt to provide an easier-to-understand picture of what an over-intellectualized vernacular fails to convey to the public. All that is perceived when a person hears the word "Communism", is the visual representation of past atrocities carried out under the banner of Communism. And it doesn't matter whether you and your little group knows that the "real communism" is nothing like what you believe to be is a beautiful and wonderful way of life. Let it be emphasized: MANY IN THE PUBLIC DO NOT SEE ANARCHISM, COMMUNISM, LIBERTARIANISM, SOCIALISM, NOR DEMOCRACY OR THEOLOGY IN THE MANNER YOU ARE TRYING TO CONVEY. Whereas you may claim that there is a natural order to the evolution of social systems, why aren't you providing some sort of time frame? Why aren't you telling the public that its present practices of a phony democracy are a hindrance to the development... and that you can't actually help the public with all your high-faluting intellectualisms (that are nothing more than disguised defense mechanisms); because you won't even help yourself to ensure that the developmental process of an Actual Democracy is first realized.
Again and again one Cenocratic member after another has recognized the violation of your own belief statute for encouraging the realization of your greater ideal by ensuring, nay... insisting, that Democracy attains its fullest developmental expression in order to reach the precipice of its evolutionary period of transition so that the next stage of needed development might be set onto the course instead of being subjected to delays caused by intentional social and economic environments which condition the publics of the world to engage in suspensions of forward development... as if subjected to intermittent occurrences of suspended animation.
Yes, it is you who are engaged in a collective rationale for pressing on the break of development. Instead of pressing on the accelerator to obtain a relative speed by which humanity can be conditioned into the necessary seasonal changes of sociological development that require adaptive cognitive alterations that will better prepare humanity for forthcoming transitions, you find excuses to make persistent stops along the highway of life in order for you to catalogue yet another historical marker to add to your personal scrapbook of adventures because you don't really believe in your destination. It is the journey to some supposed future that you care about, and your presumed place along the chain of events; then that to which you claim all of humanity is immigrating to. It is so because your vision can barely exceed the tips of your fingertips attached at the end point of an extended arm.
You are not trail-blazers because you are too comfortable remaining on the most familiar of ideological paths well-trodden by others whose similar trek feels you with some purposeful confidence of being right; because there is safety in numbers and the promise of a potential meal, companionship and shelter while in the presence of others who feel as you do. It is a community, a would-be Walden's Pond that is more in line with a retreat from society to find some personalized sanctuary, than to promote the necessity of laying seeds for a future that will be made more whole by one's efforts, as did John Chapman (Johnny Appleseed) and his apple tree planting ventures.
(A) small pond (about 64 acres [26 hectares]) in Concord town (township), Middlesex county, eastern Massachusetts, U.S. It lies just south of the village of Concord in Walden Pond State Reservation (304 acres [123 hectares]). The pond was immortalized by Henry David Thoreau, who retreated there (1845–47) from society prior to writing Walden; or, Life in the Woods. In “Where I Lived, and What I Lived For,” the second chapter of the book, Thoreau wrote:
The spot by the north shore on which Thoreau's cabin stood is marked with a cairn and nine stone posts indicating the walls of the cabin. Travelers to the site, including Walt Whitman, paid homage to Thoreau by laying stones on the cairn.
Source: "Walden Pond." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.
byname Johnny Appleseed
born September 26, 1774, Leominster, Massachusetts- died March 18?, 1845, near Fort Wayne, Indiana, U.S.
(John Chapman was a) missionary nurseryman of the North American frontier who helped prepare the way for 19th-century pioneers by supplying apple-tree nursery stock throughout the Middle West.
Although the legendary character of “Johnny Appleseed” is known chiefly through fiction, John Chapman was a genuine and dedicated professional nurseryman who expected to make a profit from the sale of his seedlings. Around 1800 he started collecting apple seeds from cider presses in western Pennsylvania and soon began his long trek westward, planting a series of apple nurseries from the Alleghenies to central Ohio and beyond. He sold or gave away thousands of seedlings to pioneers, whose acres of productive apple orchards became a living memorial to Chapman's missionary zeal.
A variety of distinctive characteristics combined to create the “Johnny Appleseed” myth of the primitive natural man: his cheerful, generous nature, his affinity for the wilderness, his gentleness with animals, his devotion to the Bible, his knowledge of medicinal herbs, his harmony with the Native Americans, and above all his eccentric appearance—flowing hair under an inverted mush pan, bare feet, ragged trousers, and an old coffee sack over his shoulders with holes cut out for arms.
John Chapman, owner of 1,200 acres of planted land, died from exposure in 1845, but the legend of “Johnny Appleseed” lives on in numerous literary works.
An authentic biography is Robert Price, Johnny Appleseed: Man and Myth (1954, reissued 1967).
Source: "Chapman, John." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.
No, we won't tell anyone to look to closely at all you would-be social reformers whose lives imitate, in some fashion either/or the upper class born Thoreau of Walden's Pond or the eccentric-inclined Johnny Appleseed. While the preceding notation of Walden's pond gave a hint of Thoreau, a more detail appraisal may be of value to some readers, because of its interest in the history of sociological concerns:
Henry David Thoreau
born July 12, 1817, Concord, Massachusetts, U.S.- died May 6, 1862, Concord
American essayist, poet, and practical philosopher, renowned for having lived the doctrines of Transcendentalism as recorded in his masterwork, Walden (1854), and for having been a vigorous advocate of civil liberties, as evidenced in the essay “Civil Disobedience” (1849).
Move to Walden Pond
Back in Concord Thoreau rejoined his family's business, making pencils and grinding graphite. By early 1845 he felt more restless than ever, until he decided to take up an idea of a Harvard classmate who had once built a waterside hut in which one could loaf or read. In the spring Thoreau picked a spot by Walden Pond, a small glacial lake located 2 miles (3 km) south of Concord on land Emerson owned.
Early in the spring of 1845, Thoreau, then 27 years old, began to chop down tall pines with which to build the foundations of his home on the shores of Walden Pond. From the outset the move gave him profound satisfaction. Once settled, he restricted his diet for the most part to the fruit and vegetables he found growing wild and the beans he planted. When not busy weeding his bean rows and trying to protect them from hungry woodchucks or occupied with fishing, swimming, or rowing, he spent long hours observing and recording the local flora and fauna, reading, and writing A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers (1849). He also made entries in his journals, which he later polished and included in Walden. Much time, too, was spent in meditation.
Out of such activity and thought came Walden, a series of 18 essays describing Thoreau's experiment in basic living and his effort to set his time free for leisure. Several of the essays provide his original perspective on the meaning of work and leisure and describe his experiment in living as simply and self-sufficiently as possible, while in others Thoreau describes the various realities of life at Walden Pond: his intimacy with the small animals he came in contact with; the sounds, smells, and look of woods and water at various seasons; the music of wind in telegraph wires—in short, the felicities of learning how to fulfill his desire to live as simply and self-sufficiently as possible. The physical act of living day by day at Walden Pond is what gives the book authority, while Thoreau's command of a clear, straightforward but elegant style helped raise it to the level of a literary classic.
Thoreau stayed for two years at Walden Pond (1845–47). In the summer of 1847 Emerson invited him to stay with his wife and children again, while Emerson himself went to Europe. Thoreau accepted, and in September 1847 he left his cabin forever.
Midway in his Walden sojourn Thoreau had spent a night in jail. On an evening in July 1846 he encountered Sam Staples, the constable and tax gatherer. Staples asked him amiably to pay his poll tax, which Thoreau had omitted paying for several years. He declined, and Staples locked him up. The next morning a still-unidentified lady, perhaps his aunt, Maria, paid the tax. Thoreau reluctantly emerged, did an errand, and then went huckleberrying. A single night, he decided, was enough to make his point that he could not support a government that endorsed slavery and waged an imperialist war against Mexico. His defense of the private, individual conscience against the expediency of the majority found expression in his most famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” which was first published in May 1849 under the title “Resistance to Civil Government.” The essay received little attention until the 20th century, when it found an eager audience. To many, its message still sounds timely: there is a higher law than the civil one, and the higher law must be followed even if a penalty ensues. So does its consequence: “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.”
Source: "Thoreau, Henry David." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.
A prison indeed. For this is what all of you would-be social reformers have subjected the whole of humanity to for refusing to free them by insisting that a Full Democracy be practiced in order that the succession of developmental stages may proceed in due course and not be prematurely thrust into a jar of constraints to be held up by the amusements of those in a Capitalistic-Democracy relationship who claim an ownership of the public that did not have a practiced means of voicing an opinion one way or another. Yes! tell the pigeon brought up in a pen that it is free by opening its cage so that by trained habituations it has learned not but to return and be forced to the subjugations of a master whose control of resources also determines the availability due to the environments it has artificially contrived. Yes! tell the whipped dog to run away... and yet out of habit it too stays connected to a binding system of welfare necessitated because all resources are controlled by a few who wield them like an apple, lump of sugar and carrot tied to the end of a string dangled from a pole pointed in the direction of an insatiable greed of a few. Yes! let an inter-generational dependency be cast off when the whole of society has been architectured around its blue-print that serves the need of the people only in as much as it serves the purpose for a few to have greater control in order to obtain an ever greater profit so that a piece-meal system of social subsistence can be aligned with various rationalizations to protect a one-sided operational imperative that persists in keeping the whole of the public in an unrealized social program of State servitude so that a very few can prosper the more from.
When it is difficult for the good Capitalists to prosper amongst an overwhelming culture of bad ones, Capitalism becomes the unwarranted victim of overall ridicule based on an inclination for people to blame an object instead of directing their wrath at individuals that would need to be named and thus set themselves up for slander or defamation lawsuits; all because Capitalism has been taught to beg, bark, growl, fetch, play dead or be the fall guy; as is needed by those who use any tactic they can to make another dollar... sanctioned by a government whose interest is less directed towards the people than it is those whom it wants to prosper alongside with.
And yet, there is yet another dimension that you would-be social reformers are not taking into enough of an appreciation; thus adding to the precipitous affair which you are participating in. This one arises as a misunderstanding with regards to a necessary part of the equation in your so-called efforts to educate, or let us more accurately say "re-educate" the masses with respect to a plight millions are already aware of, but you have not shown the leadership which expresses their collectively personalized psychology of socialization with the degree of empathy a true leader would have. Whereas it is well understood by the public it may collectively engage in the illegal activities of riot, rebellion, and revolution; they are not provided with a legal means of collectively righting acknowledged wrongs. People would rather suffer and bear their own individualized crosses, they they may grumble in silence or small intimate groups about one or another injustice; than break laws whose respect for is closely aligned with a personal characterization of their own honesty. It is only under very dire conditions that such a restraint becomes untenable.
The people need all you would-be social reformers to step forward, cast aside your differences, marching with the same banner message of establishing a New Government; by joining in the common cause to establish an Actual Democracy— the right to choose one's destiny and take their rightful place at the table of a checks -and- balances Constitutionally designated provision; so that the evolutionary development of social governing standards can proceed, unimpeded, to its ultimate destination, whatever it may be... because by right, by law, we will all have collectively chosen it.