Turn around by step in

A recommandation plan for an awakened politics

Exposition: Ability to act under urging conditions

The following case study and reflexion should concentrate on the ability to act of politics (politics in this case means elected or official administrations) in this times of so called crisis.

The actual crisis lies in the more or less sudden overwhelm of the public debt burdens, actually with public concentration on the Euro-region an the debt burden of the USA causing a loss of trust of the markets, which in this constellation is under danger of producing a spiral of disintegration in the whole system which then will also effect not only the financial markets and the monetary system but then respectively and directly the real economy and the social peace.

Analysis: A case of complex hypnosis

Under this conditions the politicians and institutions seem to act as to manage and to solve the threats and complications. We see every day via media how the crisis management system works in the EU region.

My question is that of the legitimacy of this activity. Where does it stem from? What is it grounded in?

In this case we still, more or less obvious, hear the still non gone story of the last 30 years neoliberal campaign talk.

How can I tell this? (By the way, I am not standing here as an ideological anti-neoliberalist. I am no "communist" and so on. I try to analyze the conditions as objective as it can be, considering that propaganda is also a part of social reality we live in, and if executed for the "right" thing (and this means not an ideology) not the most unnecessary one.)

When we look at the actions of the politicians and its motivations deduced from their public statements, then we see:

1. The first motive for political crisis management actions in the Euro region seems to be a public debt problem solution in order to regain trust from the markets or not too much to disappoint the (financial) markets, or to make the situation look good in front of the “markets”.
   
   
2. The second motive seems to be directly combined with the first motivation. The solution actions are restricted to an imposition of saving rules under such burdensome conditions.
   
   
3. The third characteristics of the crisis management is a certain degree of actionism, automatism and therefore inability to reflect, to communicate, coordinate and i.e. to perform politically and execute.

Upon all this the primacy of politics or the relation between finance and government comes up to become a question, the most prominent and decisive question.

Are we acting or are we just acted and why?

One again, I am not and don´t want to be an obsessive conspiratist, anti-capitalist or automatic “elite”-hater. I just ask on the basis of the deployed facts.

Who has the primacy? And to which other end exists a political action today (in times of severe public threat!!) then to establish trust conditions for the financial market?

I am not the one to say, that such a goal might be a per se illegitimate one for politics, but how and why if, no longer then 4 years ago, it became apparent to everyone that the financial market is that one which 1. caused the problems, 2. made itself apparent of not being able of meaningful self- governance and therefore lacks any legitimacy to appear as the single directive today. Why then does the politics seem not to be able to overcome a fixation with the obedience to the "markets", whose “trust” it “has to keep”? What hypnotic, unconscious and totally irrational situation is this?

1. How can a politics, seeing that the “markets” has this insufficient and not self regulatory character, and by trying to meet its demands, get magnetized by such a reason and
   
   
2. what legitimacy have their edicts for the objects (economies, states..) under constraints of such an excessive “market” to, when looking for solution, only look on and blame them self and this means to further serve the imposition of the debit situation, to save even if saving means total pauperisation and a humiliation of itself? Would not the politicians political and managerial self-respect at least at that point have to awake or to, at least, let come up some doubts about the absolute sense and necessity of their executions?
   
   
3. How can politicians live and act for even a second by knowing and sensing that they are not acting at all, not perceiving at all, that they just execute, hypnotically execute and conduct actions which in themselves would be a first class comedy if they were not a total disaster and tragedy. 

Vulnerability and firmness of the method

There certainly will be a wave of slander on the method of this exposition. I am convinced, because this exposition exposes and focuses the attention towards a crucial connection that for some should better be kept unrevealed. Even under risk that this might be to its disadvantage. And for the third time: I am not stating it ideologically! Its not a necessity. As I said, for me I more seems to be a peculiar phenomenon of hypnosis.
What sense in rolling up a mountain of analytical material that in the end should serve the blur of the apparentness of the situation and a paralysis by analytically claiming the result of the analysis is that of a situation soo complex, not monocausal, systemic, structural and so on, so the only thing we can come up with for sure is complexity, i.e. clouds, fog. A fog concealing what?

But as I said, my methodological consciousness is pure, so far. As stated, I derive my conclusions single and only through the most obvious facts (!) and truly essential informations and these are the implicit and explicit statements of the responsible or executing at the moment. Therefore the proposed is a exhausting and so far sufficient analysis of the situation (For divergent arguments and their empiric under-layers me and the analysis are always open!)

Recommendations

So what to do then and now?

I think that any other alternative simply increases the variety of system complications (and system complications mean: chaos of the entire system), so the only and the easiest, empowering and inspiring action plan, if not matter of course, and recommendation for the politics is and can be at the moment, considering the complexity of the situation combining it with that what is called global political ability to shape:

1. Regain action and thus political ability. Stop being misled by the unreflective use of the “markets” as automatic condition for action. Become aware of the hypnotic, abusive reality the politics was kept in.
   
   
2. Perform innovative, founding and constitutional steps. Enforce counter action to delete point 3 of the hypnosis. i.e. establish intergovernmental cooperation, consultation and agenda between US and European Government concerning the politics and the constitutional foundation of the financial markets. Enforce it by normally tying-in capital income (normal taxation).
   
   
3. Consider debt moratorium as immediate option. Impose if necessary a debt moratorium for period of a general destabilisation threat. (One time action. No policy!)
   
   
4. Begin re-act politically at the inner scale. Take reflectory, boulematic (from the greek boulé, i.e. consultational and self consultational process) (political main competence) time. Come up with really political, i.e. creative and formative development seeds for the public household by investing capital gains from the taxation of capital incomes and by integration of the won action quality into the action scope of “economic” action (knowledge, formation, real organic, creatively overflowing development concept vs. a technocratic, shortage determined, finally abusive and impotent concept, life based and derived from life creativity) as real and inforced innovation concept for overall growth or flourishing.
   
   
5. Consider that you are not the ultimate.

Epilogue

This, by the way, is the single alternative for which there is “time” for it to be imposed.

Why?

Because it creates time.

Because time is money, this is, by the way, also the only alternative (no alternative finally, more a natural development) which lays in the full line and direction of the modern welfare program of political economy which for the most of us appears to have started some 2-300 years ago and become a state of respective prospect.


So why not bring it to an end? And this means not dispatching it!

undefined