|
|
|
V.J. Chalupa On Post-Modern Politics
|
|
|
CHAPTER 2 PURPOSIVE THINKING An
attempt to explain politics through necessity fails because choice is at the
very heart of politics. Understanding
of politics is achieved by comprehending its purpose. In its essence, politics
is action, i.e. an intended and
rational sequence of acts derived from the selection and utilization of means
towards the implementation of a chosen purpose. Action is attributed to
(presupposes) a subject endowed with reason (acquisition of knowledge and
evaluation) and volition (decision and choice). Purpose and Means This
defines the two focal points of the purposive thinking: The purpose
(= end, goal or objective) is
a wanted phenomenon for whose attainment other phenomena (means) are wanted.
Logically, there can be no purpose for whose realization ways are not sought, no
means wanted. The means is a phenomenon wanted in order to attain another wanted
phenomenon, namely the end (goal). The same object can be wanted both as a
purpose, if another object is wanted for it attainment, and a means, if it is
wanted in order to attain another object. Several purposes can be in two
different relationships: They may be ordered hierarchically into a purposive system each of them wanted as means for the attainment
of the next one, and thus forming a pyramid ending in a purpose which is wanted
for itself and not as a means for another purpose. Such a purpose is the primary purpose,
the other ones are derived purposes. The purposes may be in the relationship of equality, i.e., none of them is a means for any of the other ones;
they compete for the means for their respective attainment. The relationship in
which they are allocated the available means, is their material
solidarity which
constitutes their common superior complex
purpose. A purpose whose fulfillment is wanted to the greatest extent (as much
as possible) is a maximum purpose; if it is a complex purpose, it is an optimum purpose. (Among the most important actions of politics is
the deciding of the material solidarity among competing maximum purposes.) Purposive
values are quantities of usefulness or harm; usefulness
is the ability of an object to
attain a purpose; harm
is the quality of an object to dely, diminish or prevent the attainment of a
purpose. They derive their quality from the purpose to which they relate
(cultural values, religious values, family values, etc.) They are commonly
designated as "good" or "bad"; some goods can be
"good" in relation to one purpose and simultaneously "bad"
in relation to another purpose. The quest for an absolute purpose generating
absolute good and absolute evil is the subject of Part B of this book. The
want of a means is a need.
When projected unto the means, it becomes its passive
need: it is not wanted by the means, but because the purpose is wanted. (A car
needs fixing because the car is a means to achieve the purpose of reaching a
destination, not because the car wants to be fixed.) The object of passive
need(s) is the object of care of the purpose from which this need is derived.
Among primary actions in politics is to decide which groups of people are to be
objects of care and what their passive needs will be. Such
a group is constituted by either similarity
or complementarity and represents a special case of a whole. No
description or analysis of any group or any totality escapes generalizations;
without abstraction and, to a greater degree, generalization any whole dissolves
into its component singularities. Abstraction and generalization, however,
cannot avoid exceptions and is therefore open to the reproach of inaccuracy and
invalidity, possibly considered as unacceptable. But omitting certain aspects of
reality by creating concepts, i.e., only abstractions and generalizations,
allows the mind to organize perceptions and out of the chaos of ever changing
singularities create knowledge enabling action. One type of generalizations
attributes to all members of a group the qualities of the whole group.
Generalizations of a different type do not deal with characteristics of a
totality, but with its individual members:
when many members of a group exhibit certain qualities or behavior, such
qualities or behavior are attributed to all members of the group; such
generalization can concern intellectual qualities, physical qualities or moral.
Such generalizations have practical validity; they are based on probability and
experience. Subjects of
Thought and Will A
purposive system, i.e., a pyramid derived from a primary purpose, presupposes
its source: a subject endowed with freedom, i.e., with the faculties of
reasoning and volition. In experience, such a subject is identical either with a
human individual or with a group of human individuals organized for the pursuit
of a common purpose. Individuals
When
the subject of freedom coincides with an individual, his primary purpose from
which all his wants are derived, is the purpose
of personal subjective satisfaction, of happiness. Actions
find their explanation in the fact that man uses reason to evaluate, select and
utilize means towards the achievement of the purpose of subjective satisfaction,
in order to attain happiness.
This term is not used here to convey a state of bliss, pleasure or well-being;
it explains the order of priorities and answers the question why does man prefer
this action from another, this situation over another; The answer is because his
choice brings him more satisfaction, makes him happier or diminishes his
happiness less than another choice. Man
is endowed with a wide scope of potentialities which all have the inherent
tendency to become actualities. His
potentialities become actualities when and as he adjusts his environment
- actively; he adjusts to the environment - unwillingly. The development
of his physical potentialities has limits in the structure of his body, but his
thoughts and will, especially will, does not know such limits and can encompass,
not only all humanity and the entire world, but reaches out to the stars and
seek, beyond time and space, the transcendental and eternal. The constraints
imposed on these tendencies, the impossibility of actualizing all his potential,
is felt by him as dissatisfaction. The
recognition of the resistance to his expansive tendencies does not in itself
trigger his reactions, but the feeling of dissatisfaction does: he endeavors to
eliminate his constraints, break the chains that hold him back. Some of such
reactions are automatic, instinctive; others are rational: the removal of these
elements that hem him in becomes his goal, his objective, a purpose for whose
achievement he chooses means, and in order to obtain the means he selects other
means, so that he constructs through his reason an entire hierarchically ordered
purposive system in which he ascribes values to things and actions according to
their ability to bring him closer to or to obstruct the achievement of his
purpose. The
immediate means everybody has at his disposal are his actions. Here he finds the
main obstacle in achieving fully the objective of happiness. Human
potentialities and ambitions are such that they can never be completely
actualized: because of their scope, but also because they contradict each other.
People can have, at the same time, the potential to be poets or scientists,
artists or bureaucrats, saints or evildoers. Everyone has the potential to be a
saint or a sinner. Man's
actions are limited by his own abilities and external circumstances, especially
by time and space. This limitation forces him to select, among his available
means, those apt to bring him fullest and fastest satisfaction. But such choices
necessarily entail forgoing others. Also among his conflicting potentialities,
he must chose -- select some and give up others. To
be able to make such choices he defines elements of his satisfaction and ranges
them from the basic ones -- those which are common to all human beings, such as
food, shelter, health, procreation -- to those which are his own and
distinctive: art, love, religion, science, relaxation, entertainment. Having
made these choices he must allocate to each of them a proportion of means which
are at his disposal and/or those he can obtain. While many of the derived
purposes are common to most people, the allocation of means to them differ; it
is this allocation, this setting of preferences, which individualizes men's
purposes of happiness. The
composition of the elements of satisfaction as well as the allocation of means
to them is not rigid, it is a process of constant change, and because of the
scope of human potentialities, the purpose of happiness
can never be fully and permanently achieved. Therefore, man is fated to strive for achieving as
much of the purpose of happiness as possible by achieving as much as possible of
the various derived purposes; the purpose of happiness is thus an optimal
purpose. From
Individuals to Organization It
is impossible to communicate, to measure or compare the magnitude of happiness
due to diversity in the composition of individual purposes of happiness, and
poets as well as scientists have tried this in vain. It is however possible to
communicate its parts, its elements; every person is able to name at least some
derived objectives whose achievement is necessary for his satisfaction, as well
as means towards their attainment (a means to achieve satisfaction is to assuage
hunger; a means to assuage hunger is food; a means to obtain food is money; the
means to obtain money is work, the means to obtain work is education, etc.). The
contents of such derived purposes are capable of being objectively communicated
to others so that they are able to recognize if they are a part of their purpose
of happiness too. Individuals who share identical objectives, constitute a movement.
A movement derives its character from the common derived objectives its members
share, such as an ideological, religious, social, ecological etc. movement,
reflecting the unlimited variety of human spirit and human appetites. Within a
movement, the causes of dissatisfaction and the means towards their elimination
are discussed, articulated and aggregated. From diffused and unformed opinions
held by individual members of the movement, evolve specific and exact demands
(articulation) and the various articulated demands are joined (aggregated) into
common goals which become the program of the movement. Because
contents of many derived objectives are capable of being communicated,
individual subjects of volition whose derived objectives are identical
constitute the same movement, they can join their efforts on behalf of the
shared objective, and in order to enhance their effectiveness agree to a division
of labor. They
become organized; division of labor creates organization.
The
essence of organization is that its
members give up a part of their freedom and subordinate a portion of their
actions to the organization; they exchange a part of their freedom for achieving
their common purpose better (faster, fuller). (3) This common goal is the nexus of the organization, its raison
d'etre, is not subordinated to any other purpose; it is
its primary purpose under which derived purposes/means are arranged
hierarchically on the basis of cost effectiveness; therefore organizations are
sources of actions, as if endowed by their own reason and will, as
subjects of freedom: making decisions, seeking means, evaluating them and
utilizing them independently of their constituent members. In
the process of creating and transforming a mood into a movement, and a movement
into an organization a specific role is played by strong individuals, strong
personalities. The
main characteristic of a personality is the recognition, positive or adverse popularity, the
impact he makes on a more or less restricted circle of people, due to an
outstanding performance in a field of human endeavor: Al Capone in crime, Mother
Theresa in charity. The status of "personality" does not indicate the
personal or moral qualities of an individual; actually, many historical
personalities behaved cravenly in their private life. At present, personalities
are often created not so much by their outstanding performance as by the
notoriety manufactured for them by the media. The recognition of individuals as
personalities is not identical with affection. With
recognition goes authority. Authority consists of an individual's ability to
have his opinion accepted as valid or his behavior as a model not so much for
its contents as for the fact that they come from a personality. The root of
authority can be rational, traditional or charismatic. A rational basis of
authority is the fact that its bearer has been right so often in the past and
that his knowledge is known to be so extensive, that his opinions are adopted on
the basis of trust and respect towards his qualities, without a need to be
substantiated in any other way. The traditional authority is derived from the
fact that its author holds a position, exercises certain function within long
established structures of society and acts within the limits of such function.
The inertia of society and of people supports and accepts such authority more or
less automatically as given until it causes or is convincingly accused of
causing significant harm to society or individuals. Charismatic authority stems from the conviction and assertion
of a personality that he is the executor of a higher, transcendent mandate, of
an imperative of supranational forces: an inner voice, God's revelation,
historic mission. Such a conviction endows its bearer with a complete devotion
to his mission, a devotion which borders on fanaticism and includes disdain
towards existing opinions, institutions
and authorities. A charismatic person transfers this attitude to his followers,
"disciples", i.e., persons whom he convinces about his mandate and
mission and who, therefore, accept
his authority even if its consequences imply the dismantling of the given order
and the creation of a new one. As the charismatic movement develops, it becomes
institutionalized and bureaucratic, which leads to a limitation of the
charismatic leader's influence. ("a revolution devours its children").
According
to the nature of its primary purpose -- or of the movement that gave it birth --
an organization can be charitable, cultural, physical education, pro-abortion,
homosexual, religious, or other. Each of them can then become a part of a
compatible movement, a charitable organization can belong to the movement for
sexual freedom, a cultural organization of a movement for human rights in
Nigeria, etc. Therefore, an organization can join a movement, and can also join
a related organization as soon as it subordinates itself, in a certain area, to
the decisions of such organization. It behaves like an independent subject of
volition and reasoning independent, divorced from the individual purposes of
happiness of the organization's members because they have given up a part of
their freedom to the pursuit of its purpose. Normativity,
the relationship of superiority of the organization and subordination of
members, distinguishes an organization from a movement. An individual can simply
join a movement; but he must be accepted into an organization. A movement is
spontaneous and improvised, in an organization, members must accept its
structures. In a movement, leaders arise; in an organization they are selected
by fixed rules. In a movement, each member is active where and when he likes. In
an organization, members act in the manner, time and place assigned to them by
the organization as if they were subordinated to the organization's will whose
expressions become, for them, norms whose duty-bound subjects they become
voluntarily, as indicated above, or sometimes involuntarily if the organization
has means to threaten them or inflict them harm. Such pressure exerted by
economic or other means in order to enforce obedience to a non-legal norm and
outside the law, is terror. Politics and Its
Subjects Subjective
satisfaction (happiness) is not identical with selfishness. No one is an island. Man is a social being, a
being for whom presence of others of the same species is the natural
environment. Therefore his unhappiness (including absence of happiness) can be
caused also by the situation of a group of people with whom he identifies. The
group whose betterment is the purpose of man as the subject of freedom may, but
does not have to, be the group to which he belongs; the reason of
dissatisfaction of an American can be, for instance, the existence of slavery in
the Sudan or suppression of human rights in China. In
both cases, a certain change in the situation of the given group becomes a
condition of his satisfaction (a secondary purpose of the purpose of happiness),
and because such a change brings the subject of will closer to his satisfaction,
it is, in his value system, an improvement. Situation
means in this connection external conditions and/or the
psychophysical status of the members of the given group and their mutual
relationship, its internal structure. It can be, therefore, concluded as a
general rule, that one of the conditions (one of the secondary purposes of man's
supreme objective) is the betterment
of the situation of a certain human group; such group becomes his object of care. The removal of a danger threatening such group falls also under the
term "betterment". Thus
the derived purpose of "betterment of the situation of a certain
group" becomes articulated from the primary purposes of happiness as a
category which includes politics; however, "betterment of the situation of
a certain group" is not yet politics. It is a part of the striving for
satisfaction, a part which is objectively understandable and which an individual
can share with other individuals and organizations. Together with them, he then
seeks and utilizes hierarchically lower means towards its implementation. "Betterment
of the situation of certain group of people" as purpose is the logical
category immediately superior to the term "politics" and does not
define politics because it is common to other actions or activities. A person or
an organization can strive for the betterment of the situation of a certain
group of people which is the object of his or its interest, individually,
through own actions, or jointly with others, but this goal does not make their
actions politics. To attain the definition of politics, it is necessary to
identify a specific quality which distinguishes politics from other actions
aiming at the betterment of the situation of a certain group of people, such as
education, welfare, protection of environment, electrification, equalization of
incomes, building an army, participation in international organizations. Ultima
Ratio -- the State When
those who pursue these goals realize they are unable to achieve them through
their own resources, individual or organized, they seek the utilization of an
institution which does posses such resources. This institution is the state
and its organs, because the state has gradually concentrated
so many instruments of power as to become sovereign, i.e. on a certain territory
its will is commanding and the state is able to make it prevail against any
other will. The will of the state is superior to the will of any real and
logical subjects of will within the scope of its power, and therefore becomes,
in the state's relation to them, a norm,
namely a legal norm
which differs from all other norms because it
can be systematically enforced. Political
action consists in subjects of will (individuals or organizations)
striving for the implementation of their political objectives through the
utilization of the power of the state
because their own means are insufficient and because the implementation
necessitates constraint of others which only the power of the state can provide
-- or at least they came to the conclusion that they can so implement their
objective more easily, with less effort or less sacrifices than those that would
be required for its implementation by their own means. Usually the changes
intended by a political program are so far-reaching that they involve structural
changes of the entire society dominated by the state, and therefore the
utilization of state power is indispensable. The subjects of political will
recognize that the most efficient, least costly way of achieving their political
objective is to participate in the
creation of the will of the state
as a means towards the achievement of their political purpose. For politics, it
is characteristic that it strives for participation in the directing
of public affairs.
A bureaucratic administration of decisions made by the state is an act of
obedience, of subordination, and does not fall under the concept of politics. Clearly,
politics is distinguished from other actions pursuing the same purpose by the
choice of means -- the utilization of the power of the state through
participation in directing public affairs. This is the specific that makes it
possible to narrow down politics within the wider category of "betterment
of the situation of a certain group of people." Politics
is actions whose purpose is the betterment of the situation of a certain group
of people through participation in the directing of public affairs.
Understanding
politics requires examination of its constituent elements: (1) to determine the
group of people whose interest is served (object of care), (2) to define the
contents of betterment, (3) to utilize state power for its implementation, (4)
to obtain a share in the directing of public affairs, (5) to select the ways in
which state power is to be utilized, and (6) to utilize it properly. Subjects of will that are constituted to pursue objective goals of a non-political nature (associations, enterprises, trade unions, churches) become politically acting subjects insofar as they strive for a share in the directing of public affairs as a means towards achievement of their non-political goals. They become members of that political movement whose program coincides most closely with their own purpose (for instance business associations support parties promoting the free market system, unions support political parties stressing social issues). They may even become a part of a political organization.
|
