PUBLIC UPROAR
a journal for eclectic policy

Any comments or questions about the articles in this issue or past issues, feel free to E-mail me at dcr420dcr@hotmail.com. Thank you. - Darin Robbins, sole contributing author

IDOLATRY OF THE ELEPHANTS

In the last ten years or so, there has been an interesting phenomenon in America. It originates from the Republican party, where there is an initiative to name a Ronald Reagan memorial in numerous places, such as the former National Airport in Washington D.C. and an aircraft carrier. Phyllis Schlafly is head of a private organization that has promised to found a Reagan memorial in at least one city in each county in the United States. Alongside this is an attempt to name a metro stop in Washington D.C. after the former president. Actually, it is very common for public places in the District of Columbia and naval ships to be named after presidents. It is a privilege, such as the ability to have an official presidential library that all former leaders enjoy. However, it is important to point out the zeal with which conservatives approach commemorating Ronald Reagan. For the current conservative movement, Reagan is the epitome of a conservative leader and in terms of history is the movement’s spiritual leader in the U.S.. In the mind of Republicans, Reagan ended the Cold War by defeating the Soviet Union single-handedly. In many cases, this required glossing over details, as well as ignoring the general historical momentum. The Soviet Union collapsed because of its inability to react positively to the demands of the citizens who wished for civil rights and liberties along with the guaranty of economic support. In terms of its economic practices, communism was a purely industrial approach, capitalism being its twin, where a mechanical approach was taken in regards to humanity and its needs. The way it conducted itself caused both the Soviet Union and communism to fail in a postindustrial climate. For most of the Cold War, the West believed the Riga axiom, which held that the U.S.S.R. was motivated by its desire to spread the doctrine of communism regardless of its own stability. The Soviet Union was therefore the “Evil Empire”. However the willingness for reform and change, through Glasnost and Perestroika, proved the Yalta axiom. This proposed that the U.S.S.R. conducted itself for the same reasons and self-interests as any nation. Communism was a means to an end and if inadequate, would shrivel away eventually. The Soviet Union failed because of its internal deficits, not because the way upheld by Ronald Reagan was superior. If the Cold War was a boxing match, then when it was Reagan’s turn to step into the ring after many rounds with past presidents, the Soviet Union dropped dead of a heart attack rather than by a TKO. Conservatives give Reagan the credit for the death of communism, and therefore is given a heroic stature among presidents. Regardless of the actual facts of the Reagan presidency, Ronald Reagan was considered a true leader not only of the country, but of the conservative movement. It should be noted that because of Reagan’s rise within a Republican cult of personality, the Republican party as a political organization is no longer rooted in its historical context. Sadly, it is no longer the party of Lincoln, or of Theodore Roosevelt, or Eisenhower. It is not even the party of Barry Goldwater. From now on the Republican party is the party of Reagan, the year 1980 was year 1, and there will always be an insistence on its own propaganda of a diluted view of American reality. A reality wearing the outgrown clothes of a Norman Rockwell contentedness. In a certain way, any monument to Reagan will be a monument to refusing to look under the surface and to a simplistic civic outlook.                  

ASTROPOLITICS

Along with having the technical ability to migrate beyond our planet and explore outer space, there must also be a researched attitude in regards to interstellar society and government. There would be a need for a geopolitics that was not constricted by the geography of a particular planet. As the possibility of humans living beyond Earth is steadily becoming a reality, there must be some basic principles in how humans create communities and living environments before they begin the task. First, there must be slow development in order not to go beyond reasonable means. A style of neo-feudalism is most conducive to organizing the social structure, since there would at first be settlements that are difficult to reach and in semi-isolation. Mercantilism is the best model for an economic structure, regulated by earthbound owners but creating new markets within each outpost. Both of these models were effective in terms of social cohesion and economic development at their time in world history when the conditions were similar. In terms of historical example the western expansion is the predominant image, requiring revisions for the sake of preventing mistakes that occurred in the American West. The economic initiatives for space exploration and settlement would include a neo-industrial boom, an appeasement of the population explosion, and new scientific discoveries for quality of life made possible by new elements and chemicals outside our planet. The structural elements for this endeavor would include the creation of C.I.S.M. company, standing for Cosmonautical Industries and Syndicate Mercantiles company, which would be a joint-stock company funding private explorations and extraterrestrial business enterprises. There must be a leapfrog procedure that will use what is there to allow further expansion with less initial baggage. Areas of movement that are possible today which can be starting points for new exploration and settlement initiatives are such diverse subjects as: low-flying satellites, L-5 O’Neill colonies, asteroid belt mining, and terraforming. More experimental subjects include: paper-thin solar sails and re-charging stations, piece-meal Dyson spheres, and research and development on almost faster-than-light travel. These must all be looked into as tools for humans to have the ability to live for long-range periods of time in outer space in order to establish communities, societies, governments, and economies. The long-term effects of living beyond Earth must be considered as well. Our perceptual coordinates will be affected, since our context will shift in terms of physical stimuli. Biological forms will be more pliable, due to a change in physical forces that continually affect the body. The great accomplishment of moving beyond our homeworld will inspire a general will to power among the population that could degenerate into a form of jingoism if not kept in proper perspective. The explorers and pioneers will be a first-wave infiltration of mythos, which could allow for an advantage in possible long-term relations with sentient lifeforms and cultures from other planets, or begin the cultural traditions of the new era of human civilization. Due to the logistics of the vacuum of space, we would see the rising power and dominance of transportation concerns, where the ability to be mobile would define power. In tandem with this, there would be the vital need of life-supporting natural resources, which would evolve into new systems of currency as time passed. Overall, an interior alteration of religious dogma would occur over time due to the great leap forward made by humans that surpassed any religious view of the universe. To take on this mission, there would be a need for applied skills. Most importantly would be a combined politics, sociology, anthropology, and earth science with philosophy as its lynch-pin. To supplement this new science, an expanded ecology must move into the work of planetology. What already exists in deep-sea technology will work as a testing range for new research in sustaining life in an oxygen-deprived context. There will be the beginning of advanced clockwork automation for emergency systems, since this operates without generated power for which life is truly dependent on for survival. For efficiency, it must be standard procedure to begin building and launching components of large spacecraft to be conjoined in space. Also, recycling deployed space equipment must be more common since vital resources are initially brought into space. Private initiatives, such as a new Homestead Act, must be considered outside of the realm of official space programs. To be able to be truly at home within space exploration there would be a hybrid of naval and aerial navigation, which would completely take into account all of the aspects of movement in outer space. The inspiration for the theories, strategies, and concepts for this new attitude of space settlement come from the imaginative work of science-fiction and futurism, which deals with these issues daily. This includes: “Dune” by Frank Herbert, “Schismatrix Plus” by Bruce Sterling, the movie “Outland”, the Millenium Project, the movies “2001” and “2010”, and the movie “Silent Running”.

SENSE OF DROWNING:
the fall from grace of authority

The 20th century, the epitome of the modern era, saw a great change in the use of authority and its position of infallibility. The actual institutions and signs of authority were still in place, but their initial relation to those who they oversaw had become marked by an infusion of personal emotion. The origins of this change started with a sense of the postmodern in terms of society, where the actual structure is called into question. Authority as an entity survives within the structure that grows for the purposes of society and government. There is also the slow torment of the Cold War agitation, which placed a severe amount of stress upon both rulers and ruled when they engaged in a long struggle of ideology. Ideology becomes eroded when set against historical events. The lessons from the Holocaust and Hiroshima also marked how people looked at those who were placed in charge of both government and society, creating an immediate amount of distrust to blind loyalty. The prosperity of the 1950’s also was instrumental in creating a strong middle class, able to be mobile socially and to have the resources to speak out against authority at a later time. This prosperity also allowed this middle class to look beyond quantity of life issues, and toward quality of life issues, creating a new debate with authority figures. The background of authority itself can be seen in the social conformity in the 1950’s, where culture was homogenized in the upsurge of consumerism and placidity after WWII. By economic means, and the Cold War sensibility, there was the goal of insuring widespread security and therefore a need for the use of authority in a positive way. A need for an image of prospering society further strengthened the use of authority to continue order. Order was a goal of the overall practice of authority, and a tradition in the industrialized age. This type of authority had a paternalistic attitude, and was meant to guard the established and insured hierarchy. It was all meant to function this way, and so there was a need to trust in order and direct problem-solving, a belief in the law, and within any single institution the internal logic was applicable to outside reality. The entire system was supposed to make sense, and authority figures were there to help make people safe. The transition began with the critical voices toward the 1950’s as a decade. This criticism occurred within the decade, against the produced image of conformity and prosperity through consumer actions. It later concentrated itself into the upsets of the 1960’s where open protest and new social attitudes defied the status quo directly. As intellectual disagreement became physical, one could see the anachronism of authority figures and their appearance of holding on to the past. What was hidden under social convention was revealed as the brutal attitude toward suppressed people was exposed, such as racial crimes in the segregated south and covert acts in international relations. There was an increased generation gap and a sense of unstable ground for everyone involved. The new attitude of authority is less calm, in which they are acting as pretenders to power. In desperation by those practicing the authority, there is at times a brutal reaction to the populace in general when there is protest of any kind. The growing mistrust on both sides is fueled by the increasing critique of the status quo and the fear of losing the position of power granted by authority. There is overall an unwillingness to listen to reason, and most importantly a personal type of hostility rather than formal power. The result is an indiscriminate exercise of force, a lack of focus in exercising granted duties within that power, and a belief in vilified subversion, which cancels out any discussion of issues. What is needed is an escape from the original internal logic that no longer meshes with the external reality and its structure. The consequences of this change in the attitude of authority are that those in roles of power are inadvertently taking up the role assigned by critics. What has become common is the phenomena of “police brutality”, along with the strength of the anti-government movement as an extreme reaction to the desperate and futile measures of authority. The partisanship identity of good and evil coupled with ignorance has been steadily growing along with these new common occurrences. Prime examples of this new persona of authority are: the 1968 Democratic convention and the resultant police riot, the acts of “Bull” Conner during the peaceful March on Birmingham, and the personal interactions within the movies “Rebel Without a Cause” and “Easy Rider”. It is also worth noting the violent reaction of the National Guard at Kent State, the overall reactionary stance of the silent majority supporting Nixon, the case of the Hard Hat Riot and the Boston busing riots, as well as the parable lessons set by the movie “Billy Jack”.