Why neo-cons cheat: Jane Jacobs "Systems of Survival"

If Wayne Madsen is right, it may turn out the election was stolen via MASSIVE vote-rigging by a broad, loose network of religious fanatics, PNAC members and corporate cheats - 3 groups that believe "might makes right" and "the end justifies the means" - and are making money off their actions - the kind of "monstrous hybrid" Jane Jacobs wrote about in "Systems of Survival".

Having an understanding of the social underpinnings of this pathology is crucial to curing it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x189029

- What would motivate these seemingly disparate groups {Dominionists, PNACers and "corporate greedheads"} to work together?

MADSEN: The connection that between these various groups seems to be the attitude that "might makes right" or "the end justifies the means".

= = =

This phenomenon is shocking - and a textbook case - as long as you've read the groundbreaking textbook "Systems of Survival" by Jane Jacobs. There are several sorts of groups that believe that "the end justifies the means".

According to Madsen: "Okay, what happens when you slam these three sets of Wing nuts together? 1) A mix of fanatical, no-holds-barred wackiligious, 2) PNAC/NeoCon cynical crypto- and outright fascist (ie. G. Gordon Liddy) types and 3) the corporate uber alles types. And all three's interests seem to coincide in the re-election of Bush by any means necessary. Voila. Exreme ideologues all. Delusion-based rather than reality-based."

Her ideas, outlined below, provide a clear theoretical framework for understanding why and how the neo-cons have come to manipulate the US political machine. Guardian (goverment, religious) and the Commercial (corporate) ethics are getting mixed in the US - and a "monstrous hybrid" is being born.

http://www.alphalink.com.au/~parkerp/essays/essay17.htm

Some human activities can be considered to operate according to "guardian" concepts of morality. Examples include politics and government, the legal system, art and religion. All of these groups are involved in protecting, acquiring, exploiting administering and controlling territories. Guardian moral precepts include:-

Shun trading
Exert prowess
Be obedient and disciplined
Adhere to tradition
Respect hierarchy
Be loyal
Take vengeance
Deceive for the sake of the task
Make rich use of leisure
Be ostentatious
Dispense largesse
Be exclusive
Show fortitude
Be fatalistic
Treasure honour

In contrast, other activities follow the commercial" moral syndrome. Examples include commerce, science and agriculture. Values such as trust between strangers and the respecting of contracts and receipts are important to the functioning of commerce. Mention was made that contractual law was invented by traders and not legislators. It was radical at the time as it applied equally to all individuals, regardless of their social standing, and was available to all individuals. Many of what we would call civil rights are the rights to enter into contracts as equals. Commercial moral precepts include:-

Shun force
Come to voluntary agreements
Be honest
Collaborate easily with strangers and aliens
Compete
Respect contracts
Use initiative and enterprise
Be open to inventiveness and novelty
Be efficient
Promote comfort and convenience
Dissent for the sake of the task
Invest for productive purposes
Be industrious
Be thrifty
Be optimistic


http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/JCGD_Volume_9/Systems_of_Survival.html

The book is Systems of Survival, by Jane Jacobs. The core concept that Jacobs presents is the notion that there are really two fundamental moral systems at work in our culture: the commercial and the guardian, personified in the merchant the policeman, respectively. Each one is internally complete and consistent, capable alone of guiding all behavior. They are also mutually contradictory, and yet they are both essential to the survival of our society.

Most morally confusing situations arise from inappropriate mixing of the two systems. For example, the guardian syndrome (as Jacobs calls it) places great moral value on respect for social hierarchy, but the commercial syndrome places its moral emphasis on honest competition instead. At the same time, the guardian syndrome eschews commercial activity as dishonorable, and the commercial syndrome disdains the use of force. Clearly, these two syndromes contradict each other.

So long as the two systems are cleanly separated, moral issues are clearcut, but when they mix, trouble ensues. For example, the army general (guardian) who sells his power to influence weapons purchases has mixed the guardian with the commercial syndrome. The commercial corporation that becomes overly hierarchical in structure loses its nimbleness and ultimately falls prey to more competitively-minded competitors.