State of the Union: The Great Resignation
“[Jeffersonianism] spares no pains in promoting the belief that it does not exist, but the success of its disappearing act depends on equally strenuous efforts on the part of an American public anxious to believe in egalitarian fictions and unwilling to see what is hidden in plain sight.”-Michael Lind, “To Have and Have Not,”
from Harpers’ Magazine, ca. 1995
The Coronavirus Pandemic had set off a whole tinder box of socioeconomic issues in these United States and around the world. In addition to the exorbitant increases in Sovereign Schuld, one of the more noteworthy implications are the enhanced risks of Death-by-Overwork among the Market/Mixed Economies in the broader Western world, which can be reinterpreted with the Work-Standard’s Attrition/Inaction Rate. Any higher Attrition Rates detected by the Work-Standard, it should be recalled, will cause Currency Depreciation in a manner similar but not identical to that of the Post-Bretton Woods Debt-Standard’s “Inflation Rate.”
However, the effects cannot be restricted to the medical practices that continue to be hard-pressed at keeping infection and death rates under control. Other Economic Sectors, Industries and Enterprises in the Market/Mixed Economies of the broader Western world are worthy of further inquiry and investigation. This comes at a time when the Empire of Liberty is forming a Détente with COVID-19 that will culminate in a “Coronavirus Endemic.” As for the Great Resignation, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Neoliberalism faces ideological assault from Socially-Minded Capitalists and Nationally-Minded Socialists. Terms like “Capitalists” and “Socialists” are not enough for comprehending the Great Resignation because its implications are related to opposing conceptions of Wealth, Market, Technology and Economic Order as part of the Mode of Production known as “Production for Profit/Utility.”
Production for Profit/Utility interprets the concepts of Wealth, Market and Technology as a “Spontaneous Order of Natural Selection,” stressing the “greatest Quantity of Kapital” for the “least Quantity of Schuld.” Those with the greatest Quantity of Kapital and the least Quantity of Schuld are meant to live, whereas those with the least Quantity of Kapital and the most Quantity of Schuld are supposed to die. One of the consequences of adopting Production for Profit/Utility is a futility in distinguishing between Voluntary Poverty and Involuntary Poverty as well as the Involuntary Wealthy and Voluntary Wealthy.
Neoliberalism in particular prides itself in fulfilling this inhumane notion of “lifting people out of Poverty,” demonstrating absolute disregard toward distinguishing Voluntary Poverty and Involuntary Poverty. It has led to the rise in certain forms of Debt-Slavery in the pursue of Kapital-Slavery. Debt-Slavery and Kapital-Slavery are two halves of the same Slavery. The consequence of such ideological ignorance is the recent rise in restless sentiments among young people in America and the Western world who are inclined to argue that they have not found their Vocation. Thus, it is becoming increasingly mundane to encounter entire privatized commercial firms struggling to find new Debt-Slaves to exploit by becoming Debt-Slaves themselves. In essence, it is now fashionable for privatized commercial firms to offer “Incentives” to entice potential Debt-Slaves, except young people have demonstrated to themselves and the world that they have always been best receptive to the Intents of Command and Obedience, not “Incentives of Supply and Demand.” No youth in the early 21st century wants to die for Neoliberalism.
The Kapital-Slaves of the Involuntary Wealthy, the so-called “American 1%” (to quote the Occupy Wall Street Movement), are no different than the Debt-Slaves of the Involuntary Poverty, the “American 99%.” Woe to those who had chosen to spend the rest of their lives chasing after the greatest Quantity of Kapital for the least Quantity of Schuld. Such people will never attain Eternal Glory in the annals of economic history. The Post-Bretton Woods Debt-Standard had always condemned the twin lifestyles of Voluntary Wealthy and Voluntary Poverty personified those Real Housewives from “Total Educational Effort (Pt. IV of V).”
The Work-Standard rewards those who had chosen wisely in the State of Total Mobilization. The Economic Order is an Ordered Liberty of Duty and Honor, a design philosophy reflected in the concurring conceptions of Wealth, Technology and Market. Its Production for Dasein deems the Voluntary Poverty and the Voluntary Wealthy as being two noble, ascetic lifestyle choices.
It is doubtful that the youths who had instigated the Great Resignation will know, let alone comprehend, the finer details of The Work-Standard. Whether they will know or not know depends on whether anyone find its compelling enough to share The Work-Standard. Conversely, it also remains to be seen whether Corporate America and the 1% will come to their senses, return to economic reality, and realize that they are just as susceptible to the Socialization of Young Minds.
State of the Union: Debt-to-GDP Ratio
“The [Jeffersonians] keep saying phrases like, ‘Let the market decide’ or ‘The market will get to the efficient outcome.’ Really? [Their Market/Mixed Economy] is a very flawed institution that does not deserve the nearly religious kind of endorsement of it that our leaders are eager to provide over and over again.”-Richard David Wolff, The Sickness is the System: When Capitalism Fails to Save Us from Pandemics or Itself, ca. 2020
The Coronavirus Pandemic, it should be recalled, has caused the Quantity of Schuld in existence to surpass Quantity of Kapital in existence. Central Banks put so much Kapital into circulation that it is difficult and even next to impossible to envisage the Liberal Capitalists being able to pay the Schuld back in full. Such notions do not exist nor will this issue cease as the question of Climate Change, regardless of whether one is convinced of its existence or inexistence, persists as an important policy issue in the Liberal International Economic Order (LIEO). With the LIEO trapped in its own ideological echo chamber, it is currently struggling to break free from its everlasting dependency on petroleum products. However, it would be naïve to not be aware of the countless different applications of petroleum like manufacturing petrochemicals as fertilizers for instance. The most obvious sign of the Liberal Capitalists’ desperation to hold onto their world order is their growing inability to maintain their Debt-to-GDP Ratio.
The Debt-to-GDP Ratio is a Liberal Capitalist metric designed to gauge their Sovereign Schuld in relation to their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Its purpose is to inform the observer on how much and how willing the Liberal Capitalist Parliamentary Democracy in question is going to pay back the Sovereign Schuld with the Kapital generated by the Market/Mixed Economy, Financial Markets, Fraction-Reserve Banking System, and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The Debt-to-GDP Ratio’s equivalent within the context of The Work-Standard is of course the Total Productive Potential (TPP) as it is applied within Command and Obedience Account Bookkeeping.
Knowing this, we can rightfully assume that if the Debt-to-GDP Ratio shows Sovereign Schuld going over the GDP Rate, the affected nation in question is incapable of paying back the Sovereign Schuld from its own means of production. Either the nation keeps piling on more Sovereign Schuld or declares a Sovereign Default: both are part and parcel of the same choice presented by the Debt-Standard of Neoliberalism since the Death of Bretton Woods.
- Choose the First Option: Expect Currency Depreciation and lower Interest Rates.
- Choose the Second Option: Expect Currency Appreciation and higher Interest Rates.
No matter which option that the Liberal Capitalists will choose for the LIEO, they are unknowingly leveraging their own futures in The Work-Standard’s favor by luring themselves into false senses of economic security and economic freedom at present. Facing the dual issues of Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change, they have entrapped themselves in a Zugzwang that puts them at a strategic disadvantage. The great question confronting The Work-Standard is how much longer the Liberal Capitalists can be expected to continue doing more of the same until it becomes explicitly clear to them and the world that “business-as-usual” ceases to exist altogether?
Has the United States defaulted on its payments? Yes, the Democratic-Republican Party did in fact have a Technical Default – a partial Sovereign Default – on the same year as the longest-running National Emergency (Executive Order 12170) in US History, the second Energy Crisis of the 1970s and the Iranian Hostage Crisis. 1979 marked a pivotal turning point for the Democratic-Republican Party, given the Reagan Revolution that came later in the 1980s.
State of the Union: “‘What is Conservative?’”
“The question: “What is Conservative?” leads on to another: “When will Conservatism become possible again?’ The confusion of Conservatism with Reaction arose when our political life lost its Conservative basis and was invaded by Reactionary phrase-mongering on the one side, and on the other by Revolutionary ideology, the latter ultimately gaining the upper hand. The confusion will end only when Conservatism itself has once more become Conservative. [True] Conservatism seeks to preserve a nation’s values, both by conserving traditional values, as far as these still possess the power of growth, and by assimilating all new values which increase a nation’s vitality. A Nation is a community of values; and Nationalism is a consciousness of values. [W]e must make our starting-point a new Conservatism, that aims at conserving, not for the sake of the State but for the sake of the [Totality]. We must make good what our Patriotism lacked; [the Nationalists] must formulate and demonstrate what Nationalism means in the present and what it means for us in our future.”–Arthur Moeller van den Bruck, Das Dritte Reich, ca. 1923
Imagine for a moment that the Socialist Nation of the SMP Compendium has a Brigade of 4,000 Selves which the Totality and State both consider as “billionaires” and “millionaires.” This 4,000 is split into four Battalions of 500 each at a combined total of 2,000 Selves. Each Self considered among the first 2,000 has an Account at the State Banks in excess of 1,000,000 GDM (Greater German Marks) or 1,000,000 USN (United States Notes). The other 2,000 has Account in excess of 1,000,000,000 GDM or $1,000,000,000 USN.
Right now, the Totality and the State are both doing very well at the moment with the Work-Standard. Since everyone is doing quite well for themselves, nobody is raising too many eyebrows about the fact that 4,000 Selves have a sizeable portion of Actual Geld. However, the Totality is convinced that these 4,000 Selves should reallocate much of their Actual Geld to the State. What the Totality does not want from the State is a “Redistribution of Wealth” because doing so is tantamount to terrorizing these 4,000 Selves. Remember, the Work-Standard knows no “Income Taxation” insofar as Income Taxation itself is closely related to the “Debt Ceiling.”
How would the People’s Party deal with these 4,000 Selves and avoid setting off the Freedom-Security Dialectic and Mind-Body Problem? How should the Socialization of Young Minds convince the 4,000 Selves to perceive Life itself in a Hamiltonian Federalist, Prussian, or Bolshevist way? What can we possibly learn from the growing factional power struggles now emerging from within America’s Jeffersonian Billionaires? Why should the American people care and why is it necessary for the Democratic-Republican Party to prevent the American people from knowing? How would the Federalist Party deal with the “Kleinstaaterei (Little-Statery) of America’s Jeffersonian Billionaires?”
To my fellow Americans, what I am referring to is far more fundamental than just a 21st century problem of countless numbers of highways, bridges, railroads, seaports, airports, nuclear power plants and electrical power substations in varying states of disrepair. The decaying infrastructure is no doubt one of the manifestations of an American Kleinstaaterei crippling the national unity forged between the States and the Federal government. The implications of the Work-Standard regarding Corporate America and the Wealth of Jeffersonian Billionaires are worthy of discussion here as these questions are also related to our Kleinstaaterei.
This Kleinstaaterei, which COVID-19 exposed in the abysmal Student, Municipal, State and Federal responses to the Pandemic in 2020-2021, did not happen overnight. It is a century-long development whose origins cannot be pinned entirely on the “Reagan Revolution of the 1980s.” Ronald Reagan, who did in fact insist that he “never left the Democratic-Republican Party,” was continuing what Franklin Delano Roosevelt had begun in the 1930s, taking the New Deal to its logical conclusions. Most Americans have yet to grasp the implications of what I am talking about in relation to this Kleinstaaterei, even though they should because it pertains to the ontological essence of what American Federalism is supposed to be.
American Federalism has undergone multiple variations since the “Federalist Era,” which is back when the Federalist Party was in power during the late 18th century. The original Federalist delineation between the Federal, State and Municipal Governments, Centralized Federalism (aka “Hamiltonian Federalism”), eventually morphed into Dual Federalism (aka “Layer-Cake Federalism”) prior to the Civil War. Dual Federalism was later obliterated in the Great Depression. The New Deal gave birth to a Jeffersonian mockery called “Marble-Cake Federalism,” treating the Federal and State governments as ‘equals’ par excellence. Recalling the analogy chosen by Morton Grodzins in the 1950s:
“The American form of government is often, but erroneously, symbolized by a three-layer cake. A far more accurate image is the rainbow or marble cake, characterized by an inseparable mingling of differently colored ingredients, the colors appearing in vertical and diagonal strands and unexpected whirls. As colors are mixed in the marble cake, so functions are mixed in the American federal system.”
As one could probably surmise from the implications of “Marble-Cake Federalism,” the priorities held by the Union’s Federal, State and Municipal governments bear the signs of misadministration, misgovernance, miscoordination, and misdirection. Those conditions are ripe for corruption, misallocation, incompetence, waste, fraud and abuse, which became apparent to Richard Nixon by the 1970s. Nixon had correctly concluded that certain powers held by the Federal government belong to the State governments, while powers held by the State governments belong to the Federal government. This became known as Fiscal Federalism.
Whatever Nixon intended for Fiscal Federalism, which could have been fully realized in his second term, obviously never happened because of Watergate. Like most Nixon-related Federal policies, the Democratic-Republican Party even made a complete mockery of Fiscal Federalism by creating a “New Federalism.” Political scientists chose the term “New Federalism” to describe the Jeffersonian trend begun by the Reagan Revolution of the 1980s, a trend that continues as of 2021.
In its current form, “New Federalism” will serve as a metaphysical roadblock to the formation of a Student Government by the American SSE, the Unified Federalist Student Economy (UFSE). Regardless of whether the Coronavirus Pandemic ends or whether it becomes normalized as an “Endemic,” one consideration still remains certain. Any return to the American Essence, to the traditional, pre-FDR American Federalism as described in The Work-Standard, must always preserve the Past and build the Future vis-à-vis the firm guidance of a revolutionary Conservative Socialism. What applies to the Federalist American Union must also apply to the UFSE.
If allowed to persist under the Federalist Party, the UFSE is at risk of isolating itself from the American Way of Life, the Municipal, State and Federal governments. It is already discernible in the issues surrounding the secondary educational level, the value of the “high school diploma” as worthless as the “associate’s degree.” The same continues to be true at the tertiary educational level, where the universities and colleges have been allowed to get away with everything from the mundane “tuition costs” and “unpaid internships” to the more sublime ones like “Student Loans” and the “Safe Spaces.” Additionally, Student Government is able to encounter a bureaucratic obstacle course, created over the decades since FDR’s presidency, all of which need to be surgically removed. They will discover another mess of Political Organization Problems that cannot otherwise be resolved through economic and financial means but solely by political and social means. It helps that the Total Educational Effort is the missing link.
State of the Union: Involuntary Wealthy and Voluntary Poverty
“Just as it is a fine sight to see free desert tribes, bodies covered in rags, whose only wealth consists in their horses and precious weapons, so it would also be a fine sight to see the powerful and expensive arsenal of civilization served and led by personnel living in monastic or military poverty. This is the kind of spectacle that pleases people, repeated every time great efforts are to be performed and directed toward great goals. Instances like the German chivalric order, the Prussian armed forces, the Jesuits, are prototypes, and we should note that soldiers, priests, scholars, and artists have a natural relationship to poverty. This relationship is not only possible but is even natural within the setting of a workshop in which the Gestalt of the Arbeiter mobilizes the world. We are very familiar with the bliss of being part of organizations whose technology is alive in every member’s flesh and blood.-Ernst Jünger, Der Arbeiter, ca. 1932
We are on the threshold of a new ordering of the great structures of Life, embracing more than culture, as the very premise of Culture. This new ordering requires the integration of all individual domains an increasingly abstract spirit has made ever more independent and removed from the general context. We live in conditions that depend on specialization, yet the question is not one of specialization. Much more is the question of seeing every specialized effort as part of [the Total Educational Effort], and understanding the treacherous character of every effort that seeks to evade this process. This [Total Educational Effort] is nothing other than Arbeit in the highest sense; that is, representation of the Gestalt of the Arbeiter. Only when this conception has been accepted, only when Arbeit is raised to a full metaphysical level and this relationship has been expressed in the Reality of the State, will it be possible to speak of an Age of the Arbeiter. Only under this premise will it also be possible to determine the value to be assigned to the museum business, that is, the activity the Bourgeoisie currently classifies as art.”
Certain social behaviors exhibited by the Totality bear discernible relationships with specific Conceptions of Currency. They reflect the broader ontological and sociological patterns related to the Self’s relationships to the Totality and State or, in the SSE, the Student Body and Student Government respectively. Perceptions revolving around “Who is ‘wealthy?’” and “Who is ‘poor?’” carries with them a distinct set of connotations that become discernible in adolescence. This means that designations like “rich” and “poor” in the social interactions of the Student Body at their classrooms, cafeterias, study halls, libraries, computer labs, chemistry labs, art rooms, gymnasiums, auditoriums, atriums, and campuses.
These social interactions are dependent on whether they occur within an SSE or an OECD-Type Student Economy as these behaviors do not occur within a “closed system.” What happens outside the SSE is also important for adolescents. After all, it is precisely at the secondary educational level where the youths encounter notions of “receiving an allowance,” a primordial, timeless tradition reflected by the language and the metaphysics behind Arbeit and Geld as well as Kapital and Schuld, indicating the presences of opposing Conception of Currency. Think of this as being no different than distinguishing between genuine banknotes and counterfeit ones.
Such behaviors are also related to specific lifestyle choices and personal conduct. To have these United States serve as a convenient example, the ontological meanings behind Metonyms like “Wall Street,” “Corporate America,” “Silicon Valley” and “Hollywood” are what often comes to mind to the average American thinking in generalist terms about the wealthy. Those Metonyms, I should mention, are always dependent on whether the American Way of Life itself is defined by Jeffersonianism or Hamiltonianism, the Federal government controlled by the Democratic-Republican Party or the Federalist Party.
Jeffersonianism defines Wealth as something created from random chance and probability. Being “wealthy” is a voluntary choice insofar as one decides to ‘push their luck and risk everything’, whereas being “poor” is an involuntary choice that one unwillingly accepts by ‘falling on hard times’. Wealth becomes the end in itself.
Hamiltonianism defines Wealth as something created from disciplined spendthrift and modesty. Being “wealthy” is an involuntary choice insofar as one decides to ‘accumulate Wealth gradually as a result of pursuing those lifestyle choices’, whereas becoming “poor” is a voluntary choice that one willingly accepts as ‘part of the Vocation’. Wealth becomes the means of production to achieve an end in itself.
Life imitates art. There exists in both cases a prevailing Command Culture that instills these behaviors in the formative years of everyday Americans, molded by childhood experiences and expectations, reinforced by adolescent surroundings and interactions with others. This Command Culture is dependent on specific Conceptions of Currency that allows young people to build their futures and live out their lives with purpose and meaning. Should the Work-Standard redefine the socioeconomic actualities of the American Way of Life, everything occurring on “Wall Street,” in the boardrooms of “Corporate America,” in the office cubicles of “Silicon Valley,” and in the studios of “Hollywood” reflects the American Essence (rather than its subverted parody). What shall this Federalist Command Culture entail for the UFSE, and those four Metonyms, including their interactions with the Third Place, the Shopping Citadel? How would those four look in the State of Total Mobilization?
Obviously, any Wealth created from Kapital, as it is currently denominated in “United States Dollars,” will become worthless in the Federalist American Union, as Actual Geld will be denominated in United States Notes. The Valedictorian Vanguard (VV), the highest-Ranked students in the UFSE, shall become the new “wealthy Americans” through their own Arbeit, embodying the Figure of the Federalist Arbeiter and the Figure of the Anti-Federalist Anarch, setting examples for the Student Body to emulate. Only then shall the true Federal government, existing beyond Good and Evil, confer upon the UFSE that Sacred Oath of Office, allowing the Student Government to revolutionize those four Metonyms for the Total Educational Effort.
“Diversity in Conscience and Community, Unity in Discipline and Action!” defines the Actualities of the Federalist American Union’s Eternal Wall Street, Eternal Corporate America, Eternal Silicon Valley and Eternal Hollywood at the Federal level. Below them are their equivalents under the State Governments, followed by those under the Municipal Governments, and the rest operated by the EGOs (Extracurricular Guild Occupations) at the Shopping Citadels under Student Government. There is a well-defined hierarchical command structure where the paths upward are straightforward and easy to grasp, allowing anyone to attain higher Social Ranks and thus reach their rightful places in the American Way of Life. Everybody starts at Student Government, and it is up to the Individual to decide how they intend to live their own life.
There are profound implications. That practice of “Resumes” and “Cover Letters,” only to be rejected by a “Job Applicant Tracking System” (which in practice is about as counterintuitive as a “Terrorist Finance Tracking System”), gets rightfully phased out for being obsolete. The Student Body is instead judged by their Personnel Records, their Achievements and Ranks, their Medals and Awards conferred by Student Government (on behalf of the US Department of Education), by the US Congress of Councils on Capitol Hill, and the President of the United States at the White House. What was learned and eventually mastered, what feats of daring were realized are now decisive factors in whether somebody works at the Municipal level and whether they are ready for the States and the Federal government itself.
That is the American Essence, described by John Jay in Federalist Papers No. 4 and No. 5:
“The people of America are aware that inducements to war may arise out of these circumstances, as well as from others not so obvious at present, and that whenever such inducements may find fit time and opportunity for operation, pretenses to color and justify them will not be wanting. Wisely, therefore, do they consider union and a good national government as necessary to put and keep them in SUCH A SITUATION as, instead of INVITING war, will tend to repress and discourage it. That situation consists in the best possible state of defense, and necessarily depends on the government, the arms, and the resources of the country.Federalist Paper No. 4
As the safety of the whole is the interest of the whole, and cannot be provided for without government, either one or more or many, let us inquire whether one good government is not, relative to the object in question, more competent than any other given number whatever.
One government can collect and avail itself of the talents and experience of the ablest men, in whatever part of the Union they may be found. It can move on uniform principles of policy. It can harmonize, assimilate, and protect the several parts and members, and extend the benefit of its foresight and precautions to each. In the formation of treaties, it will regard the interest of the whole, and the particular interests of the parts as connected with that of the whole. It can apply the resources and power of the whole to the defense of any particular part, and that more easily and expeditiously than State governments or separate confederacies can possibly do, for want of concert and unity of system. It can place the militia under one plan of discipline, and, by putting their officers in a proper line of subordination to the Chief Magistrate, will, as it were, consolidate them into one Corps, and thereby render them more efficient than if divided into thirteen or into three or four distinct independent Companies.”
“Should the people of America divide themselves into three or four nations, would not the same thing happen? Would not similar jealousies arise, and be in like manner cherished? Instead of their being ‘joined in affection’ and free from all apprehension of different ‘interests,’ envy and jealousy would soon extinguish confidence and affection, and the partial interests of each confederacy, instead of the general interests of all America, would be the only objects of their policy and pursuits. Hence, like most other BORDERING nations, they would always be either involved in disputes and war, or live in the constant apprehension of them.Federalist Paper No. 5
The most sanguine advocates for three or four confederacies cannot reasonably suppose that they would long remain exactly on an equal footing in point of strength, even if it was possible to form them so at first; but, admitting that to be practicable, yet what human contrivance can secure the continuance of such equality? Independent of those local circumstances which tend to beget and increase power in one part and to impede its progress in another, we must advert to the effects of that superior policy and good management which would probably distinguish the government of one above the rest, and by which their relative equality in strength and consideration would be destroyed. For it cannot be presumed that the same degree of sound policy, prudence, and foresight would uniformly be observed by each of these confederacies for a long succession of years.
Whenever, and from whatever causes, it might happen, and happen it would, that any one of these nations or confederacies should rise on the scale of political importance much above the degree of her neighbors, that moment would those neighbors behold her with envy and with fear. Both those passions would lead them to countenance, if not to promote, whatever might promise to diminish her importance; and would also restrain them from measures calculated to advance or even to secure her prosperity. Much time would not be necessary to enable her to discern these unfriendly dispositions. She would soon begin, not only to lose confidence in her neighbors, but also to feel a disposition equally unfavorable to them. Distrust naturally creates distrust, and by nothing is good-will and kind conduct more speedily changed than by invidious jealousies and uncandid imputations, whether expressed or implied.”
State of the Union: “Life Imitates Art”
“Of course, learning to do anything well, from playing the guitar to speaking French, from skating to philosophizing, sooner or later does require a great of Actual Arbeit, even Actual Geld. But the aim of this approach is to make it evident to the Student that the Actual Arbeit is worth it for the goal he wants to attain. Nobody forces a professional writer to revise and throw and revise again; he imposes such discipline on himself to turn out a great Work of Art that will come somewhere near to saying what he wants to say. Nobody forces musicians or champion athletes to practice for many hours. This approach to learning tries to communicate with a ‘professional attitude’ to students, whether about cooking, or putting on a play, or communicating in a foreign language.”-Mary Perkins Ryan, We’re All in This Together, ca. 1972
Mastery of the Work-Standard has made it easier for this Author to envisage the end of Neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is an outdated ideology, the centuries-old holdover of the Enlightenment which has yet to be phased out. These conclusions are, ironically enough, most apparent in the fact that there will never be enough Kapital in existence to pay down the Schuld in existence. After the Death of Bretton Woods, the Liberal Capitalists grew increasingly overdependent on “Technology” and “Globalization” to achieve world domination. Although there are countless different examples, conventional Liberal Capitalist Technologies rely on Neoliberalism as its Artform, which is very obvious within the context of the Total Educational Effort. The Student Body encounters these technical realities firsthand at the Third Place itself.
As stated in earlier Third Place Posts, the Shopping Citadel and the Deep Underground Shopping Center (DUSC) were deliberately designed to reflect the Heroic Realism of Socialism. The presence of any “Liberal Capitalist Technology (LCT)” at both locations, like the rest of the Socialist Nation, counts toward Economic Foreignization in the State’s Real Trade Agreements (RTAs). But unlike “Foreign Socialist Technologies (FST),” which is the only other source of Economic Foreignization for RTAs involving technologies and patents, LCTs are more conspicuous due to their frequent need to address emerging compatibility issues. The metaphysical logic is comparable to The Work-Standard’s distinctions between “Clean Money” (Actual Geld, Digital Geld and Military Geld) on the one hand and both “Dirty Money (KDM Account)” and “Blood Money (KBM Account)” on the other.
Most conventional LCTs are designed with Neoliberalism in mind, relying on the concept of the “Commodity” to determine whether something is worthwhile or worthless. By process of Commoditization and Kapitalization, LCTs aim to eliminate Arbeit and Geld in favor of emphasizing Kapital and Schuld before all other considerations. This results in LCTs suffering excessive from characteristics such as Spontaneity (irrelevant to anyone beyond its target audience); Transiency (senseless propensity toward obsolescence); Disposability (cannot be repurposed for other contexts); Temporary (cannot be inherited by the next generation); Inauthenticity (avoids applications of aesthetics and culture); Monotonic (refuses to preserve traditional values in order to be more “objective”); Nostalgic (refuses to revolutionize traditional values in order to be more “subjective”); Vanity (excessive self-love that tends toward selfishness and alleged racial and moral superiority by flawed notions of “nature and reason”) and Trivial (avoids meaningful and purposeful applications by creating “false wants” and “false needs”). While these are all common characteristics of LCTs, they will always be distinguished by the dependency on the “Economic Calculation Problem”.
FSTs by contrast are dependent on the Reference and Relevance characteristics of Equipmentalities. They need to reflect the cultural attitudes, traditional values, social outlooks, and customs and norms that define their country of origin. Everything, from the manner in which they are manufactured to how they are meant to be applied, should inform the Student Body about the Totality who created the FSTs. National identity and ancestral legacies are also important traits worthy of being imprinted onto FSTs. But no matter where the FST came from, who created it, and what is it intended for, they will always focus on Arbeit and Geld by eliminating the not only the presences of Kapital and Schuld but also any dependency on Kapital and Schuld. This allows the Political Organization Problem to define its tactical, operational and strategic capabilities.
The Work-Standard has demonstrated the feasibility of developing Technologies that can be readily applied by different Cultures and Civilizations, while at the same time reflecting the Authentic Daseins of various different Totalities. Heroic Realism helps immensely in providing instructions and conveying information on how best to apply different Technologies. That allows the Student Body and Student Government to familiarize themselves with the distinctions between LCTs and FSTs, minimizing overall dependency on LCTs whilst adopting FSTs that are known to be well-suited for their own Total Educational Effort. What applies for other SSEs also applies to the Federalist American Union’s UFSE as well.
Certain Technologies are more favorable to “Centralization” than “Decentralization” or vice versa. Their effects on the Federalist American Union can be discerned by investigating how they affect the organization, composition, coordination, and Gestalt of American Federalism. Finding the right form of American Federalism for the Union, States, Municipalities, and the UFSE is decisive. Below are all of the known examples of American Federalism throughout US History. For the sake of convenience, as well as the fact that there are too many contradictory sources of information about American Federalism, I have decided to split American Federalism into its proper designations, “Hamiltonian Federalism” and “Madisonian Federalism”:
Hamiltonian Federalism (Federalist party)
- Union Federalism: This is the particular version favored by The Work-Standard and The Third Place. If I had to give it a formal taxonomy for Political Science, it would “Union Federalism.” It provides the right combination of Centralization and Decentralization, allowing anyone from the UFSE to ascend or descend the socio-political structures of the US, ensuring that everyone in the American Way of Life will be in the position to build “a more perfect Union.”
- Court Federalism (aka “Marshallian Federalism”): John Marshall’s version. Although similar to Union Federalism, its defining characteristic is distinguished by its advocacy for the Supreme Court to play an influential role over the affairs of Congress and the Presidency. The Supreme Court acts as an intermediate between the Presidency and Congress and the State and Municipal governments on matters related to the US Constitution. Hannah Arendt was particularly fond of this one.
- Dual Federalism: This version of American Federalism lasted from the end of Federalist-controlled Marshall Court to its eventual demise in the Great Depression. It favored well-defined, even restrictive distinctions between those delegated to the Federal government and those delegated to the States.
- Fiscal Federalism (aka “Competitive Federalism”): Richard Nixon’s version. While still remaining within the framework of the Federalist Party stances, Competitive Federalism favors ‘healthy balance between cooperation and competition’ between the States under the firm leadership and authoritative guidance of a centralized Federal government.
Madisonian Federalism (Democratic-Republican Party)
- Cooperative Federalism (aka “Marble-Cake Federalism”): Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s version. It treats the powers of the Federal government and the State governments as equals par excellence. The States are perceived as “partners” who have a lot to gain by working together with the Union. Most distinctions between the powers of the Federal government and those of the States cease to exist, FDR relying on those ambiguities for the New Deal.
- Pragmatic Federalism: Harry Truman’s version. Emerged in response to growing disillusionment with the growing inability of Cooperative Federalism to provide well-defined distinctions between Federal and State powers. It is technocratic variant of Madisonian Federalism insofar as the Federal government relies heavily on social scientists and technical experts, quantitative research methods and Positivist political theories, and Democratic-Republican Party policies emphasizing a Federal-Corporate-Labor axis to further refine the flaws of the New Deal.
- Creative Federalism (aka “Picket-Fence Federalism”): Evenly split between John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s version and Lyndon Barnes Johnson’s version, Creative Federalism favors any and all measures to bypass the State governments by the Federal government in order to pass specific legislation that either “continue the New Deal” or else “pursue the Great Society.” The Federal government dictates the policies of the States, up to and including how much they receive in Federal funding and Federal assistance.
- New Federalism: The current variant of Madisonian Federalism preferred by the Democratic-Republican Party since Ronald Reagan. It seeks to weaken the Federal government in order to provide greater powers to the State governments, in addition to allowing States to add more regulations than is necessary or subtract more regulations than is necessary. The Federal government and States are to operate more akin to commercial entities.
Categories: Third Place