Application. This theory deals only with the Nation as defined by Smith as a “named human population sharing an historic territory, common myths, and historical memories, a mass public culture, a common economy and common legal rights and duties for all members” (Smith, 1991, 14).[i] My concern will be with the “mass public culture” and because of this I will use the term Nation-State which has connotations more closely associated with the population. While the theory I propose and the reasoning behind it may have application beyond the Nation-State I will not expand on those applications except where they clarify the general theory.
General Theory. A Nation-State chooses what governmental system best fulfills its Needs after consideration of Cultural Truths, the knowledge base of the society related to fulfilling those Needs .
Political Structure or governmental system. A governmental system is a social construct designed to take a portion of the excess goods or services its population produces and redistribute them to provide for the needs, desires, and concerns of its population. The more efficiently the government meets the needs, desires and concerns of its population the more likely it is that the governmental system will remain in force. Governmental systems do not provide equally for their population. In fact it would probably produce a very inefficient system as the needs, desires and concerns of various segments of the population are different. However, this construct is seen as desirable to all segments of the population because it redistributes this excess to accomplish tasks that no individual alone could accomplish.
Needs. A Nation-State’s Needs are those personal/social needs that the population as a whole feel are important. They are explained further below.
Cultural Truths. “Cultural Truths” are the bits of the Nation-State’s culturally accepted knowledge that can be used to satisfy the societies Needs. They are explained further below.
Supplemental Terms. My major concern is the Nation-State but I will often discuss the theory in regards to smaller elements. I will use the term “society” to describe the people who make up either the Nation-State or some part of it. The term “culture” will refer to the belief system that is common within the society.
Population. Much of what I discuss can be seen in both individuals and small groups. However, for these principles to hold true the population of the society must have reached a critical mass. What that number actually is I cannot say, but I would estimate the number at least one hundred thousand. It is also necessary for the population to have a common language or method of communication.
Time. In any society there is a group of ideas that are taken at face value as a given. When these ideas have utility in filling one of the societal Needs I call it a Cultural Truth. Cultural Truths change over time as the body of knowledge related to satisfying a societal Need expands. Often, a society will strongly resist changing a Cultural Truths since it goes both to individual and group identity. Cultural Truths tend to be assimilated by individuals during their youth. If the Cultural Truths are reinforced at that time by what the individuals see around them then they will remain the same. However, if the Cultural Truths is in contravention of what the youth actually experience then it may change. Often a Cultural Truth will only change with a generational shift: where the majority of adults see a different Cultural Truth as fulfilling their needs better than the current Cultural Truth. Resistance can often be the result of a segment of society has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. For example, whether in the
Homogony. It is not necessary that the group be homogenous. As a society grows large enough to have sub groups of sufficient size, each sub group can develop its own set of Cultural Truths. Usually these sub groups and their beliefs are not incongruent with other groups within the society. However, if this happens, then there can be conflict and a political separation may become inevitable.
Argot Groups. In almost all cases the total population of the Nation-State will be splintered into separate subgroups based on common characteristics such as power, wealth, education, locality, ethnicity, gender, or even age. Often they are the histories or myths of that group that help form their identity fulfilling that groups Tribal Identity and may justify their stratification. Argot Groups are subgroups of a Nation-State that share common Needs and Cultural Truths. They may or may not be congruent with any of the above categories.
Argot Groups versus Physical Characteristic. It is normal to attempt to compartmentalize groups by similar external characteristics such as race, age, and gender. These groupings may be valid for numerous purposes but they are only partially helpful in identifying Argot Groups. Because an Argot Group is distinguished by its beliefs, it may or may not comport to any externally obvious characteristic. Of course, being of the same race or sex will cause people to have similar experiences when dealing with the larger culture and therefore will result in similar beliefs. This can result in certain groups formulating Petite Cultural Truths that are similar (because I am African-American I am less likely to get waited on at a department store) it does not automatically make every member of the distinguishable group a member of a unique Argot Group.
Argot Groups versus Subcultures. A subculture is a set of people with a set of behaviors and beliefs, culture, which could be distinct or hidden, that differentiate them from the larger culture to which they belong. Argot Group is very similar to a subculture in that it delineates a larger group into subsections by beliefs. However, Argot Groups are delineated strictly on their acceptance of Cultural Truths.
Major Political Argot Groups: Elites and the General Population. As any population grows there is a tendency for it to split into at least two groups that play a pivotal roll in that Nation-State’s governmental structure. The first is a group of people who amass power, riches or education, which I refer to as the Elite of the Nation-State, and the second consist of the General Population (GP).[2]
Elites. Because of the disparity in wealth and knowledge the Elites as a group often will have different Needs then the GP. This is not abnormal and unless there is a striking disparity between the two groups on which Needs they are trying to satisfy the two will exist in the society quit harmoniously. Further stratification can occur based on various parts of the population attempting to satisfy similar needs. Once they reach a critical point they will begin to form their own identity; a separate Argot Group. However, the Elite/GP distinction is critical in determining political structure. Normally the Elite will have already satisfied a level of Needs that the GP are still working to achieve. Because their education level tends to be different than the GP, they may also have differing Cultural Truths. Not all of these distinct Cultural Truths may be shared with the GP. But since the Elites are often seen as the model or goal that the GP seeks to aspire to the Cultural Truths that they publicly espouse tend to be accepted with less friction than other Cultural Truths. The Elites will often push for political change in advance of what the GP wants or needs in order to satisfy Needs that the Elite have but that the GP have not yet begun to see as critical. However, if they have a vested interest in the status quo, they may attempt to retard changes in Cultural Truths. The elite itself may even fracture into separate groups each advocating different Cultural Truths.
The General Population (GP). As a whole the GP are not normally active in politics. The GP are primarily concerned with their own lives and families. They will not take part in political activities beyond voting. They are interested in their own Needs and how to satisfy them. As long as the political system allows them to do this they are content. However, where the political system interferes with their drive to fulfill their Needs then they will look to the Cultural Truths to explain this. Where the Cultural Truth tells them that this is the way things are supposed to be, they will acquiesce to these abridgements of their Needs to a point. For example, in
Where the society as a whole is not achieving their Needs they will acquiesce as long as the Cultural Truth comports with the world they see around them. For example, the GP would submit to a monarchy/aristocracy’s subjugation of their Needs as long as the conventional wisdom or Cultural Truth was that this is the natural way of the world as God intended. A cruel, despotic monarch would be viewed as an aberration, not a failure of the commonly accepted Cultural Truth.
Where the Need is essential, like a Survival Need, then the GP are more likely to no longer trust the Cultural Truth that works to deny them of that Need and will seek to replace it with another Cultural Truth. The replacement is not so much a conscious effort as a flailing about for an alternative. Trial and error will lead to a solution that will then become the next Cultural Truth. The same would be true where it is generally accepted that the Survival Needs are met and the next level of Needs is being withheld by the prevailing Cultural Truth. The GP will first work to adjust the existing Cultural Truth to try to explain its failure to provide for the GP’s Needs. If no acceptable answer can be found then the GP will find a replacement Cultural Truth. Sometimes the Elite, or a subsection of it, may offer the alternative Cultural Truth. Other times, the Elite will be the ones attempting to maintain the Status Quo.
Shifts in Governmental Structures. As the population of any Nation-State’s Needs change over time the political system they finds acceptable will change, but only if the shift is large enough. If basic Survival Needs are of primacy in the minds of the society then the society is more likely to acquiesce to an authoritarian form of government, particularly if there knowledge base is limited and if the authoritarian system provides security against others seeking limited resources. The more the society fills their Survival Needs and the population seeks Self Expression Needs the more likely the society is to demand a Democracy.[ii] It would be wrong to think of this as a unidirectional progression. At any time a society can drift between autocracy and democracy and back depending on the Needs that the population perceive as important at the time.
Caution. While the general proposition that I propose would hold true for any society once it reaches the appropriate dimensions, individual examples of its application will be unique to that society. Examples of how this theory applies in
[1] This is by no means a new idea. At a minimum it was espoused by Ludwig Von Mises in Human Action. Mises, Ludwig Von, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, Contemporary Books, Inc,
No comments:
Post a Comment