Cenocracy: A Declaration for Greater Independence
Rewriting the Communist Manifesto


It is of need to rewrite the Communist Manifesto since its present form is being used by those whose otherwise noble intentions are being kept at a distance from being able to achieve their more fullest potentialities. The language and ideas expressed in the currently viewed manifesto created by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and those with whom the two corresponded but are not given historical credit for their part, however small they originally played in their assistance in providing the cultural ambiance and social atmosphere in which the document came to be written. All too often historians do not lend due credit to those and that which played a part in the inspiration of an event which comes to having expressed dimensions of applications far beyond the initial boundaries of inception.

Nonetheless, and notwithstanding the importance the Communist Manifesto has played in the lives of tens of millions and continues to invoke the admiration of adherents in different ways of life... its currency of value is substantially diminished by the fact that its present formulation is so very often misconstrued and misused. Communism, and its counter-part alter ego known as Socialism, have been abused by the those who harbored ulterior-motivations for exercising dictatorial forms of authoritarianism, thus obscuring the purity of their most basic message as a model of socialization to benefit all of humanity. By using destruction and death to impose adulterated social reforms under the guise of social reconstruction to assist in the holistic well-being of a given populace; external impressions are rightly perceived for defining Communism and Socialism as social ideologies antagonistic to the civil decency of basic human rights.

However, this is not the fault of Communism nor Socialism, just as we can not blame the colonial and imperialistic inclinations who force their views on others under the guise of some purported Democratic agenda. The basic, underlying character of beliefs expressed in the ideas of Communism, Democracy, and Socialism are not to be blamed for the many atrocities carried out in their name by those who use a Nation's resources to carry out nefarious deeds. The three beliefs are but tools. It is unfortunate for all of humanity that they have largely been mishandled by those who can be characterized as social reforming novices. In other words, time and again humanity is confronted by those who don't know what they are doing, and "play it by ear". While this in no way seeks to discredit those whose efforts were well-intentioned, though misguided as they may have been from a larger historical perspective, it is time for us to pursue another path at introducing the considerations for adopting a different philosophical approach for the betterment of humanity.

As such, the rewriting of the Manifesto entails a distinct acknowledgment that it will represent an amalgamation of the three ideologies... particularly focused on an intent to blend the best characteristics of each, and allow these best formulas to blossom... since it is well known that each, by themselves, are not the alloy needed for forging a visionary application of expanded purpose and direction. They must be taught, so to speak, to work together harmoniously, for which examples abound in nature and present social orientations such as the Electron-Neutron-Proton complex of atomic theory, the Father-Son-Holy Spirit of Christian theology, the Father-Mother-Child complex of a basic family unit, the basic structure of a mathematical operation involving two numbers and a result (1+1=2), the Past-Present-Future recognition of time occurrences, and the many, many other triadic constructions which provide for the realization that such tripartite formulations serve as multiple instances of a precedent involving an on-going three-part environmental influence which can be expressed as a three -to- 1 ratio compartmentalization.

In our present efforts to formulate a revision, we initially began to insert the notion of "Cenocracy" (New Government) in the content as it was, in an effort to retain most of the language so as not to unduly shock those whose memory have catalogued the original into a particular frame of collated references applied to their personal interests and experiences. Yet, further reading forced us to take on a larger task of inserting words which would both amplify and more coherently describe a given idea. Then we found that full sentences needed to be added as well as expanded paragraphs, in order for a certain idea to be adapted to current social conditions. Granted that the original Manifesto was written for the conditions and temperament of a different age, such a reservation and deferment only added to the obstructions inherent in the document as it was written.

With a brutal honesty we have come to admit that the language and ideas used in the original, reads like a pictographic account of a primitive's animistic beliefs. The starts, stops and digressions give the impression of someone trying to speak just after they have run a marathon and a microphone has been stuck in their face, wanting them to give a detailed account of their participation. No less, it frequently reads like the expressions of someone trying to speak with a mouth full of food, a crying infant gasping for breath, or a lisping child who has not the experience nor vocabulary to effectively articulate conditions that were experienced and interpreted according to the emotional predispositions when confronted by an overwhelming series of events. And we might as well admit that portions are rather bemuseful in that they exhibit rather truncated attempts to befuddle confabulation into a rhetoric of actuality, based on suppositions artificially ballooned into inferences exaggerated through the prism of a personalized emotional repertoire that is projected from a footing of repressed antagonisms.

While it is an easy task in and of itself to critique the Manifesto from an arm chair repose many decades distant from those and that which caused the document to find its way into the daylight from a repository of underlying mixed emotions straddling the boundary of an accepted social perspective of varying ambivalences (the practiced schizophrenia of a given age); the document also provides the concrete evidence of that dementia which frequents the varying genres of literature, music, art, science, acting, etc... Because of the adolescent-like declarations being recited as a type of campfire refrain, regardless of the melodic trance it can impose on a reading public sensitized by social disparity to be predisposed to such a rhythm; the task of rewriting the document with an intent to keep the original mostly intact, breeds an immodest level of aggravation which leans oneself every more-so towards a complete revision.

However, if we have millions of people whose interest in Communism and Socialism spring forth from the document itself or any number of interpretations and hearsay accounts... how is such an audience to be receptive to a new message if there are no accompanying social conditions which assisted the original document to both reverence and notoriety? This is the rub... or at least that which one might think of as an obstacle if it were not the occasion to consider that those who are familiar with the text and its underlying motivations for the well-being of humanity, even if the outlined path is that being forged through a needless jungle in order to give oneself the impression for facing great odds against one's efforts; are nonetheless social radicals. By using the word "radicals" in the context of a highly fluid and potentially volatile social chemistry, and noting that such individuals are more distinctly identified as "free radicals"; we are presented with the situation in which their intellectual and emotional "atomic shells", can be altered by adding or detracting constituent electron charges (and in context, is reflected in the negativity to the government). Such a metaphor, though simplistic, is helpful if we denote the identification of stable and unstable varieties of radical. In a sense, a document such as the Manifesto can be likened to a flask and mixing wand, with component mixtures made up of inert materials having been ground together by mortar and pestle. Free radicals tend to be paramagnetic and are thus susceptible to the attraction of those or that expressing a "magnetic personality", like the original Manifesto was and still is for some.

The original Manifesto assisted millions in opening their minds to alternatives of social organization that were otherwise constrained by the known practices of a Monarchy, dictatorship, and variations of implied democracy... though other labels for given social/governing systems were applied by analytical observers (such as oligarchy, plutocracy, aristocracy, etc...). If nothing else, the manifesto has served a useful purpose in this regard, though it has also described how the ideas of Communism and Socialism as well as Democracy, can be distorted by the applications of those whose mentality wants to advance personal agendas without regard for considerations that might be offered by those with a different perspective. Typically, the populace is confronted by those advancing their own ideas, or the ideas of those they can come to claim to own as an effective tool to be used to further their own interests.

But one of the core problems with the Manifesto is that it inclines its adherents towards adopting an anti-Capitalism attitude, as if Capitalism was the name of a person or group of people whose primary interest was self-regard through privatization; without realizing that any collective ideology is a form of privatization, even if the pursuit of money is not a primary objective. In an attempt to combat this presumed evil embodied in a figure called Democracy, a Communist-Socialist perspective is one which advances the presumed need for developing a viable economic system which will compete effectively against Capitalism. But, Communism and Socialism are but different variations of Capitalism. Hence, it should be recognized that Capitalism is not the Problem for establishing a better form of governance. Capitalism is simply a tool that can either be used beneficially for all, or for the benefit of a few. Furthermore, it is of need to recognize that the present practices of so-called Democracy are superficial, or phoney expressions thereof... inasmuch as are the current practices of Communism and Socialism. Neither Communism and Socialism, as they are presently practiced, can effectively utilize the formula of Capitalism that has been tailored to fit the variations of democratic phoneyism that have been adopted.

Capitalism is not the problem. The present formulas of Communism, Democracy and Socialism are. They are like three heads on the body of a single (world) body that stupidly argues with one-another about who is going to put what in the same pant's pocket all of us are wearing at the same time. Those in the various social (business, government, religious) leadership positions of the planet are the problem. They can not be permitted to use the arguments of their respective traditions to persuade the public to continue practicing adulterated forms of Communism, Democracy, Socialism... and Capitalism. Every single flag of every single country must be taken down and replaced with the same flag of truce that can never be lowered to half-mast because it would signify surrender to the greater ideal of global unity for all of humanity. A global truce amongst all nations must be put and kept in effect. Thinking in terms of Nationalism must be changed to a comprehensive Globalism, and cultural as well as ethnic identities must be combined to produce and promote a global humanism. The ideological mirror of humanity must be shown to reflect a singular image of unity that promotes a comprehensive focus of energies and resources towards exceeding human exceptional-abilities with which to explore beyond the shores of the Earth, this solar system and the galaxy. We can not pursue a dominant us -versus- them preoccupation as was advocated in the former Manifesto. The manifest usage of dichotmization must be replaced with a trichotomization used as a metaphor for the model of an enhanced socialization to benefit all of humanity, and not singular egos of individuals or groups.

The former Communist Manifesto spoke in the language of age-old dichotomies which utilized an exploitation of opposition instead of recognizable complementarities which could be used to compliment the uniqueness of individual qualities, without trying to perpetrate the atmosphere of contention where yet additional dichotomies could arise in an endless cycle of self-defeating contests fed by a self-serving puerility of emotional content that serves to indicate a repressed state of development due to social oppression exercised by forms of governance whose maturity is constrained by the insecurities of unrealized superstitions which foment a preoccupational paranoia exhibited in socially accepted forms of hypervigilance called militarism, police statism, and other variations in which codes, pass words, secrecy and sectarianism are practiced in various cult-urisms.

The former Manifesto also spoke in a pseudo-scientific fashion of lineages and genealogical-like transitional stages of development that would necessarily be viewed as an abbreviated formulation of a presumed larger description that was available to be deciphered from a greatly expanded historical review; except for the fact it exhibited a stark reflection of its limitation and short-coming by an over-reliance on a usage of contrasting dichotomies, without placing the organization of dichotomized referencing into its own placement within an overall one- two- three maturational development formula. In other words, the usage of a recognizable occurrence of multiple dichotomies occurring in a sociological landscape is but an extracted model of itemized referencing which is part of a larger array of referencing that is available for a more expansive consideration of the developmental nature of the human psyche. In still other words, patterns-of-two (such as the contrasting or presumed adversarial examples of night/day, up/down, hot/cold, upper class/lower class, Bourgeois/Proletarians, Republicans/Democrats, etc...), can be placed into configurations where patterns-of-three exist, and additional configurations might well be viewed if one is thus predisposed to do so. But if one intentionally seeks to itemized adversarial examples to present a personalized/privatized perception in order to present a perception being practiced by a given population (though not necessarily acknowledged), the influential effect can be staggering.

Bringing attention to past and present (if not presumed or hoped-for) future occasions of conflict and oppositional structure is like someone in a school yard yelling "Fight! Fight!" in order to draw a crowd into a nucleus whose combined excitement might well explode and produce further causalities to occur in direct or random fashions. Needless to say, this is what the former Manifesto did, and the Revised Manifesto will come to supplant with a different "socio-chemical" formula. Whereas the former is like bringing fire in close proximity to an inflammable substance, the revised Manifesto formula is the description of a nuclear reaction... that some readers will no doubt react to as if the words "atomic bomb" were being intimated, instead of the words "alternative energy". Nonetheless, once receptive "free radicals" work out the formulaic configuration in their own minds and begin to translate to those who hunger and are eager for a new dish of sociology to be served to their intellectual dietary regimes; the billiard ball effect will be put into motion... and remain in motion until acted upon by some outside force that must be backed-off from, diverted around, or gone through... unless becoming fragmented into the production of multiple more free radicals.

As such, this page can be considered as a free radical, since it is a momentary digression from the task underway in the revision of the Communist Manifesto. It is a task that will continue in its otherwise inexorable peripatetic sojourn of considerations before arriving at any contemplated definitive illustration. In this mode and manner of interjected inclusions of consideration for completing or clarifying a referenced idea, a final draft is nonetheless being planned as a goal to be used as a sketch that will no doubt be worked on by others. In this sense the old Manifesto is the beginning of an end to begin the trek towards a revised model that is itself but a Way station from which to depart anew as we push forward into the many uncertainties which await us. It is a calling being heard by many living throughout the world. And now, a return to the task at hand is a must... and this page but a moment's tarriance... like stopping to reaffirm a path traced out on a map that is being drawn up each time we take another step forward... and forward we must now go.

Date of Origination: Wednesday, 27-Jul-2016... 02:55 AM
Date of initial posting: Wednesday, 27-Jul-2016... 07:11 AM