Planet and PEOPLE

We elect politicians to represent us, and to hold the over-mighty and over-wealthy to account.   It is a system with ancient origins in the local assemblies held by all northern European peoples – the Norse ‘Thing’, the Danish ‘Wapentake’, the Anglo-Saxon ‘Hundred’, and their Gaelic equivalents.    Every township, every village and town once had its assembly where even lords were – at least in theory – subject to common law and custom. 

The Tynwald still meets as the island parliament in the Isle of Man, but its equivalent in Dingwall has long gone.  Even Ross and Cromarty county is just a fading memory. 

With the growth of more centralised kingdoms from about the 9th c CE, there was a need for more centralised ways to hold kings to account.   These of course were led by those with the most to lose.

The concept of a ‘city’, a self-governing community, is as old as urbanism.   It is a place for those whose wealth is movable, rather than based on the control of land.   And bit by bit this form of wealth has come to dominate.   Even William the Conqueror failed to conquer the City of London, which has continued to operate as a semi-independent state within a state ever since.  Even today, it has its ‘Remembrancer’ sitting behind the Speaker in the House of Commons to keep an eye on proceedings.    

The English Parliament is usually thought to have been founded by Simon de Montfort in the 13th c.   However his parliament was really just a re-invention of this long pre-existing tradition.   And it was set up precisely to hold the king to account, especially in response to  royal bullying and extortion to fund war.    War had previously been a sure way to build support and reward loyalty through distribution of booty.   But the growing urban, commercial class were finding it unprofitable and the taxation a burden.

Although the wealthy sat in the Parliament to hold the king to account, local manor courts and their equivalents still operated to try to hold the lords and merchants to account.   And this they could do:  I recall the court rolls of Old Warden in Bedfordshire (England) where the lord of the manor was ordered to remove enclosures he had made in the common fields.   Locally agriculture required co-operation and the township or village would meet regularly  to maintain a fair, inclusive system.  In some places, strips in the common fields were re-allocated every year.

As individuals began to act more for personal gain and a cash economy permitted those with the money to pay others to cover their duties , the centralisation of power and wealth continued.  Landless labourers had no stake in the system.  They were just ‘resources’ to be exploited.    On the other hand, increasing wealth meant more spending power to avoid responsibility.  In fact it could be pointed to as evidence of God’s favour and an inevitable part of a natural hierarchy.   It was a hierarchy in which kings wanted to be Emperors and Popes, lords wanted to be kings, merchants wanted to be lords, tradesmen wanted to be merchants, and the bulk of the population carried the burden.

With the decline of Christianity the competition for domination became the new nihilistic philosophy.   The world became divided into ‘winners’ (who take all) and ‘losers’ ( who deserve nothing).  This drove the industrial revolution and has developed exponentially until now,  power and wealth is concentrated in a mere 1% of the world’s population.  The rest of us are merely ‘losers’.   ‘You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy’ – as the World Economic Forum announced, with the approval of ‘prince’ ( now ‘king’) Charles.

With the industrial revolution there came growing counter-demands by the disempowered and impoverished for a share in this new-found wealth and power.   The Chartists demanded for universal suffrage, to elect representatives who would speak up for them.

The reaction of the wealthy and powerful has been to let as little as possible ‘trickle down’ – just enough to buy off the poor.   The poor have been encouraged to believe  that they too might one day join the ranks of the rich if they worked hard and/or sold their souls.    But for most of the supposedly upwardly mobile, it has been a con trick.   And as automation grew the super-rich came to view us all as mere competitors for resources.   Until recently populations were encouraged to grow where they provided cheap labour, and to contract where they did not.   The wealthy and powerful have come to see humanity, like any other ‘resource’ as more of a cost than than benefit.    

Democracy then becomes ‘managed’.   It is only there to keep the population happy by giving people the illusion of empowerment.  In reality, who pays the piper, still calls the tune.  Whoever you vote for, the same people stay in control.

This historical process is reaching the end of the line.   Control has become so concentrated in so few hands that it has nowhere to go but disaster. We need representatives that stand up for planet and people, and refuse to be bullied.   It is the most basic requirement.   

If politicians, public servants will not do this, it’s a dangerous moment because this is just the situation where fearful people will cling on to any populist dictator who lies to them.

If that is allowed to happen, I have no doubt at all it will lead at least to civil, and probably nuclear war.  There can be no winners or losers in such a situation.

So, dear politicians, and others,  you have been warned.  If you don’t take responsibility now, the consequences will be inescapable later.   And the consequences are already visible. Wake up.