Anda di halaman 1dari 21


Table of Contents 1. Purpose I 2. 3. 4. 5. II Philosophy Ethics as Artistry Ethics as a System of Risk In Defense of Intolerance Merging Left/Right Strategy 6. Defining Globalism 7. Symbolic Warfare III Limitations 14 17 19 6 9 11 12 3

1. Purpose

Artista Alliance: political minorities unified together to ensure that they get the government of their choice. While not all political minorities will ascribe to Artista beliefs, most should join an alliance because a law of pragmatism says that an increase in numbers will increase political strength. The Globalist governments march towards their destruction; they might have a few more economic and political rallies, but eventually they will pick themselves up one last time and meet their fate. This treatise attempts to persuade the minorities to prepare themselves for this Aquarian Opportunity. What they should prepare for after collapse remains a mystery, but possibilities include: anarchy, attempts at the creation of a consolidated state, or territory grabs from stronger factions. The underlying vision of the Artistas is this, to provide a diversity of ideologies, government types, and trade alliances to choose from. Then, give the Artista the ability to decide which system they want to live under. An orderly plan to divide the resources and territory must be part of any Alliance. This paragraph captures the essence of this treatise, and is the only one that a reader really needs. The rest will provide a philosophical justification, a description of globalism, and explain the limitations. Remember this paragraph, and do not forget the overall goal when you read the rest! Assumptions of the Artistas In order to accept the overall vision of the Artistas, a reader should accept these premises. Some of these assumptions will be addressed more than others in this treatise. A. People have different artistic visions of the society they want to live in. B. The human mind is limited and perceives a limited view of the universe. If there are moral laws of the universe, then the human mind is incapable of perfectly grasping all of them. C. Human values change over time because of changing tastes and the acquisition of additional information. D. You want your ideology to win. E. The better the strategy, the higher the probability of victory.

Aquarian Paradigm This work has been released on December 21, 2012. In certain circles there is a discussion on what will happen at the turn of the Mayan calendar. In other circles, there is a discussion on when the Piscean age ends and the Aquarian age begins. The transformation between the ages has a wide number of possible dates. While these events may be nothing but human fantasy, it does provide a useful model for this work. So we shall define define the Aquarian age as beginning on December 21, 2012, and say this work defines the Aquarian age. Many of these ideas have already been formulated, discussed, and argued about in the Piscean Age. I will synthesize them into a unique perspective. Piscean Age Fear of other Ideologies more than your own Quest for the correct form of government Based on faith (even secular systems) Thwarting the politically different Celebration of traits that humanity has in common Focus on right and wrong Trend towards less freedom of choice Peace through Unification under one system Glorifies Cosmopolitanism Aquarian Age Fear of your own Ideology more than others Quest for the government that best satisfies you Based on risk Helping the politically different Celebration of characteristics that allow for differentiation Focus on preference Trend towards more freedom of choice Peace through Organized Separation Glorifies Enlightened Parochialism

I Philosophy

1. Ethics as artistry
Pisces fears the unleashing of the Supermen. It fears the power of arbitrary creation. Now in the Aquarian age, we no longer need to fear their development for if we are created in the image of God, then we are creators. This holds true whether our conception of God is a collection of forces driving random chance, whether he/she is a personal being, or if God(s) is anything in between. Perhaps an objective rule exists that commands us to be subjective. A diversity of aesthetically beautiful concepts exists in our collective mind. Values come in many paints: fairness, self-discipline, beauty, love, knowledge, security, charity, etc. The sentient combines these paints into differing combinations, and each of these combinations produces a different painting. A good approach starts with the least controversial. If you doubt that we differ in our combination of values, let us begin with an experiment. Imagine the architecture of your ideal city. How do the buildings appear in your mind? Are they magnificent, grand, and have a common theme to them? Maybe they are an eclectic bohemian mix of various styles. Now compare notes with somebody and see if you really dreamed of a similar city. If that other person dreams of a city with a differing appearance than you, do you consider them evil? Analyze the values of the city with the magnificent, themed layout. One should conclude that they emphasize values such as self-discipline and order. The values you associate with the bohemian city, such as open-mindedness and ability to change, are essential to existence as well. Self-discipline and openmindedness are moral values. We can conclude from this example that art does contain morality. Both cities emphasize values that everyone agrees are virtuous in certain situations; however, sentients prefer them in different quantities. We need to remember the trade-off principle. For some values, the more of one you add the more of another you must subtract. Remember that physical manifestations of things we produce are created from the blueprints in our minds. Syllogism 1 Most people believe that having different tastes in the arts (architecture, music, paintings, fashion, etc.) does not make one morally bad. The variations within the arts emphasize different ethical values. Therefore, most of you do not consider differing combinations of values as morally wrong. Not all pictures can be created. Sometimes a logical combination of values is lacking, resulting in nobody valuing the picture. In this situation, if nobody chooses to purchase the painting, then it will never exist. However, an aesthetic endpoint might not come

into existence, even if large numbers of people can conceive of it. They do not purchase enough or select the right type of paint to create their end, for they are ignorant of the ethical rules. Some combinations are ethically unsound and will eventually implode, even though it may temporarily last. We should be thankful that there are safeguards built into the universe to eventually terminate negative social creations. While an individual can become defective within a healthy system, the immune system will likely be able to solve the problem. A system which is unhealthy cannot last because it will either be devalued or self-destruct. We can realize this because we observe this happen in socially created institutions all the time. Corrupt governments go to ruin and bad businesses plans cause bankruptcy. Syllogism 2 Most people believe that some art is harmful to the participants. The variations within the arts emphasize different values. Therefore, you do not consider all combinations of values as morally right. Conclusion over Syllogism 1&2 The Aquarian should deliberate and debate on the acceptable range of moral values that are sustainable, as opposed to figuring out an exact combination of values that everyone should adopt. Expanding on what we have learned from morality and aesthetics, perhaps we should create a new hierarchy. Our minds were created to desire certain things, so perhaps God should be seen as the foundation of the desires. God creates a wide range of possible end states in our minds, and these often comes in the form of images, sounds, and pictures which are aesthetic in nature. In order for people to better see how all the pieces fit together, they need an end model to help see how the ethical values fit together. Focusing excessively on a value instead of an end state, results in failure to see the context of that particular value, which causes you to misapply it in your life. Good parables give people vivid images to help them understand the abstract or complex spiritual/ethical concepts. As we have seen, the aesthetics that we can imagine emphasize different combinations of morality. After we understand the ethics of our picture we need to understand the world we live in, and that requires understanding by our mental faculties. Once we mentally understand the physical laws, we can alter them. After we know what things in our physical medium need to be changed, its time to create alliances to help us alter the physical world. Since we are social animals, we dont want to enjoy the aesthete in solitude. Religions have our relationship with God as an end, so they too emphasize the social. Therefore, the purpose of all the other steps in the hierarchy is to enjoy social values (love, friendship, sexuality, drama, even

competition) in the aesthetic paradise we create, combined with proper mental states (calm, security, even stress when we desire it). Here is our Hierarchy God-Aesthetics-Ethics-Knowledge-Physical-Social Relationships Instrumental.End Values

Debate in the present time consists of argumentation over the possible directions that nations should take. One should understand that specific policies are derived from the values that the legislatures (anyone who makes the laws) hold. So the policies might be beneficial for one combination, but might be ineffective under another one. If there is confusion over what underlying values societies hold, then there will be confusion over what laws should be adopted. Having multiple options reduces the tension because people are not forced into each others societies. Remember a heaven that one group creates, might be a hell for another. Politics can be made more efficient if there is common agreement of the underlying values. Globalists believe that there is one correct set of underlying values for everybody, while an Artista does not. We celebrate the multiple painting our species can produce. One motto could be, Relativism for the masses!

2. Ethics as A System of Risk

All ideologies contain the seeds of their own destruction. Underlying structural flaws eventually move the grandest powers to the forgotten history books. We are confined to a doomed ship that eventually must sink. At least we should be able to choose the accommodations. Remember, we can always choose to move to another ship before our current choice sinks. If we are all on one ship, then we have no options for transfer. In a universe of uncertainty, our limitations must be taken into account, and we should be aware of the risk across the entire aesthetic/ethical chain. There are multiple sources of risk in the formation of governments. The foundation of all risk one comes from a misunderstanding of what is. What is includes: ourselves, human nature (see debate on optimism and pessimism), moral laws, physical laws, and the nature of the divine. The human mind has a limited perspective that cannot see all the laws that drive our universe. Knowing their limitations, all humanity can do is observe as much as it can, and make a calculated risk by creating a system that tries to benefit their group. Since we do not know the entirety of what is, we cannot know the proper means and the proper ends. Knowing what end would satisfy us would require a thorough knowledge of ourselves, which of course we do not have. Psychology and Sociology are not finished. How can we know what the proper end for ourselves is, when we do not know ourselves? Suppose we did make a government that was sustainable and looked mostly like what we envisioned. Would that particular government give us an opportunity to satisfy all of our inner and social desires? The risk in the creation of an end is that it will not bring satisfaction. What about the means? If we do not know enough physical laws, then we cannot figure out how to construct a building. If we do not know enough of the laws that incorporate every part of what is, then we will not be able to properly construct a creation that requires all of them. Government incorporates all aspects of what is; therefore, they cannot be sustainable until we develop enough of an understanding. Values are abstractions that are manifested in the concrete physical universe. The abstract can manifest itself in the concrete by actions, laws, items, experiences, etc. In the name of simplicity, I will call the concrete manifestations of a given abstract value products. Products require inputs. Getting inputs for the final products requires investment costs. The creation of a products result in costs and benefits for those involved in the transaction process, and positive and negative externalities for those indirectly associated. The costs, benefits, and externalities can be anticipated and expected. Buyers have greater security when they have greater knowledge on what to

anticipate. But, products also bring the unanticipated. Unanticipated costs, benefits, and externalities are all sources of risk. The concept of diversification of risk is strongly emphasized by the globalist when dealing with our money. They know that markets and winds of fortune sometimes turn against people. They know that all companies cannot survive, because every institution where they invest, employ people that dont understand their own market with perfect clarity. Our government employs leaders who dont know all the laws that go into running a government. A government is always imperfect, when they employ people with a limited view of the world. Shouldnt we create a system where risk is diversified on social inventions that have a greater impact than money? Money is just a lower order social construct. Higher level social constructs that dictate morality should be diversified to a greater extent, if their perspective of the universe is that limited. Before now, we discussed Globalism as contrasting Artistaism. But we should really consider Artistaism as an evolution of Globalism, for the Globalists brought us the language of commerce. We have just applied their concepts: risk, reward, return, investment, cost and benefit, to morality. The other human dimensions (the mental, philosophical, and spiritual) shape our physical world. Why should we trend towards a system where people only get options on creating monetary wealth within a system with a uniform perspective on the other dimensions? We could make a diversified, organized system where governments emphasize different dimensions to the desires of the stakeholders. Perspective on Government Globalism: Facilitates an efficient distribution of goods and services for consumers to purchase Artistaism: Government is a good and service for consumers to purchase


3. In Defense of Intolerance
To effectively attack an enemy, attack their highest value. They use the charge of intolerance (bigotry, racism, prejudice, etc.) to silence opposition. The charge of hate damages your reputation as that effectively prevents you from forming alliances to achieve your goals. Let us lessen the impact of their charge. One thing that we should not defend is prejudice. Prejudice implies that someone judges a group before knowing all the facts about them. We do not defend ignorance because that prevents us from getting an accurate view of the world. What though, my globalist friends, should we do if we learn all the facts about a particular group and conclude that its not in our interest to merge with them? Groups can be created along: religion, race culture, ideology, philosophy, etc. This section only includes a discussion on groups stuck together in an independent system. Survival Intolerance This happens when one group seeks another groups destruction. A group value might be to defeat other groups within a given system. Tolerance for a group that will destroy you is illogical. The only logical thing to do would be to create two independent systems where each group can make its own laws and one group will be protected from the onslaught of the other. Aesthetic Intolerance This happens when one social group brings in values contrary to another groups artistic rhythm. Cultures with different methods of food preparation are not likely to be at odds, only because of food preparation. The cultures will be able to share their ideas on food with the other group, and individuals within the cultures can choose to alternate between the two as much or as little as they like. However, a neighborhood with a culture that values quiet and serenity would be unhappy with a culture that favors outdoor parties and loud festive music, even if brought in with friendly intentions. The two aesthetes cannot be combined because quiet and loud are mutually exclusive; they are on opposite ends on the spectrum of the auditory sense. The neighborhood will be described as being full of festive music, not both quietness and festive music. There are reconcilable aesthetic differences that do not impact another groups lifestyle. But, there are also irreconcilable characteristics held by one group, which fundamentally undermine another groups identity. To paraphrase a principle of philosophy-To be everything is to be nothing. Discrimination is foundational in identity. The ability to say I am not that thing, clarifies what you are. Just because you say I am not that object, does not automatically mean that you hate it. You can appreciate the beauty of another house without wanting to live there.

4. Merging Left/Right
Definitions of Left and Right often relate leftist/liberal thought to the favoring of change and Rightist/conservative thought to resistance to change. Sometimes they create a list of values and place the left or right label on either list. That will not suffice when we are dealing with the creation of new systems. We will go by these definitions for our purposes. Left: trend towards the common. This involves the reduction of power, goods, and resources from one group, and the subsequent redistribution to a broader group. Right: trend away from the common. This involves seeing the purpose of government as serving the needs of a particular group Here are the different dimensions that the right desires their governments to form around. Libertarian systems: Separation of the individual from the rest of humanity They want to collectivize with similar minded people who value individualism and limited interference from the government. Also, remember the financial principle! The greater the risk, (since there are less safety nets) the greater the reward, or at least the perception of a greater reward. Theocratic systems: Separation of groups with religious values Cultural systems: Separation of groups with unified beliefs, worldviews, artistic tastes, etc Racialist/Ethnocentric systems: Separation of groups with similar genes Many do recognize the humanity of all races, but perhaps humanity is not the end. Race is the first step towards speciation. Value Centric systems: Separation of groups with similar values .. Often groups hold onto the founding principles of the country, which sometimes gets them labeled as traditionalists. If they held those same values in another country they would be considered open minded and revolutionary. Some of these dimensions can be merged to create unique combinations. The Artistas can be said to merge both the left and right spectrum. We expand the ability to create different values for all entities with minds (sentients), but we allow an Artista to choose which dimension(s) they want to collectivize around.


II Strategy


5. Defining Globalism
1. Globalism-The belief that your ideology is the best for all humanity and that there is an obligation to spread your system over the world. Almost any ideology can be globalist according to that definition. Therefore, we have Globalist libertarians, Globalist capitalist, Globalist national socialists, Globalist communists etc. This is contrasted with Artista libertarians, Artista capitalists, Artsita national socialists, Artista communists. I have followed a similar form to the biological binomial nomenclature system in regards to naming. Artistas and Globalists are capitalized, while the particular ideology is put in lower case. The ideology that currently dominates most of the world in 2012 is a Capitalist or Corporatist society (depending on who you ask) with an integrated banking system, combined with social leftist values which create giant safety nets. The social liberals attempt to get large, transnational bodies to enforce on all nations, what they believe are universal human rights. A Laissez-Faire approach to both individual actions and to conducting business, along with safety nets to pay for individual, destructive behavior and the bad decisions large banks plus certain corporations make, cannot be classified as a sustainable system. That is why we can count on their eventual destruction (Aquarian Opportunity). To conclude, if the Globalist can demand universal human rights, so can we. We demand the human right to be able to choose our own government, thus selecting our own level of risk. 2. Globalism-the lowering of trade barriers between individual nations, so that goods can flow across borders in a more efficient manner. While that might seem good at first, we must remember that countries have different laws on how they treat workers. A minimum wage law in one nation can be multiples above another nation. Another nation might have terrible environmental quality, but the tradeoff is that they are more competitive. An area that insists on all businesses having unionized workers will be at a disadvantage to another area, which doesnt require unions. Industries, of course, favor the nation with the lowest standards. The only thing that stops them from shipping out more industry is that the human capital is often of higher quality in the more developed nations. If they could make a higher profit by transferring your job to a person willing to do it at a lower cost, then they would, because that is the nature of business. Globalists are willing to trade with any nation regardless of how high their standards are. All things being equal, a salaried worker cannot compete against a slave. The Artistas believe that trade should occur between nations with similar economic standards and distributive means. If trade alliances occur between nations with similar wage laws and distributive methods, then all workers can compete on the same playing field. In order for nations to join a trade alliance, prospective nations they must raise the workers standards of their own country to an acceptable level. The


wealthier nations in the alliance could help aspiring nations to raise their standards, but that would be up to the individual trade alliance.

3. Globalization: The growing similarity of standards to facilitate a universal corporate culture Love/hate relationships have existed between art and business. Business wants artists to create products that sell, and artists need the business mechanism to sell their products so they can live. The goal of business is to build products that maximize profits. The goal of art is to create a product which best expresses the individual artist. People break down barriers to communicate more effective so they can sale their products. In order not to shock potential buyers too much, certain norms are developed to create a universal corporate culture. The best position for an individual business is monopoly of an inelastic good. If they can persuade the public to buy a product with no differentiation, then they do not have to diversify their capital goods. Having a limited variety of capital goods reduces costs in the long run. Artists have a tendency to look unfavorably on uniformity; therefore they often try to create new styles. Art and business engage in a power struggle. Artistas, of course, believe in the subordination of business to art, because they believe Art is more foundational to the creation of a good society. The economic system should serve society, not the society serve the economic system. By these definitions, which ideologies are likely to join the Artista side? We can sum up our strategy as outliers vs. the mean. If factions are situated slightly above or slightly below the mean, they have a chance of shifting the mean closer to their direction through marketing skill. Ideologies that have a slim or no chance of moving the mean closer, will likely favor combining forces with other outlier factions, because they cannot hope to win through the political process unless something drastic happens. Remember that other people who favor your ideology live in other countries. If you were to combine the minorities who share your ideology from all the different countries into one nation, then you might have a larger population. On a scale of government intervention in the market place, factions on the extremes of both ends could likely join an Artista Alliance. The communists who favor government in all or most aspects of their economic life would rather not stay in a corporatist system. Libertarians, who want the minimum of government intervention in the economy and their lives, would happily live in a system where there is no moral guilt thrust upon them for having no safety net. Also, people who want to collectivize around different things other than a distributive exchange system would likely join us. This includes right wing factions that wish to collectivize around culture, race/ethnicity, or religion. They could technically combine their numbers if they expand their collectivization around broader categories. For example, citizens from Ukraine,

Russia, and Serbia who wished to collectivize on culture and ethnicity, could base themselves on a broader Slavic identity rather than nationalism for their particular countries. Patriotism Detractors would probably say that we are showing disloyalty by looking ahead after the present governments collapse. Preparing for probable possibilities does not indicate our feelings one way or another. However, there is no reason to be emotionally devoted to a nation if the future population plans to vote against your principles. Some nations were founded on a cultural or ethnic foundation. Now, those nations have decided that they are citizens of the world. What distinguishes you from another country that also views themselves as citizens of the world? What need is there for borders? What about nations with founding principles? What will you do if the citizenry no longer decides that those principles are no longer desirable? One option could be to acquiesce to the voters will, but many of the voters who changed the nations foundations were brought into the country through dubious methods. Should we really rely on democratic/republican institutions in a Globalist world when populations flow between countries? The Globalists countries can say if you dont like it, then you can move. There is no place to move, my globalist friends, if you take over the world. It is much more secure to create a system where governments are created that must follow their underlying values. Then political adversaries could move to a country which would be a better fit.


6. Symbolic Warfare
We are faced with a dilemma. The globalists and reactionary forces that attempt to understand the Globalists nature, have built up a world of symbols for us to conquer. The symbols contain entire mental maps and worldviews that are etched into the conscience and consciousness of each citizen. We can seize their created symbols and adopt them as our own. We can employ their created symbols against them. But we should be careful, for using their symbols too much will cause us to adopt their thought patterns. Language Single words can contain entire collections of ideas, thoughts, and historical details. Sometimes experiences with people who label themselves with a word have not been particularly good. Negative associations get applied to that word and it becomes a source of fear to the public. Getting associated with a word ruins your reputation. Those who can effectively employ language will attempt to do just that to their political adversaries. If some words are so effective for demonizing people, then some words with positive connotations can work in the opposite direction. Good rhetoricians apply these words with positive connotations to their cause. So our goal must be to neutralize the negatively connoted words and borrow the positive words for ourselves. The corporatists have an entire language structure, an alluring prison if that is how you want to look at it, that they can use to maintain a favorable identity. Symbolic Symbols are words made into art. They too can represent entire ideologies, emotions, religions, etc. Money, as discovered my many, is a form of symbols, it represents work that people have done. But money is issued by governments, and governments are a social construct. By devoting your life to earning money, you are devoting your life to earning a symbol that was developed by some group or another. Seizure Anti-globalists come in many stripes. Some of them effectively are ostracized as conspiracy theorists. We shouldnt run from them as they are merely trying to figure out the workings of the world. Instead we should steal the imagery they accuse the globalists of employing to prove that we are not ashamed to have the theorists on our team. Keystone of the Pyramid-The globalists have built an entire symbol/language structure that they use to keep people locked in their system. If we can change the ultimate meaning of

the structure at the top, then our overall concept will be planted into the public mind. Their positively connoted words like tolerance, diversity, and world peace will be applied to the acceptance of differing political ideologies. While their negative words like hate, bigotry, and intolerance will mean that someone harbors contempt for an alternative ideology. As you can see the symbol on the front represents two pyramids with the keystone missing. I have decided to paint them in with my brush. Also, the pyramids are also in the form of As going in opposite direction. They stand for: Aurane Aquarius (rane sounds like rain), Age of Aquarius, and Artista Alliance. Using a symbol requires creativity, you must somehow figure out how to apply your meaning to someone elses created symbol by innovative means. Make it into a game.


III Limits


Now we should make room for realism. The primary thing to remember in any approach is that its a trend. Globalism is a trend towards uniformity of values, while Artistaism is a trend towards diversification of values. The Globalist system does not have uniform governments. They are unique in many ways, they have sizeable variances in tax rates and they each nation contains its own idiosyncrasies. Artistaism is a trend towards creating the widest varieties of government types as possible, so we can experiment. Unfortunately, we cannot manifest the entire creative potential of the sentient while we are on the planet. Space Our planet exists in space as a spheroid object, which is a geometric shape. Geometric shapes have measurable surface areas. We can analytically conclude from that fact-if you can measure a surface area, then you can measure a limit. Wide numbers of possible government types exist in human minds. There is no way that all the possible varieties can be manifested with limited space. We cannot give everyone their perfect ideal. But, we can give a wider variety of choices. Environment On our planet, no government can be completely isolated from any another. Nations share air and water, ozone and minerals. To protect the property rights of other nations, certain environmental agreements must be made that will ensure countries do not contaminate shared resources. Much resistance to environmental treaties between parties in the Globalist governments, occur because factions feel that redistributive attempts or another ideology is secretly getting forced upon them. In an Artista Alliance, strife gets reduced because ideologies with sovereignty and territory under their control will actually care about the environment, instead of seeing potential solutions as an excuse to advance an agenda. We wish to create as few alliance rules as possible, thus cause each nation to enjoy maximum freedom. If we each had our own planet then the issue would mostly go away. Time An alliance here on a limited planet will not last once we begin to colonize space. Different nations will have differing expansionary capabilities. Once we get into an unfamiliar territory, nations will once again battle for dominance of the new finds. If there must be another Artista alliance then it will be made under different terms. The ending of any


particular alliance we be our triumph over our limited understanding and our entrance into the great unknown-either into space or into death.

Treatise: I have not discussed all the possible details that could be said about Artista ideology. With people, you must often apply different approaches to persuasion. If someone else agrees with the fundamental strategy of uniting political minorities in a coalition, then they are going to need to do additional intellectual work. Those involved early with an idea, will most likely have the greatest influence upon the future of that idea. Perhaps, I made a poor case in the philosophy section, yet you still agree with the strategy. Abandon as much of this work as you must and create a better argument! Remember the primary goal, victory for your ideology.